|
Law in Contemporary Society
|
|
Finding my “why”-- By IlanaDutton - 04 Apr 2023 “So, what do you do for work?” It’s a casual question, and I’ll be ready with an answer. “Oh, I’m an immigration attorney.” Then the follow-up, “So what does that mean you do every day?”. In the future, I’ll have an answer with the specifics – whether I work with kids, survivors of gender-based violence, detained or non-detained adults – but the underlying theme of the answer will be the same: “I help clients navigate the legal system in a variety of ways, including full representation, know-your-rights sessions, or just answering their questions. But I also work on immigration reform initiatives.” The next part of the conversation can go one of two ways. It’s either “Wow, that’s really cool/hard/powerful/important work. I could never do it.” And then we move on. Or * “Wow, how did you get into that work?” Which opens the door for my “why”?* My “why” starts in a classroom at the University of Puget Sound my junior year of college. It’s called Politics of Detention: Criminal Justice, Immigration, and War on Terror. The class leads to a semester internship with Northwest Immigrants’ Rights Project (NWIRP), where I get my first introduction to what my future would look like if I were to work in immigration. The work is hard, and I don’t know how to handle hearing client stories, but I’m learning every day and it’s getting better. As I work with clients, the deep flaws in the system are so obvious and I’m starting actively listen to conversations about reform, advocacy, and abolition. But I’m so focused on the day-to-day client work, I don’t get too involved. I stay at NWIRP for another 1.5 years. The time comes for a post-grad job, and I move to New York City to work as a policy legal assistant at Her Justice. As a legal assistant, I work with survivors of gender-based violence to help them find immigration relief. We write declarations, write affidavits, and file applications. It’s a lot like the work I was doing at NWIRP and I’m still enjoying it. What makes my time at Her Justice transformational was the part of my job dedicated to policy work. I took what I was learning in client interactions and brought them to the policy team as areas for reform. Now, I was part of conversations about the flaws in the system and what we could do about them. While my organization was committed to reform, I sought out conversations about abolishing ICE and detention centers. I spoke to people about why they were doing this work and learned so much from them. In my split role, I saw the value of existing in both worlds. My client work showed me the real-life impact of systemic flaws and my policy work gave me an avenue to address those flaws instead of just being stuck in the reality of them. When the policy work got frustrating, the “why” was usually my next meeting. A client stuck in a system that treated them like a number instead of a person. My “why” developed, and I was no longer just focused on representation, but I was starting to imagine what a new system could look like. “So, there’s clearly a lot of problems, but how would we even fix them?” This question makes me nervous. People look at me expectantly, searching for an answer to solve this huge crisis. From experience, I’ve learned few people are looking for a history lesson about how the U.S.-Mexico border in its current form came to be (See Revisionist History: General Chapman’s Last Stand). People want quick fixes. I’ll give an answer: “Increase access to representation or develop a system that doesn’t actually need lawyers by simplifying forms.” “Develop more humane policies for people fleeing from violence.” “Hire more immigration judges.” “Go back in time and undo the harm the U.S. did in Central and South America which has led to the increased need for asylum-seeking in the region.” “Abolish ICE and immigration detention.” None of these answers solve the problem on their own. Just increasing access to representation won’t help the backlog of cases, but just hiring more immigration judges won’t fix the inhumane policies being implemented today. While abolishing ICE and detention is important, just getting rid of the structures that hold people won’t fix the bigger problem of the system as it stands today. It’s going to take a multi-faceted approach, that fixes the problem from multiple angles at once to make a meaningful difference. We need to develop a system rooted in human dignity and understanding, and that is navigable regardless of background or education level. It’s a system that needs to be built by the people who have been impacted by it since they have seen firsthand the failings of the system as it stands today. It is a system that considers the whole person, the reason that they came to the U.S., and what they will contribute to this country. It does not leave people in limbo, in unsafe border towns, or locked in a cage because of the internal failings of the system. Building this version of immigration won’t come easy, but it’s an essential process and one that I am excited to be a part of. As someone who has not been directly impacted by the system, I hope to use my legal education to support and amplify the voices of the people on the front lines of this fight, all the while providing quality representation to the people stuck in the system as it exists today.A very successful rethinking of what to write about. From the standpoint of execution, this draft could use some tightening. You often use two words or phrases where either one would do but you don't want to make a choice. These are the sorts of editorial ruthlessness it will help you very much to cultivate. On the substance of your statement it seems to me you can attain more clarity by starting with the political reasons that the two parties in Congress cannot actually deliver, and feel no political pressure to deliver, a working immigration system. If we being by reminding the reader precisely why nothing changes, we can ore easily convey the complexities of the subject without being immediately boxed in by the partisan fear structures. How will immigrants rights organizations (which have attained through their organizing and intellectual contributions very great political influence) find their way to a breakthrough on behalf of their clients and constituents? Theirs are the single most important set of decisions that will be made over the next five to ten years, as everyone else remains constrained by their own political devices. You have well defined the why of your practice. You are right that the what will develop in your mind as you go. But these basic strategic realities will stay with you for years to come, and it's not too soon to start wrestling with them. You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:
|
|
