LULAC Releases Report on Project 2025

  

LULAC Releases Report on Latino Civil Rights vs. Project 2025

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), the Nation’s largest and oldest Latino civil rights volunteer-based organization, today released a report titled “The Battle Ahead: Latino Civil Rights vs. Project 2025” outlining ten specific ways in which Project 2025 negatively impacts Latino civil rights.

The report includes analysis from LULAC Policy and Legislation Fellows Adriana Varea, Ari Kittrie, and Joaquin Macias and focuses on the following areas of Project 2025:

• Establishing a Unitary Executive Branch
• Mass Deportations
• Cutting off Legal Immigration
• Making Federal Funding & Benefits Contingent on Immigration Laws
• Criminalization of Reproductive Rights
• Dismantling the U.S. Department of Education
• Social Program Cuts and “Reforms”
• Repealing Vital Protections for Latino-Dominated Industries
• Refocusing Environmental Policy Away from Climate Change
• Ending Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Initiatives

 

 

2. Mass Deportations

“Prioritizing border security and immigration enforcement, including detention and deportation, is critical if we are to regain control of the border.” (Project 2025, pg. 135)

Project 2025 plans to repeal parts of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to allow for the large-scale use of detention facilities to mass incarcerate migrants. It also will change Title 8 of U.S. Code § 1226 to require mandatory detention for unauthorized migrants caught within the U.S. interior (pg. 150). To compound this, Project 2025 will also increase Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) capabilities by removing all sensitive zones where ICE personnel are prohibited from operating, allowing for raids in schools, churches, and businesses (pg. 142).

Project 2025 calls to authorize state and local law enforcement to participate in immigration and border security actions (pg. 150). Through deputizing local law enforcement, there will be a lack of oversight and accountability, allowing for abuses of the system that would disproportionately hurt the Latino community. Additionally, Latinos would have a more difficult time receiving impartial hearings and legal representation, especially because detainees are not entitled to public defenders as criminal defendants are. To compound upon this, the Supreme Court Case Loper Bright Entreprises vs. Raimondo, which repealed the Chevron Deference, has the potential to take immigration hearings away from the United States Immigration and Citizenship Services and shift them to the local courts. These local courts notoriously have long backlogs and a limited understanding of immigration policies and laws, which would force Latinos to have long and unjust trials.

3. Cutting Off Legal Immigration

“Victimization should not be a basis for an immigration benefit.” (pg. 144) “If CISOMB continues as a DHS component, a policy should be issued that prohibits CISOMB from assisting illegal aliens to obtain benefits. Currently, approximately 15 percent–20 percent of CISOMB’s workload consists of helping DACA applicants obtain and renew benefits, including work authorization. This is not the role of an ombudsman.” (Project 2025, pg. 166)

Project 2025 proposes to cut down on legal immigration by limiting interim immigration into the United States. For example, it calls for an increase in visa application fees. It plans to limit the issuance of H-2A and H2-B visas for seasonal agricultural workers, as well as the complete elimination of T and U visas meant to protect trafficking or crime victims who are actively cooperating with law enforcement as a witness (pg. 612, 141). Project 2025 calls to remove and deport all Temporary Status designations for migrants whose home countries are considered unsafe to live in (pg. 145). Finally, Project 2025 will phase out DACA for the over 500,000 recipients by eliminating staff time for reviewing and processing renewal applications which will make it very hard for DACA recipients to renew their status given the proposed lack of staff present to do so (pg.145).

4. Making Federal Funding & Benefits Contingent on Immigration Laws