Latest news with #CongressionalAsianPacificAmericanCaucus
GMA Network
4 days ago
- Politics
- GMA Network
Explanation sought over 'rights violations' of some Pinoys nabbed by ICE
NEW YORK—Several U.S. lawmakers are demanding an explanation regarding the alleged mistreatment of Asian lawful permanent residents—including Filipinos—who were arrested by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). In a letter addressed to U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus expressed their concern after several Asian Americans detained by the CBP and ICE were allegedly deprived of their right to legal counsel and due process. The letter cited troubling cases such as that of Filipino Mrs. Lewelyn Dixon, who was detained after living legally in the U.S. for 50 years and Mr. Maximo Londonio, a member of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, who was held in ICE custody for two months following a vacation in the Philippines. 'These cases suggest possible violations of constitutional protections. The U.S. Constitution provides critical due process protections for all persons within the United States, regardless of immigration status," the lawmakers wrote. "The Fifth Amendment protects against actions by the federal government that violate due process, while the Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to legal counsel in criminal cases. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that LPRs are entitled to these same protections,' they added. The letter—signed by fourteen lawmakers—was led by New York Representative Grace Meng, who serves as Chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus. The lawmakers are requesting an explanation regarding the denial of the right to legal counsel and constitutional protections to those in CBP custody, as well as the total number of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents who have been detained since President Donald Trump took office.
The Guardian
02-06-2025
- General
- The Guardian
Half of Asians Americans and Pacific Islanders faced hate in 2024, study finds
Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders faced chilling levels of hate in 2024, a new survey has found, reflecting the impact of a divisive presidential election year that included historic representation and rampant anti-immigrant rhetoric. The report by Stop AAPI Hate, shared exclusively with the Guardian ahead of its release, shines a light on underreported incidents largely overlooked in government data and national news media. The coalition conducted its second annual survey with Norc at the University of Chicago, a nonpartisan research organization. Fifty-three percent of respondents said they experienced a race-based hate act in 2024, a small rise from 49% in 2023. Incidents ranged from bullying at school and workplace discrimination to harassment and physical violence. Four out of every 10 people who faced a hate act said they did not tell anyone, including friends or family. Of those who experienced a potentially unlawful hate act, including explicit threats, physical harm or institutional discrimination, 66% did not report the incident to authorities, often due to the belief that the act wasn't significant enough or that reporting wouldn't make a difference. Grace Meng, a New York Democrat who chairs the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, said the coalition's report helps fill a critical data gap, which she regarded as the largest barrier to government leaders taking action. Awareness of anti-Asian bigotry had increased since a wave of high profile hate crimes during the Covid pandemic, Meng said, but since the general election, perpetrators seem empowered to openly express bigotry. The coalition's survey of nearly 1,600 Asian American and Pacific Islander adults took place from 7-15 January, days before Donald Trump's inauguration. Over 80% of respondents expressed concern about the racial climate. 'Honestly, after this president was elected, many of us were nervous again,' Meng told the Guardian. Just over four months into Trump's second term, Meng is ringing the bell on a slew of anti-immigrant actions from Marco Rubio last week announcing he will carry out revocations of Chinese students' visas, to Trump's attacks on birthright citizenship since his first day in office, and widespread funding cuts for a host of institutions. Meng said she expects the administration's rhetoric and actions against immigrant communities to translate into more anti-Asian hate and violence this year. In addition to the annual survey, Stop AAPI Hate manages a reporting center to gather data about incidents targeting Asian American and Pacific Islander communities. Stephanie Chan, director of data and research at Stop AAPI Hate, said perpetrators appear to have drawn inspiration from Trump's comments on the campaign trail and echoed his sentiments across the US at schools, public transit stations, restaurants and more. Some perpetrators have approached Asian Americans and said Trump would have them deported or arrested once he was back in office, according to the center. In one reported incident the day after the election, an Asian girl at school was handed a piece of paper scribbled green that read 'green card' and 'dog-eater', an apparent reference to baseless slurs by Trump and other Republicans that Haitian immigrants in an Ohio city were eating pets. At a big-box store in Washington state this year, a woman said someone called her a 'Chinese peasant' – similar to comments made by Vice-President JD Vance – and said she should go back to her country. Chan also noted that the prominence of Kamala Harris and second lady Usha Vance in the political spotlight has placed a target on south Asian communities. 'South Asians are now in these prominent places of leadership in the business world and in the political world now, and there's this sense that, 'Oh, now they're taking over,'' Chan said. 'And so there has been that backlash to the rise in prominence and leadership in the country, in various sectors, by south Asian people.' Stop AAPI Hate and other nonprofits recently filed a class-action lawsuit against the justice department over what they allege is an unlawful termination of over $810m in public safety grants previously awarded to hundreds of organizations. The group, which was formed in 2020 amid a spike of pandemic-era bigotry, lost a $2m grant it had earmarked for violence prevention, survivor support and the reporting center's data work. A copy of the DoJ's brief termination letter obtained by the Guardian says the grant 'demonstrates that it no longer effectuates department priorities'. A justice department spokesperson declined to comment on the litigation. 'We have a very, very strong indication of what the Trump administration is trying to do,' said Cynthia Choi, co-founder of Stop AAPI Hate, which includes trying to stop any institution from getting in the way of his anti-immigrant agenda, including nonprofits, universities, law firms and the courts. Choi noted some upsides from the 2024 survey, which found that 82% said they were optimistic about their community's ability to combat racism – about the same percentage of people who expressed concern about the racial climate. Two-thirds of respondents said they participated in activities to reduce or resist racism, with Democrats, south-east Asians and those who had experienced hate more likely to get involved. Over 85% of respondents said they believed in the importance of cross-racial solidarity. 'We are organizing and really leaning into the fact that we have to fight back collectively, consistently and with determination, because the more that we allow Trump and the administration to roll back our rights, you know, there'll be a point where there will be nothing that we can do about it,' Choi said. 'That's the part that is, I think, most frightening.' 'We know from history that overnight, democracies can become very fragile, and we know that overnight, once we lose our ability to speak out, to defend, to protect, we'll have nothing left.'
New York Times
03-03-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Trump Made English the Official Language in a Country With 350 of Them
President Trump's executive order making English the official language of the United States reached into history to argue its case, noting that the country's founding documents were written in English. But it turns out, not only in English. After the Constitution was drafted in 1787, supporters of ratification printed translations for Dutch speakers in New York and German speakers in Pennsylvania, so they could understand the arguments for a 'vollkommenere Vereinigung' — a more perfect union. The push and pull over whether America should have one national language or embrace its polyglot spirit has generated fierce debate for more than a century, raising deeper questions about belonging and assimilation in a country whose people speak more than 350 languages. Now, Mr. Trump's executive order puts an 'America first' stamp onto the nation's speech. His order gave a long-sought victory to the English-only movement, which has ties to efforts to curb immigration and bilingual education. Supporters said it recognized the reality of English's primacy in American life. Nearly 80 percent of the population speaks only English, and immigrants have long been required to demonstrate English proficiency before becoming citizens. Senator Eric Schmitt, Republican of Missouri, called it a 'long, long overdue' official acknowledgment that 'in this country, we speak English.' Senator Mike Lee, Republican of Utah, wrote a social-media post in Spanish saying that English should be the country's 'idioma oficial.' But immigrant-rights groups and congressional Democrats warned that the order could alienate immigrants and make it harder for non-English speakers to get government services, fill out health care forms or vote. The Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus called it a 'thinly veiled attempt to allow federal agencies to discriminate against immigrants.' Some critics compared Mr. Trump's order to Indian boarding schools that forbade Native languages, World War I laws that banned the German language and state-level efforts to outlaw bilingual education. Legal experts said the order's effects might be muted at first. It rescinds a mandate signed by then President Bill Clinton in 2000 that required government agencies and anyone who received federal money to provide translated documents and other language services to people who speak limited English. But unlike some restrictive English-only state laws that have been struck down by courts, Mr. Trump's order does not require agencies to operate solely in English. They can continue to offer documents and services in other languages. 'It's not nearly as punitive as it could be,' said Mary Carol Combs, an education professor at the University of Arizona. Early American history is full of examples of bilingual government, experts said. In the 19th century, Midwestern states translated laws and messages from their governors into Norwegian, German and Welsh. California's 1849 Constitution required laws and decrees to be published in both English and Spanish. 'There have always been diverse linguistic populations,' said Christina Mulligan, a professor at Brooklyn Law School who wrote about the translated Constitutions. An influx of immigrants from Asia and Latin America in the second half of the 20th century helped galvanize the modern English-only movement. More than 30 states have designated English as their official language, including heavily Democratic California. Mr. Trump seized on the issue as one of American identity when he first ran for president. He told Jeb Bush, the bilingual former governor of Florida, 'This is a country where we speak English, not Spanish.' During his campaign last year, Mr. Trump said American classrooms were being overwhelmed by students 'from countries where they don't even know what the language is.' His executive order said that designating English as the official language would streamline communication, 'reinforce shared national values, and create a more cohesive and efficient society.' The order got a mixed reaction from some voters in Arizona, a state with a large Mexican American electorate that went for Mr. Trump in 2016, flipped to Democrats four years later, and swung back to Mr. Trump in 2024. The state is also a battlefield over language in classrooms, where the Republican state school superintendent unsuccessfully sued several schools over their dual-language programs. David Ramos, 36, who works in the aerospace industry in the Phoenix area, said he had thought that English was already the country's official language. He grew up hearing his Puerto Rican father speak Spanish, and said he regretted never having learned it. Mr. Ramos, who voted for Mr. Trump, said the designation would have little effect on his life, but he took it as a sign that Mr. Trump was bulldozing ahead to fulfill campaign promises. 'I would rather have a leader who's assertive and spoke up for us, even if I didn't agree with it 100 percent of the time, versus somebody who's a doormat,' he said. But Jorge Marquez, 39, was torn. He spent years working in construction, saving up to open English 4 U, a storefront school in Phoenix where he teaches immigrants about irregular English verbs and how to order a McDonald's cheeseburger. Like Mr. Trump, he wants more people to speak English. As a Friday evening class wrapped up, though, he and his students were worried. They saw learning English as a bridge to better jobs and being able to communicate with doctors, bosses and their children's teachers. But they worried that Mr. Trump's edict would stigmatize people who spoke other languages, had accents or were still struggling to learn English. 'He's not wrong,' Mr. Marquez said of Mr. Trump. 'English is beautiful, but teach it in a good way. Have a little empathy.'
