Forum Editor: Why did you decide to get involved with the Immigrant Justice Clinic?
Sam Chang: I decided to apply for the Immigrant Justice Clinic (IJC) because my ultimate goal is to use my law degree to advocate for policies that will benefit marginalized communities. I am passionate about issues at the intersection of reproductive justice and immigrant justice and hope to work on these issues during my career. Immigrants, in particular, have difficulties accessing necessary resources due to their status (or lack thereof). The narrative surrounding immigrants, especially Latinx immigrants, not only affects how individuals treat them but how existing systems treat them as well. My interest in serving immigrants derives from this disparate treatment. I also believe that direct client experience is necessary in order to develop effective policy because policy should always be grounded in the experiences of the people it will affect.
Forum Editor: What was the transition like when the clinic became remote in March 2020?
Sam Chang: The transition was a bit disorienting. On March 11, 2020, Northeastern announced that it would transition to remote learning the next day. Originally, the school still allowed students and faculty to go to campus either individually or in small groups. At this time, Professors Gundavaram and Rosenbloom were hopeful that the clinic could still meet on campus and have client meetings in the clinic office space (if the students and clients felt comfortable doing so). My clinic partner and I were in the midst of scheduling our first client meeting and arranging travel accommodations for our client when the professors decided that it would be safer to conduct the clinic fully remote. Soon after, the school announced a complete closure of campus buildings, and my partner and I had to quickly shift gears on how we would approach our client work. I struggled with remote work at first – I experienced migraines and eye strain due to prolonged screen time, I had to adjust to constantly being in my room (and reminding myself to leave my room every once and a while), and I became overwhelmed by the flurry of emails we received. I’m the type of person that prefers to attend class with a notebook and pen, so I don’t get distracted from email alerts, and I had to exert a lot of energy in order to ensure that I was focused and got my work done in a timely fashion. The professors provided support where possible and actively reminded us to do things that would help maintain our wellness. At the end of the quarter, I did establish a strong relationship with my client and crafted a compelling affidavit for my client’s asylum application.
Forum Editor: How has the COVID-19 pandemic shaped your interactions with IJC clients?
Sam Chang: The pandemic made me more conscious of the various barriers my clients face and made me pause more often to try to understand my clients’ positioning. (It’s always good to periodically check yourself to make sure you’re not making assumptions about other people and what they are experiencing.) The pandemic made various aspects of my clients’ lives more difficult and tested my ability to be an effective advocate.
At the start of clinic, I had prepared for other challenges of client interviewing, such as building trust with a client who has experienced trauma or building rapport despite a language barrier. With the shift online, I was not prepared for the technological challenges of remote client work. After a week of coordinating with my partner, the client, and an interpreter, I had hoped that our first meeting would go smoothly. Unfortunately, the meeting ended after only fifteen minutes because there were communication issues with the interpreter – they had confirmed that they were able to meet prior to reading my most recent email with the specific date and time. In subsequent meetings, we confirmed our next meeting time at the end of our meetings and sent a reminder email, so everyone was on the same page. Even then, we found that there were technical issues that prevented us from communicating effectively. Sometimes the client would mute themself and had difficulty unmuting themself again, while other times, the client or interpreter would not be able to hear my partner or me, and we had to figure out whether it was an issue on our end or on their end. Other times, one or more of us would be booted off the call due to connection issues, so we would have to stop and start over again. Gathering information for the client’s asylum claim was difficult not only because it was hard for the client to talk about their experiences but also because we would miss parts of their story due to technical glitches. In these moments, I would find myself getting frustrated and had to remind myself that these circumstances couldn’t be helped because not everyone has access to a reliable internet connection, and not everyone has the same level of tech literacy. During this process, I learned to communicate more effectively and to accommodate for unexpected circumstances. Before each meeting, I took time to familiarize myself with the online applications we would be using, prepared screenshots to send to the client to help them navigate the applications, and prepared verbal instructions in case we got disconnected.
When I became a Research Assistant for the clinic in the fall of 2020, I worked with more clients and learned how to navigate various pandemic-related issues. Many laptops were not made to be used all day, and my clients started experiencing issues with their laptops running slowly. One of my clients consistently logged into our meetings late because their laptop would take thirty minutes to turn on. Another client logged into our Zoom meeting from the parking lot of a Starbucks because their internet went out right before our meeting. I was taken aback by the fact that my clients felt the need to go out of their way to get online, and it dawned on me that when I was trying to make myself available to the clients, I only offered them online options. I asked the client if they were comfortable with continuing the meeting and emphasized that we could always have phone meetings. From then on, we switched to meetings by phone to accommodate for internet issues, and video meetings were used only when necessary.
Something as routine as renewing a driver’s license became more difficult due to the backlog in the immigration system. My client had timely filed their work authorization document renewal but had not received their new document before their license expired. My client needed the work authorization document to renew their license, and if they could not renew their license, then they would not be able to drive to work. Before they were able to renew their license, my client had to go to the Registry of Motor Vehicles (RMV) multiple times over the course of several weeks. I empathized with my client’s frustration while going through such an ordeal and felt like the process would have been much smoother if I had been able to go with them. I am, however, grateful for the fact that my client received assistance from a security guard at the RMV and was able to renew their license.
Like many others, one of my clients lost their job during the pandemic and needed to apply for unemployment benefits. My client applied for unemployment via phone and was instructed to submit their documents online. My client had difficulty navigating through the online forms and needed assistance with filing their documents, so I tried several methods to assist with the process. First, I tried sharing my screen to show them exactly what to do, but my client had used their phone to log into the meeting, so it was difficult for them to see what I was doing. I then provided screenshots for my client to view on their computer while I stayed on the call with them in case they had questions. My client still had difficulty filing their documents online, so we decided to call the unemployment office together to see if there was another way to file since a further delay would mean living without an income for a longer period of time. The person from the unemployment office told us that it would take two to three weeks for the office to receive the documents, let alone process them. While we managed to file the documents with the person on the phone, the process had caused my client a lot of stress. I cannot imagine what my client was going through during this time – they had to worry about being able to provide for themself while managing their immigration case. I often checked in with my client to see if there was anything I could do to make their life a little bit easier so that they could maintain their well-being.
Forum Editor: Which aspects of the immigration process have been compounded by the pandemic?
Sam Chang: Immigration issues affect all areas of an immigrant’s life, so the pandemic has had profound effects across the board. I think the most dehumanizing effect of the immigration process is the constant fear instilled in immigrants about losing status or being deported. This fear not only affects an immigrant’s access to essential services but also negatively impacts their physical and mental health.
When examining the effects of the pandemic, one of the obvious focal points is disparities in health. Immigrants comprise 14% of the U.S. population. Immigrant communities are more vulnerable to infection due to a range of factors “such as higher incidence of poverty, overcrowded housing conditions, and higher concentration in jobs where physical distancing is difficult.” The Trump administration had already disrupted healthcare access for the immigrant community when it announced that it would change the public charge rule in 2018. “Public charge” is one of the grounds of inadmissibility – if deemed a public charge, then a non-citizen could be denied a visa, green card, or admission to the United States. Prior to its implementation in 2020, the rule had a chilling effect on healthcare access: 10.6% of immigrant families avoided participating in medical programs that would provide free or low-cost medical care or health insurance for fear of immigration-related consequences. The COVID-19 pandemic created “a new layer of fear” in which non-citizens are afraid to seek care. Communities who are consistently traumatized by the government will often become distrustful of the government and will refuse government services. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated existing inequities, and the Trump administration effectively built a wall by presenting more barriers for immigrants.
Even prior to the pandemic, marginalized populations have had difficulty accessing sexual and reproductive healthcare. In the U.S., immigrants “account for 17% of women of reproductive age and 23% of births.” Pregnant persons have been mistreated while in the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”)’s custody, “denied medical treatment while in labor, and forcefully expelled to unsafe locations in Mexico days after giving birth.” Pregnant persons are at heightened risk for adverse health outcomes from COVID-19 and face discrimination in accessing healthcare based upon their status.
Immigrant populations are often employed in sectors at the frontline or in sectors vulnerable to layoffs. In the U.S., 16% of healthcare workers are immigrants. These healthcare professionals are at higher risk of exposure given their occupation. Even though these workers risk their lives to treat patients, due to their status, their own access to care is limited. Immigrants are also commonly employed in the construction, hospitality, food service, and manufacturing industries. They often face job insecurity due to their status and are forced to make the choice between working and putting their health and safety as well as their family’s health and safety at risk.
In response to police brutality and the disproportionate number of Black lives taken, there has been a surge in the prison abolition movement – I believe that people should not be thrown into cages for any purpose, criminal or immigration. The public became more conscious of the deplorable conditions inside immigration detention centers earlier in the Trump administration. Immigrant adults and children are held in overpopulated facilities, often with no access to hygienic products. The detention centers do not allow for social distancing nor provide proper preventative care for detainees. From May 2020 to June 2020, COVID-19 cases in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers rose by 367%. As of April 1, 2021, 10,776 people in detention have tested positive for COVID-19. While there has been some success in releasing medically vulnerable individuals from detention, there are still millions in detention who are at risk of exposure. Despite the Biden administration’s promise to reverse Trump’s immigration policies and end family separation, a migrant “facility” for children opened on February 22, 2021. The change in language does not change the fact that the children are still held against their will; cages are cages even if you call them facilities or rapid-processing centers. Even if you give the children books and teach them English inside the facilities, you are doing nothing to honor their humanity if their freedom is restricted.
Forum Editor: You mentioned that the Trump administration did effectively build a wall via its failure to respond to the COVID-19 crisis. Could you explain what you mean by that?
Sam Chang: Former President Trump perpetuated racist and xenophobic rhetoric throughout his campaign and presidency with his promise to build a wall to curb “illegal” immigration. Both he and his administration exploited the pandemic to further their anti-immigrant agenda. Despite being aware of the severity of COVID-19, former President Trump downplayed the virus’s threat and failed to respond to the pandemic with urgency. When he finally did start responding, he unjustly blamed migrants and shut down borders. Since March of 2020, more than 109,000 migrants and asylum seekers have been expelled from the U.S. For the first three months of the pandemic, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services suddenly shut down all in-person services, and immigration courts closed as well. Many immigrants lived in a sort of purgatory where immigrants could not advance their immigration cases. Even when immigrants tried to take care of their immigration matters via mail, former President Trump’s attacks on the U.S. Postal Service slowed down processing and further impeded their progress. Even absent direct attacks on immigration, the Trump administration’s handling of the pandemic presented more barriers for immigrants. As mentioned above, there are little protections for immigrants during the pandemic despite the immigrant community’s vulnerability to the virus. Many immigrants risked exposure to COVID-19 in order to maintain their livelihood and ended up sick without care. In effect, former President Trump’s incompetence built a wall that many immigrants could not overcome.
Forum Editor: If you could redesign the pandemic relief bills and stimulus packages, what would you have included in them to better address the IJC clients’ needs and concerns?
Sam Chang: I believe that the pandemic relief bills and stimulus packages failed to provide meaningful support to the majority of people living in the United States. In its first and second relief packages, Congress failed to include immigrants in provisions related to “testing and care, cash rebates, and unemployment insurance.” To protect the entire community, we must ensure that all members of the community have access to testing and care. DACA recipients, people with temporary protected status, people with U visas, undocumented immigrants, and many lawful permanent residents were not able to get tested or receive care related to COVID-19. Millions of immigrants who file federal income taxes but do not have social security numbers (“SSNs”) were not able to receive vital cash assistance. Even families with mixed status were excluded from cash rebates if a person without an SSN files jointly with a spouse or child who has an SSN. I think all people should have been eligible to receive a stimulus check – the pandemic affects everyone, and immigrants are particularly vulnerable since they make up a large part of the frontline workforce and are susceptible to layoffs. If an immigrant does lose their job during the pandemic, they cannot receive unemployment benefits unless they have work authorization. Many immigrants may have lost their work authorization due to the pandemic since they are “awaiting adjudication of immigration benefits or [are] at risk of . . . a loss of immigration status . . . due to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office closures.” Congress should ensure automatic extensions of work authorization during the pandemic to ensure that those who need unemployment benefits will receive them.
Forum Editor: How do you think that the pandemic will linger in the clinic even after students, faculty, and staff return to working in person at the law school?
Sam Chang: The immigration system has been backlogged and overwhelmed, so I imagine that the clients’ case timelines will grow even longer than before. Since many clients’ statuses may have lapsed, the clinic faculty and students will have to address immigration issues that may not have occurred but for the shutdown. The clinic’s clients will likely also be impacted by other issues related to the pandemic, such as difficulties accessing healthcare or applying for unemployment benefits. This means that the clinic’s clients may prioritize these issues over addressing their immigration issues. When people are focusing on survival, lawyers and advocates must step back and ensure that their clients have the means to stay safe and healthy before the clients can address their immigration status.
Also, in terms of the actual work, I feel like work has been thought about in a particular way for a long time – working in-person, every day with little opportunity to work from home. The pandemic has proven that certain types of work can be done at home. This means that there may be more reasonable accommodations available for people with disabilities after the pandemic is over since there is proof that the work can be done at home. Technological advances can benefit everyone so long as everyone has access to the technology. However, the move online has also shown that there are technological and computer literacy barriers that prevent people from being successful. Not everyone has access to the internet or space to work at home. Innovations in technology could ensure better access to essential services but also present barriers to marginalized groups.
Forum Editor: What part of your experience in the clinic will you take with you into your career as an advocate?
Sam Chang: When I started with the clinic, I knew that immigration issues affect all areas of a non-citizen’s life, but the pandemic illuminated just how inequitable current systems and structures are against immigrants. Immigrant health was always an issue I was passionate about, and examining the immigrant community’s access to healthcare during the pandemic demonstrated the many ways in which immigrants are limited. Prior to the pandemic, immigrants were already vulnerable to low wages, unsafe working conditions, limited access to healthcare, etc. Now, immigrants are presented with the choice to go to work and risk exposure or stay at home and not have the means to live. Hearing about my clients’ concerns elucidated many issues, both immigration-related and not. Even if we address the problems in immigration law, we still must approach the practical needs of the immigrant community with an intersectional lens. Advocates must look at various systems and identify where to put pressure to make needed changes. As an advocate, I will set aside my own preconceptions of what the immigrant community needs and listen with open ears about what my clients need. When meeting with clients, I will make every effort to break down any communication barriers and make sure my client and I are on the same page. In terms of policy, effective policy advocacy requires accurate data collection as well as story collection in order to ensure that the policy will positively impact the people it is meant to reach. Immigrants’ experiences will inform advocates about what their needs are and what issues to prioritize.
Sam Chang is a law student at Northeastern University, class of 2021. She has been working with the Immigrant Justice Clinic since Spring 2020. During law school, Sam interned for an immigration firm, a non-profit organization for homeless youth, an international reproductive justice organization, and a local civil rights enforcement agency. After graduation, she hopes to work on policy issues at the intersection of immigrant justice and reproductive justice.