Last
year, my client Susan called me to discuss her
immigration case.
During
our conversation she referenced the news that
immigrants were being bused from the southern
border to cities in the North, often under false
promises, only
to be left stranded in an unknown city.
In
confusion and fear, Susan asked me: “Why do they
hate us so much?” While
I couldn’t answer Susan’s question, her
underlying concern highlights a startling
escalation of public aggression against migrants
over the past year — and which we may see
increase as more migrants seek asylum following
the end of a federal order that had all
but prevented it.
There
seems to be a growing “us” versus “them”
mentality towards immigrants. This divisive
language serves no purpose other than to divide
our country, undermine the legal right to seek
asylum in the United States, and cultivate a
fear of the most vulnerable.
A
clear example is showcased in recent media
coverage of northbound migration across the
U.S.-Mexico border. Many outlets describe recent
migration through the Americas as a “flood,”
“influx,”
“wave,”
or “surge”— language that reinforces the
notion that migration is akin to an imminent,
uncontrollable, and destructive natural
disaster.
These
descriptions are accompanied by sensational
photographs and videos of long lines of brown
and Black immigrants wading
across the Rio Grande,
crowding along the border
wall,
or boarding Customs and Border Patrol (CBP)
vehicles to be transported
to detention.
Woven
into this framing is the near-constant use of
the term “illegal”or
“unlawful” to
describe unauthorized crossings. As an advocate
for immigrant survivors of domestic violence,
sexual violence, and trafficking, I’m alarmed by
the use of this language to describe a migrant’s
attempt to survive.
Moreover,
it’s often simply incorrect. A noncitizen who
has a well-founded fear of persecution in the
country from which they’ve fled has a legal
right — protected under both U.S. and international law
— to enter the United States to seek asylum.
When
mainstream media wield the term “illegal” as
though it were synonymous with “unauthorized,”
they misinform readers and falsely paint asylum
seekers as criminals.
Worse
still, they encourage politicians who call
immigrants themselves “illegals,” a deeply
dehumanizing term. And the more dehumanizing
language we use, the more likely it is that we
will see immigrants as the “other” to justify
cruel immigration policies.
We
must retire the use of this inflammatory
rhetoric, which distracts from real solutions that
would actually serve survivors arriving at our
borders.
Migrants
expelled back to their home countries are at
grave risk of severe harm or death at
the hands of their persecutors. Those forced
to remain
in Mexico as
they await entry to the United States are
increasingly vulnerable to organized crime or
abusive and dangerous conditions in detention.
And
those who have no choice but to desperately
navigate dangerous routes to the United States
to avoid apprehension are increasingly dying
by dehydration, falling from cliffs, and
drowning in rivers.
The
words we use mean something — they can spell out
life or death for those among us who are most
vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. Now more
than ever, I’d urge the public and the media to
retire the use of sensationalizing,
stigmatizing, and misleading imagery and
rhetoric surrounding immigration.
Now
is the time to apply accuracy and humanity in
our depictions of migrants. Let’s not repeat the
errors of our past.
|