Choosing Joe Biden over Trump: An Immigrant Dilemma

With the March 12 primary election results in Georgia, our confirmed choices for President are bad and worse, at least on immigration. From the top to the bottom of the November 5th ballot, elected leaders across the country have made the 2024 election cycle hunting season for undocumented immigrants.

Twenty years ago, I served New York City’s first Commissioner of Immigrant Affairs. It was an honor to serve in that role, but it was also challenging. The September 11 attacks had put the city on edge, making it acceptable and easy to target immigrants, especially those from Arab American, Muslim, and South Asian communities. As part of the Bloomberg Administration, I advocated for confidentiality of immigration status, a protection that had been in place since Mayor Ed Koch signed an executive order in 1989. Since then, five New York City mayors have ensured this protection, which ensures that all New Yorkers feel safe reporting crimes or accessing city services for which they are eligible. Now, Mayor Eric Adams wants to remove that critical safety provision even as his administration has reduced maximum shelter stays from 60 to 30 days and been slow to file documents for approved federal support.

How did we switch from “wait in line” to get out?

For about 15 years leading up to Donald Trump’s election, the anti-immigrant rhetoric suggested that there was an orderly and linear process to becoming “legal.” And those of us who understood how broken the system was said, hey, there’s no line.

At the same time, arguments for immigration reform focused on the economic contributions of immigrants and distinguished between good immigrants and bad immigrants. President Barack Obama infamously said he would focus on those who were a threat. “Felons, not families. Criminals, not children.” What we have done for decades is apply reason to counter racism. And we just keep trying to do it. What’s the alternative?

Let me first say what’s different today from twenty years ago.

First, many immigrant rights advocates have clear evidence that Democrats are as willing to throw immigrants under the bus as Republicans. Eight years under President Barack Obama resulted in “turbocharged” deportation infrastructure and unprecedented deportation numbers.

Second, we understand how words are weapons against immigrants — telling us “Don’t come”, referring to us as “illegal,” calling us “drug dealers, criminals and rapists” — and how they are wielded to reassure white people rather than to convey compassion toward immigrants.

And third, the numbers at our borders have hit a record high and those coming are more diverse than ever before, from as far away as Cameroon and China.

Advocating for an overhaul of our immigration system is necessary but has so far proved elusive. We can’t let Congress off the hook but here are three actions we can take.

• Issue work authorization immediately to those entering the United States. No one is coming here looking for a government handout, and the option to work helps create a sense of independence and dignity while preventing exploitation by employers.
• Boost nonprofit capacity with government, foundation and private resources to create the programming support immigrants need to navigate American employment, education and civic systems.
• Change the composition of our state and local governments and Congress to include more voices whose experiences mirror those of our newest Americans.

These three steps neither require Congressional legislation, nor create a pathway to citizenship. But they facilitate shelter, amplify voice and contribute to inclusion, bringing us closer to the society some of us want to see.

Sayu Bhojwani served as New York City Commissioner of Immigrant Affairs from 2002 to 2004. She is currently a Soros Equality Fellow and Leader in Residence at the Moynihan Center at City College of New York.