By Kelly Zheng
University of Maryland students and faculty reacted with mixed feelings to President Donald Trump’s immigration proposals in his State of the Union Address on Jan. 30.
The president presented “four pillars” for immigration reform. They consist of a pathway to citizenship for 1.8 million Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients, building a wall on the southern border, eliminating the green card lottery and placing restrictions on “chain migration.”
Trump stated that the policies to help immigrant communities should focus on the best interests of Americans, adding that open borders have allowed gangs, such as MS-13, to end innocent lives.
Juan Sandoval, a junior psychology major and DACA recipient or (“Dreamer”) who came to the U.S. in 2002, took issue with the president’s connection of immigrants and violence.
“I disliked how he began the topic of immigration with the murder of an American girl by MS-13,” Sandoval said. “This creates a stigma and stereotype. It seems as if he is associating Dreamers to gang members.”
UMD College Republicans’ president and junior government and politics major Steven Clark had a more qualified view of the president’s association.
“There are immigrants that are members of gangs. I don’t think we should be painting them with a broad brush, though. The vast majority make great contributions to America,” Clark said.
In the address, Trump said his plan “generously offers a path to citizenship for 1.8 million illegal immigrants who were brought here by their parents at a young age,” so long as they “meet education and work requirements, and show good moral character.”
Sandoval said this proposal was what he has been waiting for.
“This reform is like a light at the end of a tunnel because of its promise for a pathway to citizenship, which is something me and my family have struggled and longed for,” he said.
Dr. Christina Getrich, the associate director of the Center for Global Migration Studies at this university, said the “first pillar” is the most feasible part of Trump’s proposal, but his intent is not standalone.
“I think he sees it more as a bargaining chip to get what he wants. It’s his attempt to compromise, except it’s not, even though he’s presenting it that way,” she said.
Trump said his “second pillar,” building a wall on the U.S.’ southern border, will close loopholes exploited by criminals and terrorists trying to enter the country.
Clark said physical barriers along the border at certain locations are necessary, but he also didn’t agree with a massive wall.
The president’s “third pillar” is ending the diversity visa lottery program. In the speech, the president said the program “randomly hands out green cards without any regard for skill, merit or the safety of the American people.” However, education, work experience and background checks are already required of those selected, according to FactCheck.org, a University of Pennsylvania non-partisan consumer advocacy group.
The “fourth pillar” is ending “chain migration,” or “the process by which green card holders or legal U.S. residents may sponsor a family member for immigration to the United States,” according to CBS.
The president said he wants to move toward a merit-based immigration system that only allows “skilled” workers who will “contribute to our society” into the U.S.
His focus on “chain migration” is limiting sponsorships to spouses and minor children for “our security, and for the future of America,” he said.
Getrich described Trump’s last two “pillars” are “fabrications and distractors to the others.”
Trump used the term “Dreamer” to tie the immigration debate back to his own policies: “My duty, and the sacred duty of every elected official in this chamber, is to defend Americans,” he said. “To protect their safety, their families, their communities and their right to the American Dream. Because Americans are Dreamers, too,” he said.
However, Getrich did not believe the word choice was an attempt to reach out to DACA recipients.
“It was used to devalue the life experiences of Dreamers in our society,” she said. “They’re not on the same field with natural born Americans…Dreamers are marked by great struggle, but also resilience.”