The Space Between- Blog
This space is for slow thinking, careful attention, and working ideas out for anyone with an interest. I write here about applied ethics, immigration, narrative, and systems of power.
“Lost in the Noise: Sorting Fact from Fiction on Immigration”
In this moment of tailored algorithms and selectively delivered information, it can be difficult to know what to think, especially when you and your neighbor may be receiving completely different information based on preferences, engagement incentives, and attempts to capture your attention that you didn’t choose and probably don’t fully understand (I know I don’t). On top of that is the uncomfortable reality that almost everything right now is complicated.
When my ethics students ask me questions about current events and what we should do, the thing I find myself saying most often is: “It’s complicated.” That response is particularly apt in this moment, when we live in different information bubbles and try to navigate conflicting narratives. Are civil liberties eroding before our eyes? Or is what we’re seeing a necessary correction in the name of security and law enforcement? Is enforcing immigration policy with ICE enforcement, detention, and deportation of over 675,000 people (according to a January Press Release) necessary?[1] Or are our neighbors, children, parents, friends, and employers living through a campaign of cruelty?
This issue is indeed complicated. But we can’t stop the conversation at the point where we recognize this complexity, because doing so often leaves thoughtful, well-intentioned people feeling paralyzed: I don’t know enough. What if I get it wrong? What if I only have part of the story? These doubts can trap us in non-action. All too often, the people most willing to speak with certainty on complex issues are either deeply motivated and narrowly focused or simply overconfident in their own views. In the face of conflicting and complex information, it becomes all too easy to dismiss anything that doesn’t fit our narrative of the current situation. How often have even the best of us, on the justification of “doing our research,” drilled in on a piece of information that felt “suspicious” (i.e., doesn’t fit cleanly with what we think) but not done the same for information that already “fits.” Let’s face it, it’s hard to separate misinformation from good information, let alone hold seemingly contradictory pieces of the puzzle together to understand polarizing issues like immigration.
This paralysis and the tendency to tune out credible information that challenges what we think we know are made worse by misinformation and obfuscation repeated over and over until they become the prevailing narrative. In my work, I encounter many misunderstandings about immigrants and the immigration system a lot. Misunderstandings that cause confusion and lead to untrue beliefs among people who actually share similar values of freedom, fairness, and family, and who would be willing to take a stand if they understood how those values were being violated.
Yes, facts, details, the immigration system, and narratives around immigration are complex. But focusing on circular talking points and complexities obfuscates and dilutes the impact of some things that are really quite simple. People are suffering; people are being denied justice and dignity, our communities are being torn apart, and everyone is being made less safe.
There are three particularly damaging misunderstandings that have plagued the conversation around immigration and the people who are immigrants living in the United States. These misunderstandings destabilize us and make it difficult to see the threat to our shared values and democracy amid the noise rushing around us.
These misunderstandings are not merely errors. They keep us frozen and unable to see clearly.
Many people are surprised to learn that for many immigrants who don’t have status, there was never a “right way” to immigrate. A number of people living in the United States did not come through a formal, permanent immigration process, and couldn’t have done so even if they had the time, resources, and knowledge to navigate the U.S. Immigration system from their home countries. The U.S. immigration system is incredibly complex and constantly changing.[2] There are strict quotas, limited pathways, and narrow eligibility criteria. Immigration categories are also divided by skill level, with more opportunities allocated to higher-skilled individuals from certain countries.
For low-income immigrants from places like Mexico, especially those without formal education, there are extremely limited legal pathways to migrate permanently. Work-based immigration in sectors like agriculture is short-term, expensive, and highly restrictive.[3] Some people who arrive without authorization are fleeing persecution or other severe conditions and seek asylum once in the United States, or at a port of entry. Asylum seekers (people eligible to apply for asylum who are already in the United States) face a difficult battle proving their case, as the requirements and burden of proof are extremely high. The number of refugees (people who meet the definition of asylum and apply from outside the country) and the countries from which the United States accepts them are determined by a presidential determination each fiscal year. In a 2025 executive order, President Trump suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) with limited exceptions, resulting in large drop in refugee admissions.[4]
Many of the programs that have allowed people to immigrate in the past have changed, not been renewed, or been removed. For example, many people came to the United States through the “Bracero Program,” a guest-worker program that operated from 1942 to 1964. Bracero Program created a lawful channel for large numbers of Mexican workers. When the program ended, legal pathways for low-wage Mexican laborers largely disappeared, even as demand for their labor remained.[5] This created strong labor demand with no legal path for people, resulting in a huge demand for undocumented agricultural labor.
Additionally, there is very little space for people who came here without documentation (not through a formal immigration process) to “regularize” their status after the fact. Some options have existed for people who have overstayed a visa, for example, but if you didn’t come here with a travel or work visa (how many people who are undocumented from Mexico have come to the country, including children brought over by their parents), there is generally no viable path to gain status after they are in the country. There are some exceptions here for special visas with strict eligibility requirements, such as the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).[6]
The common response you probably have heard that people should just get in line is both wrong (for most people there is no line) and damaging because it misrepresents the nature of our immigration system and the options people have.
Many people are surprised to learn that most immigrants living in the United States have no criminal history. As of data current to January 25th, 2026, 52,504 out of 70,766, or 74.2% held in ICE detention have no criminal conviction.[8] Many of those with convictions had only minor offenses, including traffic violations. Most undocumented immigrants are mothers, fathers, sisters, and brothers who are doing the best they can for their families in a system where they are vulnerable to exploitation and abuse.
People who are here without formal status are extremely vulnerable and have to contend with exploitation, lack of protection both in labor and legally, and a constant fear of deportation. This was before the current administration. Many undocumented immigrants are victims of many different crimes, including sexual abuse and labor exploitation, but don’t appeal to police for protection because of fear of retaliation and deportation. Because of this vulnerability, most undocumented immigrants work hard to avoid police contact and are often deeply afraid of law enforcement.
One feature of the current immigration system that makes this point easy to obscure is the criminalization of improper entry.[7] Federal law does not criminalize being in the country without status, but it does criminalize the act of crossing outside a port of entry or evading inspection, and it has since 1929.That gap is narrow and technical, and in public argument it tends to collapse: the fact that some people committed a low-level federal offense at the moment of crossing gets stretched into a claim that undocumented people are, as a class, criminals. The rhetorical move works by swapping a past act for a present condition — and by treating a six-month misdemeanor as though it established something permanent about the person who committed it.
Many people are surprised to learn that conditions in immigration detention facilities are not consistently monitored and that there are growing reports of serious human rights violations.
Many people do not realize that immigration is not part of the criminal legal system. This means that protections people assume apply when someone is arrested, such as a guaranteed trial, do not apply in immigration proceedings. There is no right to a government-appointed attorney, meaning that if you want an attorney, you must pay for one yourself or find a legal aid non-profit to take your case. Also, immigration courts are part of the Department of Justice, under the executive branch, and do not operate with the same structural independence as Article III criminal courts.
This is compounded by recent policy changes that have sharply restricted bond eligibility for many cases.[9] As a result, once someone is taken into custody by ICE or CBP, they may be held without bond until their case is heard by an immigration judge. Most people are forced to face a complex, overburdened legal system in a language they might not understand, but certainly a vocabulary that most native English speakers would struggle to navigate without existing legal expertise, and which is hostile to their claims. For low-income individuals already at a disadvantage, detention can make it nearly impossible to gather evidence, secure legal help, or meaningfully prepare a defense.
ICE uses a mix of private, government-run, and partner facilities, and the number of detention sites has increased significantly in the past year.[10] Multiple investigations have documented abuses in detention centers, including a recent report from Senator Jon Ossoff’s office documenting over 1,000 credible allegations that, according to advocates and investigators, meet international standards for cruel or degrading treatment, including medical neglect, denial of food and water, mistreatment of pregnant women and children, physical and sexual abuse, and multiple deaths in custody. [11] Reporting by the ACLU at facilities such as Fort Bliss further documents accounts of physical assaults, sexual abuse, medical harm, and intimidation tactics used to pressure people into agreeing to deportation.[12]
So far in 2026, at least six people have died in immigration detention. At the same time, serious concerns about access to health care and health conditions inside detention centers continue to be raised, including ambiguity and issues in finding people who are hospitalized while in ICE custody.
Oversight and access raise additional concerns about the rapidly expanding detention network. Members of Congress have publicly reported being denied or having their entry delayed when attempting to inspect detention facilities, and courts have intervened in disputes over advance notice requirements for oversight visits. Attorneys have similarly described difficulty accessing clients in immigration custody. These disputes do not prove abuse in every case. But when detention expands, oversight becomes harder, and access to lawyers becomes uncertain, increasing the risk to transparency and due process.
In this moment, it can be hard to know what and who to believe, especially when misinformation is repeated until it begins to feel like the truth. The speed of information, the intensity of competing narratives, and the complexity of the law make it easy to disengage or retreat into certainty. But now, maybe more than ever, it is crucial to be both careful and brave with our opinions and our information. Careful enough to verify what we repeat. Brave enough to examine whether the stories we are telling align with our deepest values.
People are suffering in very real ways, in detention centers, in courtrooms, in workplaces, and in their own homes, in our communities. And too often our public conversations orbit around abstractions, slogans, or partisan talking points rather than the lived realities of people. If we are going to disagree, and we will, let it at least be over facts honestly examined and values honestly stated. Anything less leaves us arguing in circles while serious harm continues.
[1] DHS claims over 675,000 removals, though independent trackers using standard definitions count considerably fewer.
Homeland Security. (2026, January 20). DHS sets the stage for another historic, record-breaking year under President Trump. Press Releases. https://www.dhs.gov/news/2026/01/20/dhs-sets-stage-another-historic-record-breaking-year-under-president-trump
[2] How the United States Immigration System Works. American Immigration Council. (2025a, November 12). https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/fact-sheet/how-united-states-immigration-system-works-fact-sheet/
[3] ‘USCIS. “H-2A Temporary Agricultural Workers,” March 26, 2025. https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-workers/h-2a-temporary-agricultural-workers.
[4] The United States Government. (2025, January 21). Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/realigning-the-united-states-refugee-admissions-program
[5] Library of Congress, “1942: Bracero Program,” A Latinx Resource Guide: Civil Rights Cases and Events in the United States – Research Guides at Library of Congress. (n.d.). https://guides.loc.gov/latinx-civil-rights/bracero-program
[6] USCIS. “Green Card for VAWA Self-Petitioner,” April 8, 2025. https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-eligibility/green-card-for-vawa-self-petitioner.
[7][7]This is a sticky point that needs careful elucidation. Criminalizing unauthorized entry dates to the Immigration Act of 1929, which made entry without inspection a federal misdemeanor and reentry after deportation a federal felony. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 superseded that law and carried the offense forward as INA § 275, codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1325, this time grading a first offense as a misdemeanor and a subsequent offense as a felony.
The offense is about entry, not presence. Section 1325(a) reaches three things: entering or attempting to enter at a time or place not designated by immigration officers, eluding examination or inspection, and obtaining or attempting to obtain entry by willful misrepresentation or concealment of a material fact. Being present in the United States without documentation is not, standing alone, a crime — as the Supreme Court put it in Arizona v. United States, it is generally not a crime for a removable alien to remain in the country. So the statute does not reach someone who enters lawfully on a work visa and overstays. (It does reach someone who lies to get through a port of entry, so passing through an inspection booth is not itself an exemption.)
In 1990, Congress amended the penalty language, striking the words “guilty of a misdemeanor” and “guilty of a felony” while leaving the offense criminal; the same amendment extended the statute to attempted entry. A 1991 technical amendment produced the text in force today: “for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.”¹
Removing the labels did not blur the grading. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3559(a), any federal offense not assigned a letter grade in its own statute is classified by its maximum term of imprisonment — so a first § 1325(a) offense is a Class B misdemeanor and a subsequent offense a Class E felony, automatically. The 1990 change aligned § 1325 with the general federal sentencing scheme that had taken effect in 1987; it did not make the offense harder to classify.
What did complicate the picture came in 1996, when IIRIRA added § 1325(b), a civil penalty of $50 to $250 for anyone apprehended entering or attempting to enter at an improper time or place — expressly “in addition to, and not in lieu of, any criminal or other civil penalties that may be imposed.” The same conduct now carries both a criminal and a civil sanction, which is part of why the vocabulary in this area is so easy to misuse. On that point, and on the slippery way “criminal” gets deployed in immigration debate, see the ACLU’s issue brief, “Criminalizing undocumented immigrants.”
- Cornell Law School. (n.d.). 8 U.S. Code § 1325 – improper entry by alien. Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325#a
- ACLU. (2010, February). Criminalizing undocumented immigrants. IRP issue brief. https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/FINAL_criminalizing_undocumented_immigrants_issue_brief_PUBLIC_VERSION.pdf
[8] Immigration Quick Facts. Tracreports.org. (n.d.). https://tracreports.org/immigration/quickfacts/
[9] American Civil Liberties Union. (2025, December 1). Federal Court affirms nationwide class has right to bond hearings . Press Releases. https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/federal-court-affirms-nationwide-class-has-right-to-bond-hearings
[10] Ice detention trends. Vera Institute of Justice. (n.d.). https://www.vera.org/ice-detention-trends
[11] Office of Senator Jon Ossoff. “U.S. Immigration Detention Oversight.” https://www.ossoff.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/260114_Report_Patterns_v5.pdf
[12] Gassama, H. (2026, January 26). Immigrants detained at Fort Bliss in Texas report abuse and inhumane conditions. American Civil Liberties Union. https://www.aclu.org/news/immigrants-rights/detained-immigrants-detail-physical-abuse-and-inhumane-conditions-at-largest-immigration-detention-center-in-the-u-s
There Is No Line
A common belief circulated in public discussions about undocumented immigrants is that they could have come legally if they wanted to, or could “fix their status” if they were willing to follow the rules. This belief shows up everywhere: in political rhetoric, in media commentary, in everyday conversations, and makes it easy for others to assume that undocumented immigrants are troublemakers or out to cheat the system, and therefore bad in some moral way.
An important effect of this is that people who care deeply about fairness, lawfulness, and human dignity can find it easier to dismiss the harmful impacts of current immigration policies on people who are undocumented. This is doubly cruel because this belief is a fundamental misunderstanding of the current immigration system.
Before going further, one clarification about what kind of argument this is. Much public defense of undocumented immigrants rests on merit: they pay taxes, they do essential work, they have no criminal record. Those claims are true, and they matter for rebutting specific falsehoods. But an argument built on them fails for everyone it does not cover — people who cannot work, who are elderly or disabled or ill, who have an old conviction. That is not a small remainder, and their treatment should not turn on a different principle. So the case here is not that undocumented people have earned an exception. It is that the system offered most of them no lawful option in the first place, and not that what a person’s value depends on what they produce.
Contrary to rhetoric suggesting that undocumented immigrants could “get in line” or “fix their status” if they wanted to, no such general process exists for many. For millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States, there is no line to get in. There is no application to file. There is no realistic pathway to permanent legal status under current immigration law.
Understanding this reality is essential if we want an honest conversation about immigration. Without it, debates about enforcement, deportation, and “personal responsibility” rest on a mistaken picture of what the law actually allows, and the impact of these laws on our neighbors and friends.
A System with Severe Legal Limitations
The U.S. immigration system is often described as broken, but that language obscures the more troubling reality: it is an expensive system with severe legal limitations, especially for low-income and/or low-skilled workers.[1a] It is also incredibly complex and subject to rapid changes.[1b] Worse, it depersonalizes and mischaracterizes the people who bear the burden of its brokenness.
Many undocumented people have very little chance of legal immigration status under current U.S. law. The system is structured around narrow categories used to track and privilege highly skilled labor, advanced degrees, and exceptional ability. For people who work in agriculture, construction, caregiving, food service, and other essential sectors, the system offers almost no viable entry points. At the same time, these industries have high labor demand.
Employment-based green cards are a good example. While roughly 140,000 employment-based immigrant visas are made available each year across all categories, only about 10,000 are reserved nationwide for low-skilled workers.[2] These visas are subject to long backlogs, especially for applicants from high-demand countries such as Mexico.[3] In practice, many undocumented people have virtually no access to this path.
Temporary work visas are often presented as an alternative, but they are, by design, temporary. As such, they offer no help for people who are already here. Programs like H-2A and H-2B do not lead to permanent residency, require employer sponsorship, and generally must be applied for from outside the United States.[4] Undocumented people already living here cannot simply transition into them. Even when granted, these visas are short-term and restrictive, and they place enormous power in employers’ hands. Many of our essential sectors are dependent on low-wage labor from a population unable to gain legal status, which limits their ability to safely assert labor protections such as minimum wage without risking retaliation. The immigration system, as it currently exists, systematically excludes many undocumented people from the possibility of long-term legal status.
When Legal Pathways Disappeared
This exclusion did not happen by accident. Historically, there were periods when U.S. immigration policy included programs specifically to bring in people for this kind of labor. One such example is the Bracero Program, a guest-worker program that operated from 1942 to 1964 and brought many Mexican laborers, many of them in Arizona, into the United States legally.[5] When the program ended, the demand for labor did not disappear. But most of the legal pathways did.
No Way to “Regularize” Status After the Fact
For people already living in the United States without legal status, the situation is even more restrictive. If someone entered the country without inspection, meaning they crossed the border at a non-authorized crossing rather than arriving on a visa, there is generally no viable way to apply for lawful permanent status from within the United States.
Leaving the country to apply from abroad often triggers automatic three- or ten-year bars on reentry, depending on how long a person has lived in the U.S. without documentation.[6] For people with families, jobs, deep community ties, and lives built here, this is obviously not a viable option. For most, legalization is functionally out of reach.
Some narrow exceptions exist. Victims of domestic violence under the Violence Against Women Act, survivors of serious crimes who assist law enforcement, and victims of trafficking may qualify for specific humanitarian visas. But only narrow and exceptional circumstances provide a pathway to legal status, and even these are very difficult to access by a population that is extremely vulnerable and marginalized.[7]
Marriage to a U.S. citizen is often assumed to be a solution, but it is not a guarantee.[8] For people who entered without inspection, marriage alone does not confer status. The process is lengthy, costly, and uncertain, and often requires difficult-to-obtain waivers.
Temporary programs such as DACA or Temporary Protected Status offer protection from deportation but do not lead to a green card or permanent status.
None of these options are solutions; they are stopgaps.
Asylum Is Not a General Safety Net
Another widespread misunderstanding is that people fleeing violence can simply apply for asylum. In reality, asylum eligibility is much more narrow than this common claim presupposes.
In the United States, a person is eligible for asylum if they are physically present in the U.S or at a port of entry and can demonstrate that they are unable or unwilling to return to their home country because of past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution. It applies only to people who fear persecution on specific grounds such as race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.[9] Things like generalized violence, gang violence, economic instability, and climate change are often not deemed sufficient under the current U.S. asylum law. To receive asylum, individuals must show past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on specific grounds, and generally must apply within one year of arrival unless they qualify for limited exceptions. Many people who migrate under desperate conditions do not qualify, even when their fear is real and well-founded.
Life in Legal Limbo
The result of these constraints is a population of people who are effectively trapped. The overwhelming reality is that many undocumented people in the United States have no viable pathway to immigrate legally under current law. If someone immigrates in an undocumented way, the hope of gaining status is slim to nonexistent. And this was true before the current administration’s immigration and deportation campaign.
Millions of people have lived and worked in the United States without any opportunity to adjust their status, despite contributing to essential sectors of the economy, raising families, and paying taxes.[10] Most have no criminal record at all. Some crossed without inspection, a federal misdemeanor on a first offense; many others entered lawfully and fell out of status. Neither is a crime of ongoing commission.Yet they live with constant vulnerability to exploitation, to abuse, and to deportation.
None of this has gone unanswered. Undocumented people have organized for decades — through worker centers, legal defense networks, and the campaigns that forced DACA into existence — and they continue to, under conditions that make organizing dangerous.
The myth of “coming the right way” allows the public to accept harsh enforcement policies without confronting the structure of the system itself. It shifts responsibility onto individuals who were never given a meaningful legal option in the first place.
Any honest discussion about immigration reform, the current administration’s approach to immigration, and the unconscionable activities of immigrant enforcement agencies must face the reality that the narrative that many of us have been fed about our neighbors who are immigrants is misleading and harmfully inaccurate. Until we do, debates about immigration will continue to rest on fiction.
[1a]”Low-skilled” and “unskilled” are terms of art in U.S. immigration law, not descriptions of the work. The relevant legal category is the EB-3 “Other Workers” subcategory, which the Department of Labor defines by training time as positions requiring less than 2 years of training or experience. That definition sweeps across agriculture, caregiving, food service, construction, and domestic work — occupations that demand real expertise, physical skill, and judgment, and that the economy cannot function without. I use these terms here because they are the technical vocabulary and the literature, not because I accept the framework behind them.
[1b] The current immigration system is rapidly changing. Under the current administration, the immigration system requirements are in flux, and this discussion is limited to the immigration situation prior to the November 2024 election. However, that is the situation on which most people’s beliefs about the immigration system are built; therefore, it is the relevant context for the narrative operating around the country right now about immigration.
[2] ‘travel.state.gov (U.S. Department of State- Bureau of Consular Affairs ). “Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.” Accessed May 21, 2025. https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/immigrate/employment-based-immigrant-visas.html.
[3] Ibid.
[4] ‘USCIS. “Cap Count for H-2B Nonimmigrants,” March 26, 2025. https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-workers/h-2b-non-agricultural-workers/cap-count-for-h-2b-nonimmigrants.
Note: Temporary workers and trainees include workers in specialty occupations (H-1B visa), seasonal agricultural workers (H-2A), seasonal nonagricultural workers (H-2B), workers with extraordinary ability or achievements (O-1 and O-2), athletes and artists (P-1, P-2, and P-3), intracompany transferees (L-1), treaty traders and investors (E-1, E-2, and E-3), people working for employers in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and their immediate families (CW-1 and CW-2), representatives of foreign information media (I-1), workers in international cultural exchange programs (Q-1), workers in religious occupations (R-1), and TN visas reserved for Canadian and Mexican professionals, as well as their spouses and minor children.
Batalova, Jeanne. “Frequently Requested Statistics on Immigrants and Immigration in the United States.” migrationpolicy.org, March 11, 2025. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states.
[5] Library of Congress, “1942: Bracero Program,” A Latinx Resource Guide: Civil Rights Cases and Events in the United States – Research Guides at Library of Congress. (n.d.). https://guides.loc.gov/latinx-civil-rights/bracero-program
[6] USCIS. “Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver,” April 28, 2025. https://www.uscis.gov/i-601a.
[7] USCIS. “Victims of Criminal Activity: U Nonimmigrant Status,” May 16, 2025. https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/victims-of-criminal-activity-u-nonimmigrant-status.
USCIS. “Victims of Human Trafficking: T Nonimmigrant Status,” May 16, 2025. https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/victims-of-human-trafficking-t-nonimmigrant-status.
USCIS. “Green Card for VAWA Self-Petitioner,” April 8, 2025. https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-eligibility/green-card-for-vawa-self-petitioner.
[8] USCIS. “I Am Married to a U.S. Citizen,” November 18, 2020. https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship/learn-about-citizenship/citizenship-and-naturalization/i-am-married-to-a-us-citizen.
[9] USCIS. “Asylum,” January 24, 2025. https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees
[10] Initiative, & Kallick, D. D. (2024, July 29). People who are undocumented: Occupations, taxes paid, and long-term economic benefits – immigration research initiative. Understanding economics, advancing policy, supporting action. https://immresearch.org/publications/people-who-are-undocumented-occupations-taxes-paid-and-long-term-economic-benefits/ ==
Aubrial Harrington 