1. The Immigration Landscape & Implications for Young Children
Rebecca Ullrich, Policy Analyst
Child Care and Early Education
The Immigration Landscape & Implications for Young Children
Alliance for Early Success 2018 Partner Summit
Denver, CO | November 2018
Brief overview on what’s been going on in the immigration space at the federal level, and ways that you all working in states can get engaged on these issues both federally and in your states and localities.

2. 1 in 4 Young Children Are Members of an Immigrant Family
< 10%
10 – 17%
17 – 24%
24 – 31%
> 31%
Always like to start by reiterating that young children in immigrant families are a large and growing share of our young child population,
forging a strong connection between your work as children’s advocates and immigration policy.
Nationally, 1 in 4 young children live in an immigrant family—5.7 million under age 6. And while the share varies widely by state, impt to emphasize that children are everywhree
But across the board, the vast majority of children in immigrant families are U.S. citizens.
Most live with parents who have some form of lawful immigration status, such a lawful permanent residents or “greencard holders”.
However, a sizable portion—1.6 million under age 5—live in mixed-status families with at least one undocumented parent. (note age groups don’t perfectly align)
Don’t have state-by-state numbers on hand, but share of children with undocumented parents also varies by state. Estimates available from our MPI

3. Administrative and Legislative Threats1 2 3
Since the beginning of the administration, President Trump and leadership at DHS and other agencies have engaged in a coordinated effort to make life difficult for immigrants in this country and to try scare away those who might be considering coming to the U.S.
Think about the major threats to immigrant families as falling into 3 categories. Going to talk through each one in the context of a specific example. Have just enough time to hit the highlights, so if anyone has questions save them for the end or grab me afterwards.
Increasing enforcement
Removing legal protections
Reducing access to public benefits

4. Family Separation and Detention as an Enforcement Strategy
27,080
Parents of citizen-children deported in FY 17
2,600+
Children separated from their parents
First category includes efforts to ramp up enforcement in the U.S. and at our borders. Administration has used a few different strategies to this end:
--increasing number of ICE and CBP agents, most recently deploying troops to the Southern border
--demanding money for border security, namely the border wall
--increasing the number of immigrants potentially subject to enforcement
These enforcement strategies are all part of a broader, coordinated effort to deter families from coming to the U.S. and penalize those who eventually arrive
Am sure many of you were following the crisis of families being separated at the border over the summer
This was the result of a “zero tolerance” policy for immigrants arriving to the US without documentation
Now one of the most infamous efforts to deter and penalize immigrant families
These are overwhelmingly Central American families fleeing violence in their home countries and coming to the U.S. seeking asylum.
While most of these children have been reunited with their parents, many remain separated
Reunification efforts are ongoing while the administration continues to attack this population—family detention, asylum ban, etc.
Remind you that children aren’t just being separated from their parents at the border
Heightened enforcement means family separations are happening here in Colorado, in DC, in North Carolina, in Tennessee, and elsewhere around the country every day
Last fiscal year, more than 27,000 parents of citizen-children were deported. These are the children being served by ECE programs in your community, for whom your advocacy can play a direct role in their day-to-day lives

5. Revoking Temporary Protected Status for Thousands of Immigrants
TPS is a temporary, renewable immigration status that provides work authorization and protection from deportation
TPS population
U.S.-born children
Avg. years in U.S.
U.S. total
302,000
273,200 19
California
55,000
54,700 22
Florida
44,800
28,100 14
Maryland
22,500
18,400 20
New Jersey
13,900
8,800
North Carolina
13,100
11,600
Texas
53,800
Virginia
23,500
21,200
Second category is removing protections for immigrants previously granted discretion—about taking away status for specific immigrant populations who’d been granted some form of temporary protection from deportation. Likely familiar with DACA—may have engaged in some of the advocacy efforts around Dream Act, but today going to talk about TPS, which you may be less familiar with.
TPS
A temporary, renewable immigration status
Provides work authorization; protection from deportation (but not a pathway to citizenship)
For folks from countries facing armed conflict, natural disasters, and other extreme and unsafe conditions.
Today, issued to nearly 440,000 foreign nationals from 10 countries.
Chart shows some characteristics of TPS holders in the U.S. and in the 7 states w/ largest populations, looking specifically at El Salvador, Honduras, and Haiti (where majority are from)
As you can see, most TPS holders have been living in the U.S. for decades. They are parents, home owners, entrepreneurs, and members of their communities. Nationally, 273,200 U.S. citizen-children have a parent with TPS.
President Trump has announced that he will not continue TPS for foreign nationals from 7 of the 9 countries he has reviewed, including the three countries w/ the most TPS holders. Decision based on the interpretation that these countries were no longer feeling the effects of the original disaster or conflict that made them eligible for TPS in the first place.
Worth noting that Honduras & El Salvador—two of the countries whose TPS was ended—are major countries families coming to border seeking asylum are fleeing from
Several legal challenges filed almost immediately. Lead plaintiff in one lawsuit is a 14-year-old citizen-child of a TPS holder from El Salvador. Judge placed preliminary injunction on the termination of TPS for recipients from El Salvador, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Sudan.
Allows TPS holders from these countries to maintain or renew their status as litigation continues. But relief is temporary, and the uncertainty continues.
If admin is successful, would be destabilizing for hundreds of thousands families across the country. Families facing question of whether to stay or go, if they stay, how to continue supporting families w/o work authorization…
Characteristics of TPS Holders from El Salvador, Honduras, and Haiti. Center on Migration Studies,

6. Proposed “Public Charge” Provisions Would Undercut Access to Vital Programs
Proposed benefits included:
Cash assistance
SNAP
Housing assistance
Medicaid
3. Efforts to reduce immigrant families’ access to public benefits—has been largely through “public charge”
“Public charge” is a provision in immigration law that is intended to identify individuals who would be primarily dependent on government support in the future. When making this determination, government officials consider a range of different factors, including whether they have ever received cash assistance or government-funded long-term care. If an immigrant is deemed likely to become a public charge, he or she can be denied entry to the U.S. or lawful permanent residency (a green card).
On October 10, the administration published an NPRM announcing its intention to dramatically expand the scope of public charge in two ways.
First, changes definition of public charge to an individual who is likely to at any time apply for or receive one or more public benefits. List of public benefits to consider now include Medicare Part D, SNAP, housing assistance, and non-emergency Medicaid
Second, creates a set of weighted standards for officials to consider during public charge determinations. These standards emphasize wealth and work, and overwhelmingly disadvantage immigrants who are low income, have limited English proficiency, and who are parents.
Recent research from MPI found that 69% of recent green card recipients would’ve been at risk of being denied status under the proposed standards.
Impact of proposed rule would extend far beyond immigrants who are applying for permanent status in the future. Map shows the number of children who might experience a “chilling effect,” or be scared away from progs & services due to the proposed rule. Predictably, largest # of chilled population are in CA, TX—but impacts would be felt all over the country.
Estimates are bolstered by other research, including CLASP’s own interviews and focus groups with ECE providers & immigrant parents
Recent analysis of SNAP enrollment data finding sharp decline in early 2018 among immigrant mothers living in US < 5 years

7. Defending Against Threats to Immigrant Families
Public charge
Submit comments at
Sector-based comments
Document the impact
Develop partnerships
Speak out on harmful state policies
Turning to ways to take action…
First, I think many of you in the room are aware that CLASP co-chairs the Protecting Immigrant Families or PIF Campaign with our partners at NILC. The campaign includes 275 active member organizations from around the country…

8. Advancing a Positive Agenda at the State Level
New governors, new legislators, new opportunities
Proactively communicating about policy changes
Sensitive locations or “safe space” policies
Clarifying immigrant eligibility for public benefit and early childhood programs

9. Contact Information
Rebecca Ullrich
Policy Analyst, Child Care and Early Education 12