by Edwin Quinabo
Statistics suggest that the Filipino community in the U.S. could be sorely jolted by President Donald Trump’s immigration policies that mostly target undocumented migrants.
The Department of Homeland Security records show there are 350,000 unauthorized Filipino migrants residing in the U.S. as of 2022. The U.S. Census Bureau in the same year registers 4.1 million Filipino Americans in the U.S. Combine the two figures: 8.5% of Filipinos in the U.S. are at-risk of potential deportation.
While the number of undocumented Filipinos deported since Trump began his mass deportation is not available, data from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) shows more than 200,000 people believed to be undocumented have been arrested shortly after his inauguration in the span of a month. Thousands already have been deported. ICE has been instructed to arrest at least 1,200-1,500 per day.
Kami Yamamoto, MPH, Education Officer, National Alliance for Filipino Concerns (NAFCON), told the Hawaii Filipino Chronicle, “Filipinos become undocumented for a variety of reasons – they’re victims of labor trafficking, they have overstayed their tourist visa, they’re unfamiliar with the system, sometimes they even forget to renew their visa. In some instances, they also become subject to exploitation because of these same reasons.
“Nonetheless, we maintain migrants – undocumented or not – have only gone abroad and endured years if not decades of separation from their loved ones to provide a better life for themselves and their family. The question we ask: would you not do the same for your family and provide them with support by any means possible? From our door-to -doors and community talakayan (discussion), we have heard fear and anxiety from community members about the Trump administration’s intimidation, harassment, and surveillance administered by ICE,” Yamamoto said.
Arrests in Hawaii, not just criminals
The Migration Policy Institute estimates there are 21,000 illegal immigrants in Hawaii. Nearly two-thirds of them are listed as being from the Philippines or Japan.
Federal agents have arrested numerous individuals in Hawaii, and recent protests have been held near the state capital. One of the attendees was Thor Donola whose uncle was recently arrested by ICE. He told HNN, his uncle has no criminal background. “They are ripping families apart. They are ripping people away who ultimately just come here for a better life.”
Sol Castro, Makakilo, a second-generation Filipino American told the Filipino Chronicle, “The Trump administration emphasized deporting people with criminal records who pose a danger to the community. Most people don’t have a problem with that. But what’s happening is undocumented people who are good contributors to our communities, people who we want to stay, are also being deported. I don’t think sensible, fair Americans want to see that.”
Trump expanded arrest priorities to anyone in the country illegally, not just people with criminal convictions. The White House clarified its definition of criminal history. “If you are an individual who illegally enters the United States of America, you are by definition, a criminal,” said White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt.
Widespread arrests emoting palpable fear
Extreme fear that any undocumented — and not just those with criminal records — have migrants hiding out, staying at home and some who need income electing to not show up to their workplace. Reports have arrests being made at gas stations, on highways, restaurants, stores, at Home Depot (where migrants often wait to be picked up for short-term, day labor work), places of employment and homes.
The areas where ICE can seek illegals will expand. The Department of Homeland Security announced it would roll back an Obama-era directive, suddenly allowing the immigration agency to detain people in sensitive areas such as hospitals, places of worship, court rooms, funerals, and weddings.
“Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest,” a spokesperson for the agency said in a statement. “The Trump Administration will not tie the hands of our brave law enforcement and instead trusts them to use common sense.”
Unlike the Biden administration, Trump has ordered other government enforcement agencies to work with ICE on deportations, that include the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives-all part of the Justice Department-and the Homeland Security Department’s Customs and Border Protection, which includes the Border Patrol.
A closer look at polls on Trump’s immigration policies
Trump has signed about 30 executive orders to date with about 10 relating to immigration. Some actions on immigration were immediate like mass deportations and the end of catch-and-release, while others face legal challenges and could take years or fail to be implemented like ending birthright citizenship and denaturalization of U.S. citizens specific to those born in the U.S. to illegal parents.
In these first months of Trump’s immigration actions, polls show wide support for Trump’s immigration policies but also unfavorable disagreement in a few areas. “There’s essentially broad agreement with Trump’s position on these topics, but as soon as you start pushing into specifics, a lot of that dissipates,” said Chris Jackson, Ipsos pollster and senior vice president.
He explains, “the concept of mass deportations may work better for Trump in the abstract than in the reality. Immigration, in reality, is complicated, messy and difficult. The real question is going to be… does that level of support maintain or fragment as they confront the reality of what it means.”
An Axios/Ipsos Poll conducted Jan. 10-12, 2025, shows 9 in 10 Republicans and close to half of Democrats say they support mass deportation of illegals. But at the same time, just one in three (33%) endorse separating families or sending people to countries other than their country of origin in the interest of speed. And just 33% support deporting those who came to the U.S. as children.
In another poll conducted later, Jan. 27-Feb 5, 2025, the Marquette University Law School poll shows support for Trump’s deportation already dropped to 60% in favor and 40% opposed to Trump’s deportations of illegals. 57%, oppose deporting immigrants who have been in the United States illegally for a number of years, have jobs, and no criminal record, while 43% favor deportation in this circumstance.
In yet another later poll, Feb 5 to 7, 2025, CBS News/YouGov found most (52%) oppose “the U.S. government establishing large detention centers, where people would be sent and held, while the government determined whether or not they should be deported. In a Democracy Institute poll, 67% support reinstating the “remain in Mexico” policy.
Most polls show broad support for strengthening the border. There is a legislative proposal to increase the number of Border Patrol agents from about 20,000 to 22,000, and to provide more funding for surveillance, is favored by bipartisan majorities in the swing states (71-77%), including 77-82% of Republicans and 65-79% of Democrats. Nationally, a bipartisan majority of 70% are in favor (Republicans 74%, Democrats 71%).
On Mass Deportation
Raymund Llanes Liongson, PhD, Ewa Beach, a self-identified “secular, progressive, humanist” is against mass deportation. “Mass deportation does not make sense; it invites chaos and abuse and creates terror and violence. There should be a pathway to citizenship for those already in the country. Undocumented immigrants are a vital part of America’s workforce. Research shows that substantial shares of critical occupations nationwide are filled by undocumented individuals, including crucial jobs in farming (34%), construction (13%), building grounds and maintenance (13%), food preparation and services (7%), and manufacturing and production (7%),” he said.
Divina Telan Robillard, Kailua, Democrat, said “any government action that does not consider individual circumstances, as in mass deportation, is unfair, unproductive, disruptive, and inhumane. It is unconscionable. There must be a decent, fair process to allow in-country undocumented people to achieve citizenship.”
Nieva Elizaga, community leader, said “the deportation of undocumented people will not be good for the economy. Who will pick vegetables and fruits? Who will work in the factories? Essentials for daily living will be unaffordable, not just eggs. I think they should be given some kind of visa but not outright citizenship. It wouldn’t be fair to those who have been waiting patiently for years and years to get their green card legally. The children brought here as minors should be given green cards. They are here through no fault of their own. The children born here are citizens, according to the constitution. We should not let Trump get away with proclamations that are illegal.”
Mark, identity withheld by request, Independent, formerly of Salt Lake but resides in a border city on the mainland has mixed feelings on mass deportations. “Trump is doing what people voted for, so Americans want action. This is justified. A big part of what he ran on is deporting illegals. But there are many undocumented who deserve to stay in this country – those who haven’t broken laws besides illegal entry, those who lived here for many years and contribute positively to our communities, those who were brought in as minors, and parents with underage children.”
Humanizing the illegal vs legal debate
Yamamoto said, “with all of Trump’s executive orders and policies, it is NAFCON and the Tanggol Migrante Campaign Network’s belief these are just attempts to obfuscate the root causes of migration, which is the economic crisis that is happening in countries around the world like the Philippines. Over 7,000 Filipinos leave the country every day because of the lack of sustainable job opportunities and a livable wage in the Philippines. We wish to humanize the situation that many migrants find themselves in right now and humanize those who have become the subject of this debate of ‘legal vs illegal’, ‘good vs bad migrant.’”
She adds, “One of the main demands of the Tanggol Migrante Campaign is to call on the Philippine government to defend and protect their nationals by providing concrete support for migrants including the conduct of wellness checks for Filipino nationals in ICE detention and the provision of Assistance to Nationals (ATN) funds for Filipinos experiencing financial problems in the U.S. including but not limited to exorbitant immigration application fees.
Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. said he wants to meet with Trump to discuss among matters, the fate of thousands of Filipinos at risk of deportation. “I will meet with President Trump because there’s much that we need to discuss between the U.S. and the Philippines in terms of trade, in terms of defense and security, and now, the new policy on immigration,” Marcos told reporters.
Catch-and-Release Ends
Catch-and-release is a policy that immediately after processing, releases into the U.S. any asylum seekers who came through the border. Mark blames catch-and-release for spiking illegal immigration. “Under Biden, the asylum option was overused and abused. They just had to come in at the border, claim asylum, be processed and were released with an immigration court date which most would not appear. It was so easy because of this catch-and-release policy. The word was out that all they need to do is follow these simple steps to live in the U.S.”
Trump put an end to catch-and-release his first week in office. Migrants who cross the U.S. border will no longer be set free in the U.S. while they await their immigration hearings.
Mark adds that the massive number of asylum seekers at the border was in the thousands each day in some weeks during the Biden administration. U.S. cities along the border had their resources strained and the federal government was not quick to reimburse municipalities and, in some cases, did not. And whatever federal aid is given to municipalities, it became disproportionately allotted to migration. The rest of the country does not understand the burden that border cities face. “For example, municipal-run hospitals and clinics are frequently visited by illegal immigrants. This drives up costs for these health centers that were established for citizens of the municipality, but it is the taxpayer who will end up paying for the added medical visits by illegals with rising property taxes. U.S. border cities have among the highest property taxes in the nation. This is unfair,” Mark said.
Liongson acknowledges that the Biden administration “failed to manage the southern border effectively.” He cites the Brookings Institution, a nonprofit and nonpartisan research organization based in Washington, D.C., that showed encounters with migrants at the southwestern border rose from 458,000 in 2020 to 1.7 million in FY 2021, 2.4 million in FY 2022, 2.5 million in FY 2023, and 3.1 million in FY 2024, 3.1. At the same time, Lliongson said, “The Biden administration navigated and welcomed a promising bipartisan congressional bill, but GOP lawmakers eventually walked away from it at the urging of Donald Trump, as he was centering his reelection campaign on immigration.”
On “catch and release, Liongson said that policy is a debatable program. “On the one hand, it is considered a humane act that does not result in overcrowding detention facilities. On the other hand, some believe that catch-and-release policies can incentivize more people to attempt illegal entry. There is weight on both sides of the argument. But I keep asking, what happened to the old American ideal expressed in the sonnet of Emma Lazarus, inscribed on a bronze plaque and attached to the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty: ‘Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.’ The huddled masses cannot apply to just the white migrants from Europe in the 1880s. It applies to the huddled masses of today.”
Robillard said on catch and release and asylum seekers, “People cross our border for many reasons. It is important to me that a person be given the chance to state what that reason is and if found it is within our stated acceptable reasons, that person should be allowed to stay. I believe those who cross the border need to know that they will be detained in humane circumstances (for example children not separated from parents) prior to hearing their case in immigration court. I think that is fair.”
Ending birthright citizenship and denaturalize U.S. citizens
President Trump is seeking to end birthright citizenship in the US, a nearly 160-year-old practice guaranteed by the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, which grants citizenship to anyone born on American soil. If ending birthright citizenship were to pass legal muster, it would not strip citizenship from children already born in the U.S. before the new policy takes effect. The second part, a separate policy that Trump wants, is then to denaturalize U.S. citizens born in the U.S. to undocumented parents, a retroactive goal.
The latest update: U.S. District Court judge in Maryland Deborah L. Boardman issued a preliminary injunction that indefinitely blocked President Trump’s attempt to unilaterally eliminate automatic U.S. citizenship for children born to undocumented immigrants on U.S. soil.
“The executive order conflicts with the plain language of the 14th Amendment, contradicts 125-year-old binding Supreme Court precedent and runs counter to our nation’s 250-year history of citizenship by birth,” Judge Boardman ruled. “The United States Supreme Court has resoundingly rejected the president’s interpretation of the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment. In fact, no court in the country has ever endorsed the president’s interpretation. This court will not be the first.”
Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez said in a statement, “If allowed to stand, this order—for the first time since the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868—would mean babies born each year in Hawaii who otherwise would have been citizens will no longer enjoy the privileges and benefits of citizenship.”
On denaturalizing citizens, the Supreme Court put an end to politically driven denaturalization campaigns in 1967, ruling that the government could only revoke an immigrant’s citizenship in the case of fraud or “willful misrepresentation.” Irina Manta, a law professor at Hofstra University in New York, began building a database of denaturalization cases. She said, “You would think naturalization would be final, no matter what people did or didn’t do. The government shouldn’t be able to come back five years later and question it.”
Liongson agrees with most legal scholars that say ending birthright citizenship is illegal and unconstitutional. He said of denaturalization, “The attempt to denaturalize U.S. citizens is part of the grand design to restore White dominance and supremacy in the U.S. It reveals what MAGA truly is. It is not about making America great again. (It has always been great.) It is about making America White again.”
Robillard also called ending birthright citizenship unconstitutional and on denaturalizing U.S. citizens whose parents were illegal at the time of entry, she called that “immaterial.” She explains, “it would be making a person pay for the fault of their parents.”
Castro said, “It’s a time of real fear in immigrant communities as they see family members deported. Even government workers are afraid to speak out on mass deportation but can comment on Trump’s safer policies like defending the border and ending catch-and-release that many agree with. Eventually, though, and we’re already seeing it, mass deportation will become less popular because many of the undocumented, including many who are Filipinos, are contributors and in good standing. These migrants should be given a pathway to citizenship.”
About Author
+ There are no comments
Add yours