logo
‘I'm really not safe': A Venezuelan poet's fight to stay and write in the U.S.

‘I'm really not safe': A Venezuelan poet's fight to stay and write in the U.S.

Yahoo2 days ago

When Oriette D'Angelo, in the fifth year of her doctorate program at the University of Iowa, found out that President Donald Trump had plans to revoke her temporary protected status, she told her friends she would mail them her notebooks of poems if she had to go back to Venezuela.
They asked her why.
'It would be almost impossible to start over,' she said.
She'd put years into her degree in Spanish and Portuguese, only to have it threatened by Trump's immigration agenda.
D'Angelo, 34, came to Chicago on a student visa over a decade ago, seeking professional opportunities and escape from a crumbling infrastructure and violence in her home country. In recent months, however, a string of executive orders and court decisions on the legality of these orders has left her in an uncomfortable state of limbo, grasping for loopholes that might let her continue her academic research and writing.
As a student who researches and writes poems about themes of dictatorship, she is heartened by the separation of powers in the United States, but said the federal government's often contradictory language in this moment feels dangerous.
'Venezuelans are being categorized as bad,' she said. 'But I want to stay here professionally. I want to finish my dissertation. I want to follow the right path.'
D'Angelo's legal status changed several times over the course of a decade as she navigated the processes of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
She grew up in Lechería, Venezuela, a beach city with white buildings and red thatched roofs, which she said was peaceful in the 1990s and early 2000s. Throughout her young adulthood, she watched Venezuela slowly decline under the leadership of the country's far-left leaders, Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro.
She had a student visa upon her entry to the U.S. in 2015, as her purpose for coming to Chicago was academic and professional.
When her Venezuelan passport expired in 2020, she applied for temporary protected status, or TPS, a form of relief that allows individuals from certain countries experiencing ongoing conflict or disaster to live and work in the U.S. for a specified period. But due to Venezuela's broken diplomatic relations with the U.S., all the consulates were closed. She had to travel to Colombia to renew it.
And when D'Angelo came back through O'Hare International Airport in late November 2024, she was processed under TPS, not her student visa. She lost her international student status, despite her main purpose for moving to the U.S. being to study.
Then, in late January, Trump revoked her temporary protected status. In a few months, it could expire, she said, and she would have no legal documents.
D'Angelo is set to complete her doctorate in May 2026. She said everything she had worked for — her professional future and career aspirations — was put in jeopardy.
Photos: Local officials, protesters clash with ICE outside
Local officials, protesters clash with ICE outside office over detentions in growing escalation over Trump's immigration tactics
Advocates demand release of Milwaukee father still facing deportation after being falsely accused of threatening Trump
Chicago's new FBI boss touts new squad focused on fentanyl and says immigration enforcement is a 'sustained effort'
Kristi Noem said an immigrant threatened to kill President Donald Trump. The story quickly fell apart
'The (Venezuelan) government is persecuting and detaining people who speak freely against them, so I couldn't imagine doing research like mine in my own country,' she said. 'It wouldn't be possible.'
Following the news of her status being revoked in January, she immediately began preparing statements and documents for an international student status application. The processing and legal fees would add up, so she made a GoFundMe page to raise over $10,000.
At a time of intense fear, D'Angelo and her girlfriend decided to get married in mid-March. They didn't make the decision for immigration purposes, D'Angelo said, but for concern about federal attacks on LGBTQ rights.
'With the current administration, we don't know if same-sex marriage will still be legal in the next few years,' she said. 'We want to be together.'
As Trump ramped up the pressure on international students over the spring, D'Angelo took down her GoFundMe and kept a low profile. Every day in March, pulling up the news was a new type of anxiety.
'It was the longest month of my life,' she said.
Her stress was so out of control that it started to affect her memory, D'Angelo said. She couldn't remember what had happened a day before.
With the help of online donations, D'Angelo submitted an international student status application in March, which was approved by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in mid-April. Receiving her status while watching more federal changes and mandates come in every day was surreal, she said. And, it all still feels fragile.
About a month after she received her status, the U.S. State Department temporarily halted interviews abroad with foreign citizens applying for student visas and expanded scrutiny of applicants' social media.
'Survival mode is not over,' she said. 'Even though I have my student status back, I'm really not safe.'
D'Angelo is concerned that funding for her program might be cut. She is cautious about what she shares on the social media platform X, as the Trump administration has said that it doesn't want to let in international students who are critical of the country. After spending years studying the patterns of dictatorships, she said that she can sense when politics becomes personal.
'It's getting very real,' she said.
Recent data shows that almost 8 million Venezuelans have left the country in an exodus, a quarter of the population, in the largest Latin American displacement in recent history.
Poetry was a way for her to escape the violence in Caracas, where she lived and studied in her early 20s, and where at least three times she was walking back to her home and passed dead bodies on the street, she said.
'It's impossible to fully describe what it was like,' she said. 'But that's also something that motivates me. It's part of everything I do.'
In her poems, D'Angelo writes about gender-based harm, using threads from personal experience in a close relationship she had at age 21 with one of her professors, whom she said turned abusive.
She compares unemployment, hunger and violence to a chronic illness that corrodes everything. Her work reflects the belief that human beings, inherently political, will do whatever it takes to survive, like humans traversing mountains and crossing borders in pursuit of a better future.
At a recent book fair at the University of Chicago, D'Angelo sat on a panel with other writers from Latin America and talked about her childhood in Lechería. Her home was paradise, she said, except she loved to read and there were no bookstores. The only one was converted into a clothing store a few months after it opened.
Hungry for a literary community, she began writing online, she said. She read authors like Octavio Paz and Mexican poet Leticia Cortéz and imitated their vivid style, using rich metaphors to explore big themes.
Light shone through the window in a perfect square in front of them.
'Bruises on the skin know nothing of forgiveness / Dried-out wounds only tell one story,' she read.
In an interview with the Tribune afterward, D'Angelo said that most Venezuelans come to Chicago because they are forced out of their homes, seeking physical safety or economic security that they don't have.
'It seems so unfair that the people who ran away from that … are now forced to go back, when they came here looking for safety,' she said.
D'Angelo's second book will come out this month. Her goal is to teach at a university upon graduation, which she is allowed to do under her student status.
As a professor, she said she wants to help her students understand that their dreams are valid, no matter where they come from.
D'Angelo's arm is covered with tattoos: a hummingbird, her mother's handwriting, and designs like air and flowers.
The Trump administration has used tattoos in combination with other justifications on a checklist to deport migrants, but hers remind her of beauty and home. They give her strength.
'Vale la pena,' reads one in cursive lettering on her left forearm, in English, 'It's worth it.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Elon Musk Claims Trump's Name Is On The Epstein List, Taco Trump Threatens To End Phony Stark's Government Contracts
Elon Musk Claims Trump's Name Is On The Epstein List, Taco Trump Threatens To End Phony Stark's Government Contracts

Black America Web

time21 minutes ago

  • Black America Web

Elon Musk Claims Trump's Name Is On The Epstein List, Taco Trump Threatens To End Phony Stark's Government Contracts

Source: The Washington Post / Getty / Elon Musk / Donald Trump It should come as no surprise that the bromance between these two ego maniacs would have come to a fiery end. We knew this day would come, but no one had Musk and Trump beefing with each other so soon on their bingo cards. The alleged ketamine abuser couldn't keep his disdain for Trump's 'one big beautiful bill,' calling it a 'disgusting abomination.' 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore,' Musk began. 'This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' Trump was uncharacteristically quiet following Musk's initial comments about his legislative centerpiece of his second presidency, the 'one big beautiful bill.' That all changed when Trump finally 'clapped back' at Musk while taking questions during his meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. Trump said he was 'very surprised' and 'disappointed' by his former financier's comments about his stupid bill, claiming the Tesla chief saw the bill and understood its inner workings better than anybody, while suggesting that Musk was mad because of the removal of subsidies and mandates for electric vehicles. Elon Musk Had Time For Donald Trump Musk responded in real time via his 'former platform,' X, formerly Twitter, with a flurry of posts on X accusing Trump of 'ingratitude' and 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election,' while refuting the orange menace's claims. 'Keep the EV/solar incentive cuts in the bill, even though no oil & gas subsidies are touched (very unfair!!), but ditch the MOUNTAIN of DISGUSTING PORK in the bill,' Musk wrote. Oh, and he wasn't done. Musk then hit the president with a low blow, writing, 'Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public. Have a nice day, DJT!' Donald Trump Claps Back Trump finally fired back on his platform, Truth Social, by threatening to cut Musk's government contracts. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts. I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it.' Felon 47 wrote. Musk replied by threatening to decommission SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft, which could be detrimental to the International Space Station and NASA, as it is described as 'the only spacecraft currently flying that is capable of returning significant amounts of cargo to Earth' and can seat seven passengers. Musk also agreed with a post stating that Trump should be impeached and replaced by JD Vance. Oh, this is getting spicy. While all of this was going on, CNN reports that Tesla stocks took a hit and Musk's net worth shrank. Per CNN : Tesla shares plummeted 15% this afternoon as Elon Musk's battle with President Donald Trump intensified. Trump threatened in a social media post to target Musk's business empire. 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. The Tesla selloff has wiped off more than $150 billion off the market value of Telsa, which started the day worth nearly $1.1 trillion. It has also erased a chunk off the net worth of Musk, the world's richest person. Social media has pulled up all the seats, grabbed some popcorn and are currently watching Musk go at with Trump and his supporters, you can see those reactions in the gallery below. Elon Musk Claims Trump's Name Is On The Epstein List, Taco Trump Threatens To End Phony Stark's Government Contracts was originally published on Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE

How a Supreme Court decision backing the NRA is thwarting Trump's retribution campaign
How a Supreme Court decision backing the NRA is thwarting Trump's retribution campaign

CNN

time22 minutes ago

  • CNN

How a Supreme Court decision backing the NRA is thwarting Trump's retribution campaign

As Harvard University, elite law firms and perceived political enemies of President Donald Trump fight back against his efforts to use government power to punish them, they're winning thanks in part to the National Rifle Association. Last May, the Supreme Court unanimously sided with the gun rights group in a First Amendment case concerning a New York official's alleged efforts to pressure insurance companies in the state to sever ties with the group following the deadly 2018 school shooting in Parkland, Florida. A government official, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for the nine, 'cannot … use the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression.' A year later, the court's decision in National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo has been cited repeatedly by federal judges in rulings striking down a series of executive orders that targeted law firms. Lawyers representing Harvard, faculty at Columbia University and others are also leaning on the decision in cases challenging Trump's attacks on them. 'Going into court with a decision that is freshly minted, that clearly reflects the unanimous views of the currently sitting Supreme Court justices, is a very powerful tool,' said Eugene Volokh, a conservative First Amendment expert who represented the NRA in the 2024 case. For free speech advocates, the application of the NRA decision in cases pushing back against Trump's retribution campaign is a welcome sign that lower courts are applying key First Amendment principles equally, particularly in politically fraught disputes. In the NRA case, the group claimed that Maria Vullo, the former superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services, had threatened enforcement actions against the insurance firms if they failed to comply with her demands to help with the campaign against gun groups. The NRA's claims centered around a meeting Vullo had with an insurance market in 2018 in which the group says she offered to not prosecute other violations as long as the company helped with her campaign. 'The great hope of a principled application of the First Amendment is that it protects everybody,' said Alex Abdo, the litigation director of the Knight First Amendment Institute. 'Some people have criticized free speech advocates as being naive for hoping that'll be the case, but hopefully that's what we're seeing now,' he added. 'We're seeing courts apply that principle where the politics are very different than the NRA case.' The impact of Vullo can be seen most clearly in the cases challenging Trump's attempts to use executive power to exact revenge on law firms that have employed his perceived political enemies or represented clients who have challenged his initiatives. A central pillar of Trump's retribution crusade has been to pressure firms to bend to his political will, including through issuing executive orders targeting four major law firms: Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, WilmerHale and Susman Godfrey. Among other things, the orders denied the firms' attorneys access to federal buildings, retaliated against their clients with government contracts and suspended security clearances for lawyers at the firms. (Other firms were hit with similar executive orders but they haven't taken Trump to court over them.) The organizations individually sued the administration over the orders and the three judges overseeing the Perkins Coie, WilmerHale and Jenner & Block suits have all issued rulings permanently blocking enforcement of the edicts. (The Susman case is still pending.) Across more than 200-pages of writing, the judges – all sitting at the federal trial-level court in Washington, DC – cited Vullo 30 times to conclude that the orders were unconstitutional because they sought to punish the firms over their legal work. The judges all lifted Sotomayor's line about using 'the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression,' while also seizing on other language in her opinion to buttress their own decisions. Two of them – US district judges Beryl Howell, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, and Richard Leon, who was named to the bench by former President George W. Bush – incorporated Sotomayor's statement that government discrimination based on a speaker's viewpoint 'is uniquely harmful to a free and democratic society.' The third judge, John Bates, said Vullo and an earlier Supreme Court case dealing with impermissible government coercion 'govern – and defeat' the administration's arguments in defense of a section of the Jenner & Block order that sought to end all contractual relationships that might have allowed taxpayer dollars to flow to the firm. 'Executive Order 14246 does precisely what the Supreme Court said just last year is forbidden: it engages in 'coercion against a third party to achieve the suppression of disfavored speech,'' wrote Bates, who was also appointed by Bush, in his May 23 ruling. For its part, the Justice Department has tried to draw a distinction between what the executive orders called for and the conduct rejected by the high court in Vullo. They told the three judges in written arguments that the orders at issue did not carry the 'force of the powers exhibited in Vullo' by the New York official. Will Creeley, the legal director at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, said the rulings underscore how 'Vullo has proved its utility almost immediately.' 'It is extremely useful to remind judges and government actors alike that just last year, the court warned against the kind of shakedowns and turns of the screw that we're now seeing from the administration,' he said. Justice Department lawyers have not yet appealed any of the three rulings issued last month. CNN has reached out to the department for comment. In separate cases brought in the DC courthouse and elsewhere, Trump's foes have leaned on Vullo as they've pressed judges to intervene in high-stakes disputes with the president. Among them is Mark Zaid, a prominent national security lawyer who has drawn Trump's ire for his representation of whistleblowers. Earlier this year, Trump yanked Zaid's security clearance, a decision, the attorney said in a lawsuit, that undermines his ability to 'zealously advocate on (his clients') behalf in the national security arena.' In court papers, Zaid's attorneys argued that the president's decision was a 'retaliatory directive,' invoking language from the Vullo decision to argue that the move violated his First Amendment rights. ''Government officials cannot attempt to coerce private parties in order to punish or suppress views that the government disfavors,'' they wrote, quoting from the 2024 ruling. 'And yet that is exactly what Defendants do here.' Timothy Zick, a constitutional law professor at William & Mary Law School, said the executive orders targeting private entities or individuals 'have relied heavily on pressure, intimidation, and the threat of adverse action to punish or suppress speakers' views and discourage others from engaging with regulated targets.' 'The unanimous holding in Vullo is tailor-made for litigants seeking to push back against the administration's coercive strategy,' Zick added. That notion was not lost on lawyers representing Harvard and faculty at Columbia University in several cases challenging Trump's attacks on the elite schools, including one brought by Harvard challenging Trump's efforts to ban the school from hosting international students. A federal judge has so far halted those efforts. In a separate case brought by Harvard over the administration's decision to freeze billions of dollars in federal funding for the nation's oldest university, the school's attorneys on Monday told a judge that Trump's decision to target it because of 'alleged antisemitism and ideological bias at Harvard' clearly ran afoul of the high court's decision last year. 'Although any governmental retaliation based on protected speech is an affront to the First Amendment, the retaliation here was especially unconstitutional because it was based on Harvard's 'particular views' – the balance of speech on its campus and its refusal to accede to the Government's unlawful demands,' the attorneys wrote.

Johnson brushes off Musk campaign spending threats: ‘It doesn't concern me'
Johnson brushes off Musk campaign spending threats: ‘It doesn't concern me'

The Hill

time23 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Johnson brushes off Musk campaign spending threats: ‘It doesn't concern me'

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) in an interview Friday brushed off Elon Musk's campaign spending threats in light of the tech billionaire's public fallout with President Trump, suggesting he isn't worried. The spat between Trump and Musk began with the latter's criticism of the president's legislative agenda making its way through Congress. Johnson said he built a closer relationship with the then-special government employee and that the tech mogul has been led astray regarding the 'big beautiful' spending package. 'Look, it doesn't concern me. We're going to win either way because we're going to win on our policies we're delivering for hardworking Americans and fulfilling those promises,' Johnson told Fox News's 'Jesse Watters Primetime.' 'But look, I like Elon and respect him. I mean, we became friends in all this process,' he continued. 'I've been texting with him even this week … in trying to make sure that he has accurate information about the bill. I think he has been misled about it.' Musk, who contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to assist in Trump's win in the 2024 presidential election, was the biggest donor during the White House race. Amid his recent spat with Trump, which broke out in public as the two traded insults and threats, Musk argued that without his political expenditures, Trump would have lost to former Vice President Harris, Republicans would lose the majority in the House and the GOP would have failed to flip the majority in the Senate. Trump then threatened to have all federal contracts associated with the billionaire's companies to be cut off. As the fight between the two intensified, the tech executive floated the idea of forming a third party and accused the president of being named in the late Jeffrey Epstein's files. Trump has denied close ties to the disgraced financier. Musk's opposition to the GOP megabill — which he called a 'disgusting abomination' — is largely tied to deficit spending. The billionaire argued the legislation would balloon the national debt and fails to slash enough spending. The package faces an uphill battle in the Senate. While Musk, who recently left his position as the top adviser to Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), seemed open to repairing ties on Friday, the president appeared to be OK with moving on. Johnson in the interview Friday defended the spending bill and commended Trump for his handling of the squabble. 'We're going to make good on this… I like the president's attitude. You know, he is moving on. He has to,' he told the host. 'He's laser-focused on delivering for the people. And House and Senate Republicans are as well. So, we've got our hand at the wheel.' 'We're going to get this done just like we told the people,' the Speaker continued. 'And if you are a hardworking American that is struggling to take care of your family, you are going to love this legislation.' The Louisiana Republican added, 'I'm telling you, all boats are going to rise and everybody's going to be in a much better mood before we go into that midterm election in 2026.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store