Since the onset of the pandemic, COVID-19 has disproportionately devastated Black, Latinx, Indigenous, and Asian communities and now, these same communities are being left in the dust in the nationwide race to vaccinate. The racial disparities in hospitalization and death rates among these groups are mirrored in early vaccination rate data. Black people are two to three times less likely than white people to be vaccinated. While statistics like these are disheartening, we can and must do better. States should push back against these disparities by prioritizing outreach and access to the vaccine in geographic areas with the most vulnerable people.

The key to equitable vaccination lies in social vulnerability data, which includes variables such as race, language, socioeconomic status, and household composition. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) aggregates this information using census tract data, which enables the agency to measure the resiliency of communities and make geographically-based recommendations to local officials using their Social Vulnerability Index (SVI).

While the CDC has collected and used this data to anticipate and respond to environmental and public health crises since 2000, the index has become an especially crucial tool in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The data offer a path forward as localities seek to relieve the disproportionate burden borne by communities of color. Social vulnerability indices help experts identify neighborhoods most at risk for COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. Of all the variables measured, minority status and English language proficiency have the strongest association with COVID-19 deaths at the community level. Underlying health conditions alone cannot address the severe racial disparities in vaccination rates.

At least 26 states have announced plans to use or are already using SVIs in their vaccine distribution plans. Ohio uses the SVI to allocate the vaccine, while Arizona uses it to target outreach and communication plans. Tennessee and New Hampshire use the SVI to identify the most vulnerable geographic areas and to set aside a percentage of the vaccines for these counties.

This crucial data should be used in every state to ensure equitable vaccine access — a goal that states have fallen woefully short of thus far. Disparities in vaccination rates are plainly illustrated by health care worker data. Because the initial round of vaccines was primarily provided to these workers, the percentage of people vaccinated should align with the racial demographics of this sector. Yet despite making up a large portion of this workforce, Black people are significantly underrepresented in vaccinations.

In Mississippi, Black people comprise 37 percent of health care workers but only 15 percent of people vaccinated. Similarly, just 16 percent of people vaccinated in Maryland are Black, even though Black people comprise 42 percent of health care workers and 30 percent of the state population. Vaccination rates don’t match up with local demographics, either. In Philadelphia, just 12 percent of Black people were vaccinated, even though the population is 44 percent Black. Only 7 percent of people vaccinated in Miami-Dade County were Black, even though Black people “comprise almost 17 percent of the population and are dying from COVID-19 at a rate that is more than 60 percent higher than that of white people,” The New York Times reported.

Some of these disparities can be explained by systemic barriers to vaccine access in low-income communities and communities of color, such as the lack of technology, transportation access to vaccine sites, or ability to take off work. Many people in low-income communities lack the stable, high-speed internet access required to continue refreshing sign-up websites for appointments, and registration phone lines have notoriously long wait times and are difficult to navigate. Wealthy white people with more access to these resources have taken a disproportionate share of vaccinations provided in low-income communities of color. In Washington, D.C., 40 percent of vaccination appointments were made by residents of the city’s whitest, wealthiest ward.

Social vulnerability data is key to intentionally increasing vaccine access to those who need it most, but it should be coupled with other tools to counter barriers to vaccination. To combat skepticism and mistrust, states should increase culturally sensitive education about the vaccine, including community and faith-based outreach and marketing. States should facilitate non-computer registration for the vaccine. Further, states should expand locations for distribution to residents of the most vulnerable neighborhoods. This can include working with mobile health vans and community health workers, and offering vaccinations at federally qualified health centers, as well as community-based health care providers in underserved areas.

The best way to assess whether those who need the vaccine most are receiving it is through transparent and thorough data collection. States should collect and report vaccination data — consistent with all privacy laws and best practices — by various demographic factors, including race and zip codes of those who are vaccinated, to identify and eliminate disparities. Disparities were consistent in the 34 states that have released vaccination data by race to date. Black and Latinx people receive smaller shares of the vaccination than their proportion of the larger population and COVID-19 hospitalizations or deaths. Finally, states should conduct fact-finding hearings with testimony from public health, history, and economic experts to identify and remedy incidents of discrimination in the response to the pandemic.

Communities of color continue to bear the brunt of COVID-19, and this crisis has laid bare the impact of systemic racism in the U.S. Inequitable vaccine access is the latest manifestation of this ongoing problem. It is up to state officials to mitigate these racial disparities by using social vulnerability data to prioritize vaccine access and distribution to the most vulnerable groups.

In November and January, voters across the country watched as the people of Georgia helped deliver both the presidency and the Senate to the Democrats this past election cycle, defying the perception of the state as a Republican stronghold. After Stacey Abrams’ contentious loss in the 2018 race for governor, the effort to thwart voter suppression in the state and mobilize Black voters ramped up. As a result, Black Georgians showed up to the polls in droves and turned the state blue.

One of the activists responsible for this shift is LaTosha Brown, a political strategist who has worked at the intersection of social justice and political empowerment for decades. LaTosha is the cofounder of the Black Voters Matter Fund and BVM Capacity Building Institute, a movement to expand voter access and build political power for Black people in the U.S., particularly in the South.

She joined At Liberty this week to discuss the impact of expanding the right to vote and building a more diverse and inclusive future for the South.

Organizer LaTosha Brown on Building the New South

Organizer LaTosha Brown on Building the New South

This country watched as the people of Georgia helped deliver both the presidency and the Senate to the Democrats this past election cycle, defying the perception that the state was a Republican stronghold. After Stacey Abrams’ contentious loss in ...

This country watched as the people of Georgia helped deliver both the presidency and the Senate to the Democrats this past election cycle, defying the perception that the state was a Republican stronghold. After Stacey Abrams’ contentious loss in ...

Listen to this episode

Congress and President Biden have a mandate from the American people to fix our broken immigration system: It’s time to pass legislation that provides a pathway to citizenship and legal residency for the millions of people in this country who are our neighbors, co-workers, friends and loved ones — yet are denied the ability to live freely as citizens and legal residents. The American people soundly rejected the hateful and divisive anti-immigrant policies pursued by the Trump administration. Now it’s imperative for Biden and Congress to seize on this momentum to finally get citizenship legislation done.

The goal for Congress this year must be to pass legislation to create a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented people living in the U.S. In February, members of Congress introduced myriad bills that would help get us there, including the landmark U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021 and the American Dream and Promise Act. The bottom line is this: Too many members of our communities are living in fear of being deported away from their homes and families. They are being denied a pathway to become citizens and legal residents, even as they serve on the frontlines of the COVID-19 pandemic, raise their kids, support our communities, and contribute to our country. This is unfair and unjust. Congress has a responsibility to act.

The U.S. Citizenship Act is comprehensive legislation that will help millions of people. If passed into law, immigrants who have lived in the U.S. before Jan. 1, 2021 will have a path to gain legal status and eventually be eligible for citizenship.

It will also reform immigration law to help prevent future discriminatory bans, like the Muslim ban and its targeting of Africans, and undo restrictions that have made it more difficult to work, travel, and live openly, and administer new aid and support programs meant to address the root causes of migration.

Along with this comprehensive legislation, several lawmakers are also proposing more targeted bills that may see votes in Congress.

The Trump administration threw peoples’ lives into chaos by attempting to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for hundreds of thousands of U.S. residents, and Deferred Enforced Departure (DED) for Liberians. While court rulings and recent actions by President Biden helped limit the enormous harm that transpired over the past four years, DACA is still at risk due to persistent court challenges, and TPS and DED recipients continue to face long-term uncertainty. Members of our communities have suffered the indignity of being used as political pawns for far too long.

If passed, the American Dream and Promise Act will provide protection from deportation and a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and immigrants eligible for TPS and DED, ending the fear and legal limbo experienced by too many people in our country once and for all. The ACLU continues to urge Congress to strengthen due process, reduce racial disparities, and end the disproportionately harsh consequences of criminal convictions in any future immigration legislation.

On Jan. 20, President Biden rescinded Trump’s Muslim ban, including its expansion explicitly targeting Africans. This was a milestone victory for all the advocates who spent four years demonstrating, advocating, and fighting to stop the ban. Now we must make sure that presidents cannot use rank prejudice to enact discriminatory bans in the future.

The NO BAN Act will put stricter standards in place to limit such abuses of executive authority in the future, including Trump’s use of this authority to destroy our immigration system during the pandemic. There is much work to do in order to right the wrongs against people whose lives were destroyed by the ban.

We must also prevent any community from enduring this kind of harm in the future, and make certain that presidents cannot abuse their powers in such a way again.

As lawmakers debate these bills, they should ensure that the legislation gives a fair chance to all Americans in waiting. Using criminal convictions and allegations of criminal conduct to categorically exclude immigrants from a path to legalization and citizenship is unnecessary and harmful. As we embark on new reforms for our broken immigration system, we should not import the problems that plague our criminal legal system — including the disproportionate targeting of Black and Brown people. We also cannot deny people access to benefits or citizenship based on fear-mongering and bigotry that stereotypes Muslim, Arab, Middle Eastern, and South Asian community members as “threats” and targets them for national security surveillance, discrimination, and worse. Categorically barring people from citizenship or residency based on stereotypes or past actions also denies them the chance to show that their personal histories, experiences, and family and community ties mean they ought to be able to stay.

Citizenship legislation should not be used as a vehicle for throwing even more money toward immigration and border enforcement personnel, technology, or equipment. Over the past two decades, border communities have experienced increased civil liberties and rights violations at the hands of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials, extreme surveillance and over-policing, and wanton destruction of wildlife and nature. CBP and ICE are already enormously overfunded. DHS received $26 billion for immigration enforcement in fiscal year 2020 — 33 percent more than all federal criminal law enforcement agencies combined. And in the past four years, ICE and CBP’s budgets have increased by $6 billion. Given the abuses committed by CBP and ICE agents, Congress should not be rewarding the agency with additional technology funding.

Surveillance technology, justified as a means of border security, frequently spreads across border communities, degrading privacy rights of all residents. CBP use of technology has extended far away from the physical border and for purposes that have nothing to do with the border — as evident by CBP’s use of drones on Black Lives Matter protesters last summer and surveillance of George Floyd’s burial. CBP spent $1 billion on its last failed attempt to create a “virtual border fence.” These efforts don’t come with any of the necessary privacy protections, nor does peppering sensitive lands with mobile surveillance towers respect the environment or border communities.

Not all technologies — if used with appropriate safeguards — infringe on privacy and civil liberties. However, past border proposals have suggested expanding warrantless and broad aerial surveillance, constant video monitoring, or biometric collection. Congress should not leave it to DHS to determine what privacy safeguards are necessary to prevent rights violations.

This is a moment of profound possibility for our nation. We urge Congress to seize it.