![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
Since the increase of interior immigration enforcement in the US, immigration detention has ballooned. In recent years, a daily average of up to 50,165 immigrants were in detention, a significant increase compared to 1994, when the daily average was 5,532 (DHS, 2019). Individuals arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have reported human rights violations, including no due process and verbal and physical abuse (Martínez-Schuldt & Hagan, 2021). The rights violations that immigrants experience have been normalized, legitimated, and described as "legal violence" for their legally-sanctioned nature (Menjívar & Abrego, 2012).
Using a community-based participatory action research (CBPAR) approach, the current study sought to understand lived experiences of immigrants impacted by federal immigration enforcement. CBPAR allowed the research team to partner with a community advisory board, participants, and community members impacted by ICE detention to understand their experiences and to follow their lead, particularly during the action phase of the project. The community’s interest in advocacy guided the dissemination of the project, leading to a state-level lobby day, legislative public testimonies, a research brief, and a media exclusive. This presentation will describe our research findings, policy advocacy actions, and insights on using CBPAR in research with immigrants with vulnerable legal statuses.
Methodology:
A community advisory board guided study design and recruitment protocols to capture this collective narrative. In Phase 1 of this study, we used purposive and snowball sampling to engage in in-depth semi-structured interviews with 17 individuals who had experienced immigration detention directly or through someone close to them. Interviews were conducted in Spanish and lasted 56 minutes, on average. Guided by a legal violence lens, open-ended questions centered on participants’ experience with ICE, impacts on self and family, and coping strategies and resistance. We employed inductive thematic analysis, consolidating the data through in vivo, pattern, and axial coding of transcripts in NVivo. Analytic memoing helped us identify and interpret recurring patterns and interrelations between themes. Team-based coding, interpretive convergence, and member checks enhanced the trustworthiness of findings. Phase 2 of the study involved a partnership between participants, community-based coalitions, and the university team to disseminate results for policy impact.
Results:
We identified six salient themes that characterized participants’ experiences with federal immigration enforcement and perceptions of treatment by individuals within the system: (1) treatment as aggressive and authoritarian, (2) treatment as ignoring basic rights, (3) coercion to take voluntary departure, (4) racist treatment as fueling rights violations, and (5) being treated like a criminal as unjust. Additionally, participants noted (6) increased critical consciousness and advocacy involvement due to their interactions with ICE, which informed the project’s next steps.
Implications:
Findings highlight mistreatment and misconduct by federal immigration enforcement. The need for improved oversight, community know-your-rights training, and subfederal integrationist policies is discussed. Lessons learned for future CBPAR with immigrants with vulnerable legal statuses are addressed, as are the meaningful translational research products (e.g., research briefs, media exclusives) and policy advocacy actions (e.g., public testimony, lobby events) used in this project for consideration by social work researchers.