Half of Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) adults, or someone they know, have been detained or deported, started carrying proof of immigration status, or significantly altered their lives in the last year due to heightened state immigration policies, a new poll reveals. The survey, released Monday by AAPI Data and The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, documents the systematic disruption of life for a critical segment of the working class.
About 6 in 10 AAPI adults now believe the U.S. used to be a great country for immigrants but is no longer. Only about 3 in 10 said America is currently a great place for immigrants, while 5% stated it was never a great place. These findings follow more than a year of immigration crackdowns, which the poll notes have included multiple clashes between protesters and enforcement officers and the shooting deaths of two U.S. citizens earlier this year.
The State's Hand in Labor Control
AAPI adults constitute one of the country’s fastest-growing demographic groups, with most born outside the country. Karthick Ramakrishnan, founder and executive director of AAPI Data, stated that “America’s success story has depended critically on the role of Asian Americans, but also immigrants in general.” He added that when people who have been in the country for decades express doubt about its promise, “that’s a warning sign.”
The state’s enforcement apparatus has extended its reach even to immigrants with legal status. Khoa Tran, 27, of San Antonio, Texas, who came to the U.S. from Vietnam 11 years ago and gained citizenship 7 years ago, sponsored his wife from Vietnam 3 years ago. Last year, Tran became concerned by social media posts emphasizing the necessity for even legal immigrants to carry documentation. He noted that it had not occurred to his wife to carry her green card at all times, but “it’s literally become like a second form of identification in addition to the driver’s license.” Tran also observed international students in his community postponing trips to visit family in Asia due to fears about student visas, stating, “They’re just scared. They don’t know the law around that.”
About half of South Asian adults, a higher proportion than the 4 in 10 AAPI adults overall, know someone who started carrying proof of legal status or citizenship over the last year. Ramakrishnan noted that many of these individuals may hold green cards or be naturalized citizens, yet feel “like their presence and their status in this country is under question.”
Identity Under Attack
The poll also found that AAPI adults are more likely to prioritize their family’s ancestry or country of origin as extremely or very important to their personal identity (just over half) than to say the same about being American (44%). Among U.S.-born AAPI adults, 59% cited family heritage as important, compared to 47% for American identity. This contrasts with a separate April current year survey of U.S. adults, where 55% valued being American and 37% valued family ancestry.
Abigail Jeyaraj, 22, born in Texas to Indian parents, identifies as South Asian American. She expressed feeling conflicted about celebrating America’s 250th anniversary this year due to restrictions on immigration and diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Jeyaraj stated, “You have recent actors who are trying to undo that progress. They maybe view it as restoring an ideal, but it’s removing so much work that powerful and influential people made to bring us toward an ideal of equality and justice.”
Khoa Tran described the anniversary as arbitrary, stating, “I don’t think this country is ‘founded’ at some point in time. It just changes from one form to another.” He added, “Even the Native Americans (were) a long time here. I’m pretty sure that was more than 250 years.”
While federal courts offered limited, temporary reprieves this month by striking down a policy that would have hiked fees for certain visas and another that “categorically barred” immigrants from 39 Asian, African, Latin American, and Middle Eastern countries from receiving final decisions on applications, these actions do not address the systemic precarity imposed by the state’s immigration apparatus.