Washington Conference: Attorneys Address an Unsettling Immigration Era

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) Amid fast-moving changes to U.S. immigration policy, attorneys and advocates meeting in the nation’s capital this week described an “unsettling new era” shaped by aggressive enforcement tactics, rapid executive actions, and sweeping proposals that test due process and strain community safety nets.

Under President Trump’s second term, officials have widened the use of expedited removal nationwide, escalated workplace and community raids, and pressed for broader detention. These moves have upended daily life for mixed‑status families across the United States 🇺🇸 and set off a wave of legal challenges.

Expedited Removal: The Most Consequential Shift

Advocates say the single most consequential shift is the surge in expedited removal, a fast‑track deportation tool once focused mainly on the border region.

• Now used across the country, expedited removal allows immigration officers to order someone removed without a hearing before an immigration judge if the person cannot prove they have been in the U.S. long enough or cannot show a legal claim to stay.
• Lawyers at the Washington conference warned this expansion, paired with increased ICE operations in homes, schools, hospitals, and places of worship, has created deep fear and raised serious due process concerns.
• People who have valid legal defenses may not get the chance to present them.

Border Measures and Humanitarian Impact

The administration’s focus on aggressive removal has coincided with tougher border measures.

• Attorneys report increased military resources and rhetoric calling to “shut down” the southern border, producing higher risks just south of U.S. territory.
• Closed pathways and longer waits mean many would‑be asylum seekers are stuck in unstable, confusing, and more dangerous conditions.
• Humanitarian groups report a rise in danger and confusion, with many unsure whether their claims will be heard.

Proposals to Reduce Humanitarian Programs

Policy advisors aligned with the Project 2025 blueprint have pushed proposals to reduce or repeal major humanitarian programs.

• Proposed changes include ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for nearly 700,000 people and canceling protections for Dreamers.
• Even where courts have slowed steps, the threat alone has disrupted work, housing, and family plans—people are afraid to renew leases or change jobs.
• Analysis by VisaVerge.com indicates the pace and scope of changes have forced families and employers to brace for frequent policy shifts and sudden enforcement actions that ripple through local economies.

Policy Shifts and Legal Fallout

The climate is driving a growing caseload in federal courts.

• Lawsuits focus on constitutional claims, the reach of executive authority, and whether limits on asylum and fast‑track deportations violate statutory protections.
• Attorneys report worsening communication barriers with clients in detention—sudden transfers and limited phone/video access can derail representation.
• With detention set to expand sharply—plans call for holding up to 100,000 people daily, with mandatory detention for wider categories—lawyers worry more clients will lose contact before they can gather documents or contact family.

Worksite enforcement is also changing.

• The administration is pushing for mandatory national E‑Verify, a government system that checks new hires’ work authorization.
• Business groups warn that error rates can cost lawful workers their jobs, while immigrant workers fear audits will be paired with raids.
• Officials argue E‑Verify is a key deterrent to unlawful hiring. For employers seeking official guidance, see the Department of Homeland Security’s E‑Verify program page: E-Verify.gov.

Across Washington, one central question persists: How far can expedited removal go before it undermines basic fairness?

“These policies raise profound questions about our society and the rule of law,” said Doris Meissner, senior fellow with the Migration Policy Institute.

Faith leaders voiced similar concerns. Franciscan Sr. Marie Lucey described the climate as “almost a war against any kind of immigrants,” urging churches and faith communities to stand with families facing sudden detention or removal.

Legislative Response: The Dignity Act of 2025

On Capitol Hill, the bipartisan Dignity Act of 2025, introduced by Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar (R‑FL) and Rep. Veronica Escobar (D‑TX), seeks a broader reset.

Key provisions include:

• Tighten border security and mandate E‑Verify
• Reform the asylum system
• Create a “Dignity Program” allowing certain undocumented people to work, pay restitution, and earn the pathway to legal status
• Update employment‑based and student visa categories

Polling suggests public support for earned legal status, but the bill faces long odds in a divided Congress. As of October 2025, no major immigration overhaul has passed.

Legal Access and Rapid Removals at the Border

At the border, lawyers and humanitarians report fewer options for asylum seekers.

• Rapid removals give people less time to find counsel or compile evidence for fear‑based claims.
• Individuals who would have qualified for relief under past standards may now be sent back within days—or hours.
• Legal groups warn errors are difficult to correct once someone is returned, especially if contact with U.S. attorneys or relatives is cut off or travel documents are seized or lost.

Community Impact and Local Economies

In towns and cities nationwide, increased ICE presence in “sensitive” places has chilled community life.

• Parents keep children home from school.
• Patients skip medical visits.
• Food banks see fewer clients—not because need has dropped, but because people fear showing ID or sharing addresses.

Employers in agriculture, food processing, construction, and caregiving report sudden workforce gaps after raids:

• Lost harvests
• Missed building deadlines
• Canceled home‑care shifts

Economists warn aggressive removal can shock local labor markets, especially in rural areas that depend on immigrant workers for essential roles.

Who Is Affected

Not all enforcement pressure falls only on undocumented workers.

• Green card holders with minor past offenses, students who slipped out of status, and survivors of crime with pending applications report more stops and check‑ins that can trigger removal proceedings.
• When expedited removal is used, individuals often must show clear and convincing proof of presence or eligibility quickly—often impossible without a lawyer or access to records.

State and local governments face increased federal pressure to share data and assist enforcement.

• Requests include access to driver’s license and voter registration records, with penalties for noncompliance.
• Some local officials have pushed back—citing community trust and legal risks—while others have cooperated.
• The result is a confusing patchwork: a family’s experience can change dramatically when crossing a county line.

Practical Advice for People at Risk

Legal groups recommend simple, practical steps that can help in fast‑moving situations:

1. Keep proof of presence (rent receipts, pay stubs, school records) in a safe place.
2. Carry contact details for a trusted attorney or legal aid clinic.
3. Plan for child care and finances in case of sudden detention.

While these steps are not a shield against removal, they can buy time or make it easier for a lawyer to intervene. Organizations such as CLINIC and the American Immigration Lawyers Association are holding trainings to help local advocates build trauma‑informed support and coordinate rapid‑response teams.

Potential Changes to Birthright Citizenship

The administration has floated changes to birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to undocumented parents, though no law has passed.

• Legal scholars say any attempt to limit Fourteenth Amendment citizenship would face immediate court challenges.
• Immigration courts are already strained; adding complex citizenship cases could deepen backlogs and prolong uncertainty for children and families.

Comparisons with Prior Administrations

Under President Biden, officials leaned more on humanitarian parole and narrowed interior enforcement priorities. By contrast, current directives aim to broaden arrests and increase detention.

• Supporters say stricter policies deter irregular crossings and restore control.
• Critics argue aggressive removal without robust due process risks wrongful deportations and tears apart families with long ties to the country.

The Near-Term Outlook

One steady fact remains: expedited removal is now central to federal enforcement.

• It is reshaping the work of lawyers, the risk calculus for families, and hiring practices for employers.
• As courts weigh executive limits and Congress debates the Dignity Act, people on the ground continue to face immediate effects—unannounced knocks at dawn, missing coworkers, a child’s empty school seat.

Attorneys say the best near‑term guardrails will likely come from federal judges who can slow or block certain rules while lawsuits proceed.

• Even temporary wins may not reach people already removed or deported under older policies.
• Practitioners warn the human cost is highest in these gaps: parents returned decades after leaving, workers separated from jobs in days, and children left with relatives while guardians navigate complex pathways to reentry or relief.

If Congress cannot pass a broad deal, the system will continue to swing with each executive memo—leaving immigrants, employers, and local officials planning around uncertainty.

For now, the government’s emphasis on enforcement—especially expedited removal—signals more arrests, more detention, and fewer chances to present claims before a judge. With raids extending into sensitive spaces and mandatory E‑Verify on the table, community life and workplace stability remain fragile.

Whether lawmakers, courts, or local leaders can restore a steadier balance will shape the country’s immigration debate for years to come.