the undocumentary

Documenting the undocumented. An on-going multimedia documentary project chronicling the lives of activists in the immigrant rights movement. Produced by @joshabla.

[undocumentary]

Future of 'Dream 9' activists who self-deported is still uncertain

It’s unclear how long Lulu Martinez will be held in immigration detention -- or if she'll be deported.

ICYMI: By far the riskiest NIYA action to date.

[undocumentary]

LA Times drops term "Illegal Immigrant."

The LA Times will no longer use the term "illegal" or "undocumented" when describing people. The goal is to "provide relevance and context and to avoid labels." Read more here. 

[undocumentary]

The Undocumentary is honored by the Society of Professional Journalists:

I'm proud to report that The Undocumentary placed as a National Finalist in the Society of Professional Journalists annual Mark of Excellence Awards. It won 1st Place in SPJ's Region 2 competition, which covers North Carolina and other mid-Atlantic states. Thank you again to everyone involved in the project, and happy May Day! 

[undocumentary]

The Undocumentary receives 2 Gold Medals from the Horizon Interactive Awards

I'm happy to announce that The Undocumentary has received two Gold Medals in the Horizon Interactive Awards. The project was recognized in both the Short Film/Documentary and the Advocacy/Non-profit categories. Awards like this are as much a testament to the reporting and production, as they are to the individuals who bravely opened up and shared their lives for this project. Thank you to everyone involved. 

[undocumentary]

Protesting N.C. Driver's Licenses

North Carolina's controversial plan to indicate "No Lawful Status" on driver's licenses issued to DACA recipients is now national news. The New York Times picked up the story this week, and today USA Today ran with it today. For more information on the legal end of the debate, read more from The National Immigration Law Center. 

[undocumentary]

UNDOCUNATION DENVER

The last UNDOCUNATION took place in Charlotte, right as the DNC was in full swing at the height of the 2012 election. Now, as talk immigration reform has taken over the national conversation, immigrant artists and supporters will come together in Denver this weekend for this special event.

In Charlotte, I was honored to share the stage with Alicia Torres-Don and talk about The Fighter after it screened. In Denver, Felipe Baeza will be discussing the challenges of being an artist living in NYC without papers after a screening of An Undocumented Artist. Unfortunately I will not be attending, however if you have the chance to go, don't miss it. 

[undocumentary]

IMMIGRATION REFORM?

I've been sitting on this post for a while now. In part for personal reasons—I recently moved to New York to start a gig at a documentary production company—though also because I wanted to wait until we got to that point where the political talk turned into some semblance of action. And, well, that point is now.

Immigration reform in 2013 is real. There are no guarantees of a CIR bill passaging. And, even if Congress does pass a bill, there are no guarantees that it will adequately address the needs of the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. But here we are today, talking about immigration as an issue square and center in the national debate. No longer is immigration relegated to a obligatory campaign promise or threat. Rather it's an issue that politicians of both parties want to get behind in one way, shape or form.

But here's the rub. Much of the chatter coming out of Washington lacks a certain sensibility and understanding of the greater issues concerning migration. One such problem is tying citizenship benefits to enforcement. Mother Jones went so far as to call it a deal breaker. The main point being that, stricter enforcement does not necessarily slow the flow of migrant workers into the United States. Instead the root of the problem needs to be addressed by answering the question: How do we create a legal path for migrant workers to enter the United States, or help create opportunities in their country of origin? The answer is largely academic, and I'll soon share some nonpartisan studies. 

Another issue is that the Congressional "Gang of Eight" is putting together a bill that would ask millions of undocumented immigrants to wait until stricter enforcement efforts were "certified" by governors in border states—among them, Jan Brewer. Close to two decades have passed since we passed significant immigration reform. And in that time the Obama administration has deported record numbers of immigrants. To make people wait any longer is a stain on our national consciousness. 

I have more to say about this, and I will certainly do so in upcoming posts. For now, let me send you to Jose Torres Don, Cinthia Marroquin and Marco Antonio Cervantes. The NC Dream Team trio discussed their demands for immigration reform in 2013 in this video I recently produced for The Nation.  

[undocumentary]

New immigration policing guidelines?

As 2012 draws to a close, Congress will fail to pass significant immigration reform for yet another year. (For those keeping score, the last reform bill was in 1996). In it's place, the Obama administration issued DACA and Prosecutorial Discretion. The latter, which came in the form of a 2011 memo from ICE director John Morton, established new guidelines for prosecutors to close deportation cases of noncriminals. In immigration circles, the Morton Memo, is largely seen as a joke, as Obama owns a record 1.5 million deportations in his first term in office, fulfilling a quota of 400,000 people a year. 

The new ICE directive issues stricter guidelines for placing detainers on undocumented immigrants. Currently, programs like Secure Communities and 287g help local police work with ICE to identify and detain people suspected of being in the country without papers. The new guidelines, however, seek to eliminate placing detainers on individuals with no known criminal record who pose no threat to society. It is unclear why this directive was not attached in the 2011 memo, however it does address a clear problem where individuals are detained for minor offenses, such as for driving without a license. (Undocumented immigrants cannot receive driver's licenses in most states).

The New York Times Editorial Page entered the debate yesterday, writing the following:

A stricter detainer policy is better for police and sheriffs, who can focus more on public safety. It makes people less vulnerable to pretextual arrests by cops who troll for immigrants with broken taillights. And it helps restore some sanity and proportion to an immigration system that has long been in danger of losing both. 

On paper, this would be an accurate interpretation of the increasingly problematic deportation issue. How it will play out, however, especially in the absence of meaningful Congressional reform, remains to be seen.

[undocumentary]

[undocumentary]

Activists arrested while challenging Sen. Kay Hagan on deportation case

The immigration system is clearly broken. And one place where this could not be any more apparent is North Carolina. Today, two NC DREAM Team organizers were arrested for occupying Sen. Kay Hagan's office in Greensboro, NC. The group is trying to pressure Sen. Hagan, who was one of five Democrats to kill the DREAM Act in 2010, to intervene in a deportation case that likely should not exist. 

Here's the backstory. Maria Juana Perez Santiago was arrested two years ago for driving without a license. The arrest occurred in Alamance County, NC, which the U.S. Department of Justice recently investigated and has since filed a lawsuit against the county for a pattern of racially profiling Latinos. Santiago has three children who are U.S. citizens, and should be a prime candidate for prosecutorial discretion. 

It is not uncommon for lawmakers to intervene in such cases, however Hagan herself has demonstrated a lack of commitment toward the Latino community in her first term in office.  

[undocumentary]

As this year wraps up and we prepare for immigration reform in 2013, take a moment to reflect on some of the causes of Mexican migration to the US, which are examined in the 2011 doc "Stay: Migration and Poverty," produced by Laura Elizabeth Pohl and Maisie Crow (Originally produced here for Bread for the World).

[undocumentary]

The Undocumentary receives Three CPOY Awards

I'm excited and honored to announce that The Undocumentary won three awards in the 67th College Photographer of the Year Awards this week. To be recognized in this contest is an honor, and to win multiple awards is a testament to the hard work and dedication from everyone who contributed to this project, and the strength and courage of those who opened their lives up to the camera. Thank you to EVERYONE who supported this project, you all know who you are. 

Here's what won:

The Undocumentary (the website): Silver, Large Group Multimedia Project

--

Illegal: Silver, Multimedia Project

--

The Fighter: Bronze, Multimedia Project

[undocumentary]

Illegals for Romney: Why some influential undocumented youth support Romney for president

I had a good time this weekend of catching up with organizers from the National Immigrant Youth Alliance, many of whom I have't seen since they infiltrated the Broward Detention Center in Florida. As I wrote in August, the Broward action exposed a system of deportation of low-priority detainees, contradicting Obama's repeated public pledge not to deport "non-criminals" and immigrants who arrived to the United States as children. So when we got around to talking presidential politics, I was curious to hear their thoughts. Would this small yet influential group of organizers, frustrated and angry at the Obama administration's immigration policies, support a Republican for president? The answer may surprise you.

To better understand the Illegals for Romney logic, I spoke at length with Viridiana Martinez, who I have been close with since I began reporting on immigration two years ago. "What reason do I have to support Obama," she asked, citing his record number of deportations and her less-than-positive experience inside the Broward Detention Center. But when I asked if Romney would be better, she responded (and I'm paraphrasing): It's not about better or worse, it's about, "What other choice do we have when Obama has failed our community in so many ways?" Her logic was a mix of the adage that "things have to get worse before they get better," and a belief that a Republican president may have a greater shot at pushing through immigration reform, no matter what those reforms would actually be. 

Throughout the conversation, in which I played the steady role of the devil's advocate, I got the sense that Illegals for Romney was as much of a scare tactic directed toward Democrats as it was actual support for the GOP. After all, what would frighten Democrats more than an Obama voter turning into a Romney voter? And while undocumented immigrants clearly cannot vote, their influence should not be discounted. It is widely believed that it was undocumented activists that forced Obama to announce the Deferred Action/DACA policy after they staged mass sit-ins that shut down Obama For America campaign offices across the country. Obama made the DACA announcement just days after this action closed campaign offices and gained national attention in the press. The message was clear, immigrants would not tolerate Democrats who do not support their communities, regardless of the alternative. 

Now, the frustration with Obama among immigration activists does not universally translate into support for Romney. Some organizers I have spoken with, both undocumented and allies, support the president for his positions on a wider range of social issues, including reproductive rights, health care, economic equality and civil rights. These Obama supporters do not consider themselves to be "single-issue voters" (or would-be voters) and, instead, make it a point to consider issues involving communities in which they seek solidarity. One organizer posed the question, what would someone say to an African-American voter about their support for Romney when both communities identify with similar human rights issues? While this is somewhat of a loaded question, worthy of its own post altogether, the point remains: one may want to consider the effect of single-issue voting on other communities.

Regardless of the results tonight, the political stage is set for either candidate to tackle significant immigration reform in 2013. What the reform will look like, however, largely depends on the priorities of the next president, and the special interests that influence the next administration. 

[undocumentary]

Illegals for Romney? Why some undocumented youth support the GOP challenger for president. A full report coming this afternoon. 

[undocumentary]

Illegal v. Undocumented, Round 3

IMPRESSIVE is the debate sparked by "journalist-turned-activist" Jose Antonio Vargas when he requested that the New York Times and AP stop using the word "illegal" in reference to undocumented immigrants. Not only did it prompt the open reflection from the Times public editor Margaret Sullivan, it also gathered attention from The Huffington Post, ABC News and, apparently, quite a number of academics.

In a story titled, "Linguists Tell New York Times That 'Illegal' Is Neither 'Neutral' nor 'Accurate,'" ABC News reported this week that a group of 24 linguistic scholars released a statement condemning the usage of "illegal." Interesting, I find, is their comparison of the "Drop the I-Word" campaign to Linguistic Anthrpology:

The “Drop the I-Word” campaign resonates with a central tenet of Linguistic Anthropology:language is a not merely a passive way of referring to or describing things in the world, but a crucial form of social action.

As for the Huffington Post, a story about this debate last week added that a Fox News Latino poll from March 2012 indicated that nearly half of all Latino voters polled found the term "illegal immigrant" to be offensive. 

Sullivan responded to the chatter earlier this morning. In her post titled, "Readers Won’t Benefit if Times Bans the Term ‘Illegal Immigrant,’" Sullivan endorsed the term. In her words:

I see no advantage for Times readers in a move away from the paper’s use of the phrase “illegal immigrant.” It is clear and accurate; it gets its job done in two words that are easily understood.

The public editor's words drew a frustrated response from Vargas:

I am disappointed at her assessment. The headline of the blog, to me, is most revealing: "Readers Won’t Benefit if Times Bans the Term ‘Illegal Immigrant.’" Which readers? Readers who want and need to understand the complex and evolving nature of immigration in America, how an immigrant can be out-of-status one week and have status the next? Readers from immigrant families (Latinos and Asians, particularly) who are likely to personally know someone who is undocumented and is offended that their friends and relatives are continually marginalized and dehumanized?

As for the Associated Press, they seemed more inclined for change. As printed in the HuffPo article:

“’Illegal immigrant’ had been the preferred term at AP,” Associated Press Director of Media Relations Paul Colford said in an email to several news organizations. “It ceased being the preferred term last year.”  And, while the AP still uses “illegal immigrant” as a general term, Colford wrote, the agency’s reporters try to detail circumstances rather than categorizing people.

In my original post on the topic, I discussed how, as an immigration reporter, the term "illegal" had put me at odds with the values of the community I was documenting. How it offended them, how it felt antiquated. I think for those on the ground the issue much more clear. To those charged with high profile decision-making, the pressure to reject change may be a safer bet, at least for now.  

A final side note, multimedia journalist Mimi Schiffman (my @UNCJSchool classmate) recently produced a well made documentary short for the NYT Lens Blog about an undocumented student struggling to pay for college. A debate ensued, however, over the accompanying text story's use of the term "illegal," which was not the author's original intention—she prefers undocumented. And of the seven Times readers/viewers that commented, all were supportive of the story, and one felt it necessary to criticize the Times directly. 

I'm disappointed by the NY Times for using the term "illegal" to refer to him and to other undocumented immigrants. (I know Mimi and this was not her choice of words.) No human being is "illegal." 

Despite the lack of immediate change, I would not expect this debate to go away time soon.

[undocumentary]

Would DACA have a future in a Romney administration?

The Denver Post reported Monday night that presidential candidate Mitt Romney indicated that he would uphold Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. 

By no means did Romney sound enthusiastic about DACA, however he did express hope to pass comprehensive immigration reform sometime within the next two years—something that both candidates would hope to accomplish should they win in November. 

The GOP candidate had this to say:

"The people who have received the special visa that the president has put in place, which is a two-year visa, should expect that the visa would continue to be valid. I'm not going to take something that they've purchased," Romney said. "Before those visas have expired we will have the full immigration reform plan that I've proposed."

News of the event quickly spread as the Huffington Post ran with the story. Appearing most of the day with the banner headline "Mitt has a "DREAM" too," its Latino Voices section ran the story, which now contains a rebuttal from the Obama campaign. 

Is this news evidence that the immigration debate is shifting left, a common sense reaction to those desperate for reforms, or race-baiting by both candidates? Feel free to chime in with comments. 

[undocumentary]

Is the New York Times ready to "Drop the I-Word"?

According to a new article by New York Times Public Editor Margaret Sullivan, The Times may be ready to consider alternatives to the term "illegal" in reference to immigrants living in the U.S. without papers—undocumented immigrants. 

The article quotes Philip B. Corbett, the associate managing editor for standards at The Times.

“We do think about this, and we talk about it all the time,” he said.

Does this mean a change anytime soon? Probably not. However at some point, given more information, Sullivan stated, she could "take a stand." 

Other journalists taking a stand are Jose Antonio Vargas, who prompted this discussion in a recent email exchange with Sullivan. Vargas, a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, came out with his undocumented status in a 2011 article in the New York Times Magazine. 

For more information about why the term "illegal" is considered offensive and inaccurate to Latinos, and how the media has responded to issues like this historically, check back to my April post: Questioning the "I" Word: illegal, undocumented, or other...?