Naturalized US citizens thought they were safe. Trump’s immigration policies are shaking that belief – AP News

Analysis of U.S. Immigration Policy Impacts on Naturalized Citizens and Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

Recent shifts in United States immigration policy have generated a climate of fear and uncertainty among naturalized citizens, undermining the perceived security of their status. This development presents significant challenges to the principles outlined in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). The experiences of naturalized citizens, such as former refugee Dauda Sesay, indicate an erosion of trust in the promise of equal rights and protections, suggesting a regression in the nation’s commitment to building an inclusive society. This report analyzes the effects of these policies through the lens of the SDGs.

Undermining SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

Current immigration enforcement and rhetoric risk creating a tiered system of citizenship, which is in direct opposition to SDG 10, aimed at reducing inequality within and among countries. The goal’s targets, particularly 10.2 and 10.3, call for the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of origin or other status, and the elimination of discriminatory laws and policies. The following developments challenge these objectives:

• Erosion of Equal Status: Policy proposals, such as attempts to end birthright citizenship, and heightened enforcement measures create a distinction between naturalized and native-born citizens, fostering inequality.
• Climate of Fear and Exclusion: Naturalized citizens report fear of domestic and international travel, with some, like Mr. Sesay, now carrying passports for internal travel. This indicates a diminished sense of belonging and security, hindering full social inclusion.
• Disproportionate Impact: Immigration roundups and detentions that have reportedly included U.S. citizens create a chilling effect, particularly within immigrant communities, thereby exacerbating existing social inequalities.
• Perceived Instability of Status: The sense that naturalization is not a permanent protection but rather a conditional status undermines the principle of equal rights for all citizens.

Challenges to SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The current policy environment directly impacts the targets of SDG 16, which focuses on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, providing access to justice for all, and building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions. The trust between naturalized citizens and state institutions is reportedly weakening, which is detrimental to the rule of law.

1. Weakened Rule of Law: Accounts of naturalized citizens being questioned at borders and reports of U.S. citizens being detained by immigration agents challenge the principle of equal justice and due process for all (Target 16.3).
2. Erosion of Institutional Trust: The U.S. Justice Department’s initiative to increase denaturalization efforts contributes to the perception that citizenship is revocable, weakening the integrity and accountability of state institutions (Target 16.6).
3. Diminished Personal Security: The fear expressed by naturalized citizens, including state Sen. Cindy Nava, reflects a breakdown in the state’s fundamental responsibility to ensure the safety and security of all its people, a cornerstone of peaceful societies (Target 16.1).
4. Threats to Inclusive Governance: The public questioning of a U.S. citizen’s status, such as the case involving Zohran Mamdani, undermines the principles of an inclusive political community where all citizens can participate without fear.

Historical Context of Citizenship and Systemic Inequality

The current challenges are situated within a broader historical context of shifting definitions of American citizenship, which has often been exclusionary. Understanding this history is crucial for addressing the systemic barriers to achieving SDG 10. Key historical points include:

• Early Exclusion: The Naturalization Act of 1790 initially limited citizenship to “free white persons,” establishing a precedent of racial and ethnic exclusion.
• Expansion and Contraction: While the 14th Amendment established birthright citizenship, subsequent laws like the Immigration Act of 1924 barred entire national groups, such as Asians, from naturalization.
• Precedents for Revocation: Historical events, including the denaturalization of Indian Americans following a 1923 Supreme Court ruling and the internment of Japanese American citizens during World War II, demonstrate that citizenship rights have been ignored or revoked in the past.

Conclusion: The Imperative for Inclusive and Just Societies

The sentiment of betrayal expressed by naturalized citizens like Dauda Sesay highlights a significant disconnect between current national policies and the global commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals. The erosion of security for naturalized citizens directly conflicts with the objectives of SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). Achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development requires a firm commitment to upholding the rights of all individuals, ensuring that citizenship provides an irrevocable bond of security and inclusion. Policies that create fear and division undermine the foundation of strong, just, and sustainable societies.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article directly addresses inequalities faced by naturalized citizens compared to native-born citizens. It highlights how changes in immigration policy create a sense of fear and uncertainty for a specific group based on their origin. The historical overview of U.S. naturalization law, which explicitly excluded people based on race (“free white person,” barring people from Asia), is a clear example of institutionalized inequality that this goal aims to combat.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  This goal is central to the article’s theme. The narrative revolves around the erosion of trust in the institution of citizenship, which is supposed to provide protection and rights. The article discusses the weakening of the rule of law, where naturalized citizens fear their status is like “quicksand” rather than a “bedrock protection.” It also touches upon access to justice, citing a federal lawsuit filed by a citizen who was detained, and the role of government institutions in either protecting or threatening citizens’ rights through actions like denaturalization efforts.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • Target 10.2: “By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.” The article discusses the opposite of this target, detailing how naturalized citizens feel their inclusion is being threatened. Dauda Sesay’s story, from refugee to citizen to advocate, is about social and political inclusion, but his current fear shows this inclusion is fragile and dependent on policy, directly relating to this target.
   • Target 10.3: “Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices…” The article highlights policies and practices that create inequality. The Justice Department’s memo to “ramp up efforts to denaturalize immigrants” and immigration enforcement roundups that have “included American citizens in their dragnets” are examples of practices that undermine equal protection and opportunity for naturalized citizens.
   • Target 10.7: “Facilitate orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility of people, including through the implementation of planned and well-managed migration policies.” The article shows a breakdown in the “safe” and “well-managed” aspects of migration policy, even for those who have completed the process to become citizens. The fear among naturalized citizens of traveling internationally or even domestically (“he doesn’t travel domestically anymore without his passport”) demonstrates a failure to ensure their safe mobility.

2. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.3: “Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.” The article’s core theme is the perceived weakening of the rule of law for naturalized citizens. The statement that “what they thought was the bedrock protection of naturalization now feels more like quicksand” directly speaks to this. The mention of a U.S. citizen filing a “federal lawsuit” after being detained by immigration agents is a direct example of seeking access to justice to uphold the rule of law.
   • Target 16.9: “By 2030, provide legal identity for all, including birth registration.” Citizenship is a fundamental legal identity. The article discusses direct threats to this identity, such as the push for “trying to end birthright citizenship” and the Justice Department’s increased efforts toward “denaturalization.” These actions challenge the permanence and security of a person’s legal identity.
   • Target 16.b: “Promote and enforce non-discriminatory laws and policies for sustainable development.” The historical context provided in the article, such as the 1790 law limiting citizenship to a “free white person” and the 1924 Immigration Act barring Asians, describes discriminatory laws of the past. The current fear among naturalized citizens suggests that present policies are perceived as discriminatory, running counter to this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article does not cite official SDG indicators, but it implies several qualitative and quantitative measures that could be used to track progress:

• Proportion of the population reporting feelings of discrimination or fear based on origin/immigrant status: The article is built on this implied indicator. State Sen. Cindy Nava’s observation that “the folks that I know that were not afraid before, now they are uncertain” and Sesay’s feeling of “betrayal” are qualitative data points for this measure.
• Number of legal challenges or lawsuits concerning wrongful detention of citizens: The article explicitly mentions that one U.S. citizen “has filed a federal lawsuit” after being detained by immigration agents twice. Tracking the frequency of such cases would be a direct indicator of challenges to justice and the rule of law.
• Number of denaturalization proceedings initiated by the government: The mention of the Justice Department’s memo to “ramp up efforts to denaturalize immigrants” points to a clear, quantifiable indicator. An increase in these proceedings would signal a move away from the security of legal identity (Target 16.9).
• Existence of discriminatory policies related to citizenship and immigration: The article references specific policies and executive actions, such as the “memo this summer saying it would ramp up efforts to denaturalize immigrants” and the effort to “end birthright citizenship.” The existence, modification, or rescission of such policies serves as an indicator for Targets 10.3 and 16.b.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: apnews.com