Â鶹Æƽâ°æ

0:07      Madi Minges: From the School of International Service at Â鶹Æƽâ°æ in Washington, this is Big World where we talk about something in the world that truly matters.

0:14      Maria de Jesus: Partners report that immigrant families and refugees are increasingly facing mental health challenges due to the stress of living in fear. The uncertainty has made it difficult for people to plan for the future, leading to anxiety, depression, feelings of isolation. Some are even planning to voluntarily depart the United States, including those who are documented, but feel unwelcome and no longer wish to stay.

0:39      MM: According to census data analyzed by Pew Research Center, the United States is home to an estimated 47.8 million immigrants representing just over 14 percent of the country's population. Actions taken by presidential administrations surrounding immigration policy have real impacts on immigrants seeking ways to enter the US and can also affect immigrants currently residing in the country. Since taking office, the Trump Administration has introduced several new policies surrounding immigration and launched a sweeping deportation campaign. Today we're talking about some of these recent changes to US immigration policy, discussing misconceptions about the US immigration system, and unpacking policy impacts on communities here in DC and across the country.

1:22      MM: I'm Madi Minges and I'm joined by professors Maria De Jesus and Tazreena Sajjad. Maria is a member of the Department of Environment, Development, and Health. Her research examines the social determinants of health and the role of culturally responsive and strategic communication in addressing local and global health inequities. Tazreena is a professor in the Department of Peace, Human Rights, and Cultural Relations at SIS. She specializes in several areas including transitional justice, refugees and forcible displacement, post-conflict transitions and gender and conflict, and peace building. Maria and Tazreena, thank you for joining Big World.

1:59      Tazreena Sajjad: Thank you. It's wonderful to be back.

2:01      MDJ: Thanks for having us.

2:03      MM: Tazreena, I want to pose this question to you. To start our conversation, can you walk us through how the US Immigration system has evolved over time, including one or two of the major shifts, and maybe discuss some of the misconceptions that persist about the US Immigration System?

2:20      TS: Thank you so much for the question, Madison. The US immigration has a long, complex and messy history, and it's critical we understand how it has evolved over time. This is vital because some common threads with some variations run through US immigration system's history, including the role and legacy of the 1719 Naturalization Act, which clearly stated the preference for Europeans and people classified to be, quote unquote, free whites and of good moral character. I want to focus on four main misconceptions related to US immigration that is still widespread, while also acknowledging there are several others that define our understanding of how we commonly see US as a country of immigrants.

3:03      TS: The first is the misconception that, and people say that quite often, is that my ancestors came into the country legally, and you should too, and if you came into the country legally, then you have nothing to worry about. A second myth is that the Ellis Island was the welcoming entry point or gateway for all immigrants. A third assumption is that the US has always been a welcoming country for all immigrants, and that it then allows us to build a narrative that what is happening right now is an exception without any historical precedent. In addition to allowing entry to all people, another myth holds that immigration history of the United States is both race neutral, but also gender-neutral. It was not until 1875 that the United States developed a federal immigration system.

3:57      TS: Up until 1875, there were no federal laws to break so illegally entering the United States compared to today's migration protocols is basically a false or a flawed premise. Another narrative, as I mentioned earlier, is about Ellis Island. And what is not explicitly stated is that the vast majority of arrivals from Europe, about 98 percent or so that came through Ellis Island were actually granted entry. In contrast, US immigration narratives don't really talk about Angel Island in San Francisco Bay, which tells us a very different story of immigration into the United States because Angel Island served basically as a detention site for mostly Asian migrants from China, Japan, India, and several other countries.

4:47      TS: In fact, on Ellis Island, by some accounts between 60 to perhaps 70 percent of the people were detained and then deported. So let me attempt to address some of the main developments in US immigration history. As I mentioned earlier, in 1875, the first federal immigration law, which was known as the Page Law was enacted. In particular two groups, became the focus of the enactment of the Page Act. One was the convicted or assumed convicted criminals of all races and nationalities, and the second was the Asian population, particularly the Chinese population and Chinese women who were all presumed to be sex workers. In 1882, the Chinese Exclusion Act was passed, and this proved to be a turning point in terms of a new phase of preferential entry into the United States based on race. This particular law banned the entrance of Chinese people and more broadly people from the Asian continent into the United States. In 1903, the United States also codified several of the immigration laws, and that meant that potential immigrants could be excluded not just on racial grounds, but also for economic reasons or because they were viewed as being a security threat or a public health threat. Now, the 1924 Immigration Act was also highly consequential because it not only consolidated efforts with regard to immigration based on racialized preferences, even though for instance, Europeans could still enter the country although they were ranked differently based on their desirability.

6:22      TS: But non-Europeans were considered to be absolutely foreign and incapable of assimilation. The 1952 Immigration National Act that came next both upheld the National Origins quota, but at the same time removed explicit racial, gender and nationality barriers to US immigration, but it also introduced a system of preferences based on skillsets and family reunification. It also lifted the ban on Asian immigration, but actually in terms of reality, the quota system did remain intact. The next most relevant immigration act was the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and the Immigrant Responsibility Act. And this was a momentous law because that recast undocumented immigration as an issue of crime, and it fused immigration enforcement with crime control, which meant that the law expanded the crimes broadly defined for which immigrants could be deported, legal permanent residency could be revoked, how deportations could be fast-tracked, and also restricted access to relief from deportation proceedings.

7:37      MM: Tazreena, thank you for that overview. I wanted to also ask you: Can you discuss what pathways currently exist for immigrants to enter the US?

7:46      TS: Today the US Immigration System still remains a vast complex, and by all accounts, a confusing landscape with distinct pathways to entry for different categories of people. Broadly speaking, US immigration law has focused on reunification of families, admitting immigrants with skills that are valuable to the US economy, on the notion of humanitarian protections, and also for a promotion of diversity. If we just look at employment-based immigration, there are two broad categories, the temporary and the permanent. Within the temporary category, there are at least about 20 types of visas for non-immigrant workers. In the permanent employment-based immigration category, there is an actual numerical limit imposed, and that's about 140,000 per year.

8:39      TS: This also includes immigrants coming into the country with their spouses and minor unmarried children. Some in our audience may have heard about the DV program or the Diversity Visa program. This was created by the Immigration Act of 1990 and has an allocation of about 55,000 visas. This is a computer-generated lottery for nationals from countries that have sent less than 50,000 immigrants to the United States in the previous five years. Then, of course, is the family reunification program. Basically, it allows US citizens and long-term permanent residents who are basically known as green card holders, to enable certain members of their family to gain legal permanent residency in this country as well.

9:26      TS: The last, but not the least, is the question of humanitarian protections, and this is particularly with regard to refugees, asylum seekers, and also individuals who may be fleeing protracted and other kinds of disasters in their own country, and the US has formalized a very extensive system with regard to this particular broad community of people. The 1980 Refugee Act became the backbone of what we know as the US Refugee Resettlement Program. This has been suspended under

10:00      TS: ... Trump administration, but with some caveats. The US Refugee Resettlement Program made the United States the global leader in refugee resettlement, and about 1 percent of the world's refugee population used to be resettled through this program in the United States. The US also had developed the Welcome Corps Program, and it was launched by President Biden in 2023, and it allowed private citizens to sponsor refugees and pay for their resettlement in the United States.

10:31      TS: There are other additional protection mechanisms that existed, and that are now perhaps going to be challenged under the new administration. One is the Temporary Protected Status, which granted people who are in the United States but cannot return home because of events, such as a natural disaster or extraordinary temporary conditions or ongoing armed conflict. Many perhaps have heard of DACA, or the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. This was a program that was created in 2012 for individuals who arrived in the United States under the age of 12 since June 15th, 2007. That meant that they could live in the United States and work lawfully for at least two years, as long as they met certain criteria, including having no significant criminal record, and of course, had a high school degree or a college degree or a degree equivalent. And then, the US also had the Humanitarian Parole Program, and it's long-standing executive authority which allows certain individuals to enter the country even if they don't meet the legal definition of a refugee.

11:45      MM: Since taking office, we've seen several executive orders from the Trump administration on immigration policy, including orders to end birthright citizenship, deploy more than 1,000 additional troops to the US Southern border, and suspend the US Refugee Admissions Program. As of the time that we're recording this episode, Trump's order to end birthright citizenship and suspend the US Refugee Program has been temporarily blocked in the courts. But with all of these recent actions in mind, Maria and Tazreena, I'd like to pose this question to both of you, what are the ripple effects of shifting US immigration policy both domestically and internationally?

12:22      MDJ: Thank you for the question. So the ripple effects of shifting US immigration policy under the Trump administration are what I characterize as politics of violence around migration, which translate into harmful effects on migrants, their families and communities. Calling this politics of violence means that these policies are not meant to regulate migration or fix the flawed system of immigration, as we just heard, but rather to inflict harm on migrants and refugees. It implies that violence isn't just about direct physical force, but also about policies that create suffering, fear and exclusion.

13:02      MDJ: First, on the domestic front, an impact on those seeking protection. It is lawful for people to come to the US to seek refuge from persecution in their own country, but yet people seeking refuge are under attack and are being treated like violent criminals. We see direct actions that aim to dismantle the US asylum system. Current administration officials have systematically disregarded US asylum laws and implemented new rules governing asylum that have prevented tens of thousands of asylum seekers from accessing a fair and safe adjudication process. And there's several pieces of evidence I want to highlight here for our audience that show this attack on the domestic front.

13:45      MDJ: First, a mass indefinite expulsion policy, which suspends entries anywhere along the US-Mexico border, including at ports of entry, and instructs agencies to turn away asylum seekers. Second, a reinstatement of the Remain in Mexico Program, which forces people seeking asylum in the United States to remain in dangerous conditions in Mexico while their cases proceed in the US. Third, cancellation of the CBP One mobile application for asylum seekers, which leaves no avenue for people stranded in Mexico who are waiting to seek asylum. The Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, is entering into third country agreements, forcing people to seek asylum in another country. Fifth, the nationwide expansion of expedited removal, which allows the Department of Homeland Security officers to deport people without judicial review or access to a lawyer. And finally, the indefinite suspension of refugee resettlement.

14:45      MDJ: I want to move on to the second form of impact, and that's the impact on immigrant communities. So firstly, we see increased fear and uncertainty. My community partners who are working with these communities on the ground confirm that these aggressive enforcement policies create a climate of fear for immigrant communities, particularly those from Muslim majority countries, Central America and Mexico, and not only among those who are undocumented, but also those who are documented. These actions have an impact on the entire community. The fear is compounded by increased US immigration and customs enforcement, or ICE raids, detentions and deportations. And many undocumented immigrants now live in hiding, avoid public services and do not send their kids to school. Secondly, these policies paint all immigrants as a national security risk and block them from protection. We see the use of racist and stereotypical tropes, and Trump is spreading lies and disinformation, which is false information deliberately spread to deceive the population about immigrants, stoking xenophobia and fear about migration and migrants. And we know that this type of sweeping enforcement that presumes that all foreigners are criminals has dire consequences for immigrants and refugees, which severely harms people fleeing persecution.

16:06      MDJ: Turning to the direct negative impact on families, we see this through various mechanisms, what I refer to as Mano Dura, or iron fist strategies, including the rescission of the Family Reunification Task Force created to implement the safe reunification of families that were separated at the US-Mexico border. However, what we see is the current border czar, Tom Homan, who oversaw the family separations during Trump's first term, reveal plans to bring back family detention, a zero tolerance policy that resumes jailing children and families together. The administration also wants to strip children of their constitutionally guaranteed right to US citizenship in contravention of the 14th Amendment that states, "All persons naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside." Trump ordered federal agencies not to recognize the US citizenship of children born in the United States when one parent does not have permanent status in the US, and to date, 18 states have sued the federal government over this executive order.

17:15      MDJ: Fourthly, there's an economic impact. We know immigrants contribute to the US economy across a wide range of sectors, from agriculture to technology. Tightening immigration policies create labor shortages, including in industries that rely on low-wage workers, such as construction, hospitality and agriculture. And another economic impact, of course, is the diversion of military and taxpayer resources towards militarizing our border.

17:44      MDJ: On the international front, two things I wanted to highlight. Firstly, we're observing strained, of course, diplomatic relations, including tensions with our neighboring countries, Mexico and Canada. We see an impact on global alliances, so Trump's America First stance is isolationist, and his administration's approach to immigration reinforces a protectionist vision of the United States. This approach negatively affects international perceptions of the United States, especially among global allies, who view the US's stance on refugee resettlement and international migration as inconsistent with international norms. And relatedly, in terms of international law and human rights, the shift in US immigration policy is raising questions about the US's commitment to international human rights agreements that limits asylum and refugee resettlement. This policy shift places the United States in a position of greater isolation in terms of international human rights standards.

18:46      MDJ: Additionally, the US's approach to immigration signals to other countries that hardline immigration policies are becoming more acceptable. We could see a domino effect globally as other countries adopt increasingly restrictive immigration policies. And the US policies may push more migrants into regions already experiencing difficulties in managing large numbers of displaced people, exacerbating challenges in the global refugee system.

19:13      TS: I want to really focus on a few additional elements that Professor de Jesus has mentioned. First of all, it takes about 18 to 36 months or more for refugees to actually undergo the vetting process, so many of the refugees who had been vetted, as of January 2025, after the signing of the executive order, can no longer come to the United States. The Trump administration canceled the flights of 10,000 vetted refugees who were supposed to arrive into the United States, mainly coming in from countries that are actually undergoing enormous violence, such as Venezuela, Afghanistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar, Nicaragua, Sudan and Iraq. Several of those countries very well might end up

20:00      TS: ... in the final travel ban that the Trump administration is going to roll out, which means that vetted refugees from these highly difficult circumstances, even though they may face the possibility of death and persecution, will not be able to arrive in a place of safety.

20:19      TS: There is also indefinite family separation that was experienced in the last travel ban and again being experienced here, where families who may have gone through the refugee vetting process may have arrived and they're waiting for their family members to arrive to the United States, and that, as a result of the suspension and as a result of the travel ban, this family separation could become permanent. Refugees selected for entry, as I mentioned before, are now exposed to persecution, enormous economic precarity, particularly if they have sold off their belongings in the preparation to come to the United States, and they have nowhere else to go, along with being targeted as a result of the fact that they were selected for coming to the United States, and now, again, their path of exit is now closed.

21:10      TS: In terms of those who work in refugee resettlement in the United States, this has taken an enormous toll. If you look through the refugee resettlement agencies in the United States, along with the local partners that work with refugee resettlement, many of them have lost funding, which means American workers are also losing jobs at a very high level because they are no longer able to provide for employment opportunities for Americans who work in refugee settlement, broadly speaking. The result of funding freezes related to refugee resettlement also means basic necessities that refugees had a right to by virtue of US laws are being denied, including, for instance, health support, food, food assistance, housing, so on and so forth.

22:00      TS: The other element of this discussion is also mass deportations. The Alien Enemies Act is a wartimes act that was specifically created to allow residents to detain, relocate, or deport non-citizens from a country considered an enemy of the United States during wartime. Alien Enemies Act is now creating a climate of palpable fear, not just for undocumented migrants, but also documented migrants, green card holders, and even citizens, particularly naturalized citizens and citizens of color in the United States. They're all living in palpable fear, and as Professor de Jesus pointed out, they're not showing up for classes, they're not showing up for work, they're not showing up for their medical appointments; they're facing anxiety and mental health challenges; there's a constant fear of family separation, dealing with family separation that is already happening, along with the possible fear of deportation if deportation has not happened already; and the consequences of deportation, which means they may be returned to context where they may be facing the possibility of enormous violence, torture, and even death.

23:09      TS: From a fiscal standpoint, the United States does also stand to lose extensive amounts of state, local, and federal tax revenue. If you look at 2022 alone, undocumented immigrants paid $46 billion in federal taxes and $29.3 billion in state and local taxes. The collective loss of this federal and state tax revenue undermines essential services that Americans depend on, including funding for teacher salaries, road maintenance, and bridge repairs. Furthermore, Americans access to social security and Medicaid is partly funded by undocumented immigrants, who contribute to these trust funds via payroll taxes without being eligible for the benefits they help sustain. Higher education industry is also a source of enormous economic revenue, and this is particularly generated by international students as well. Between 2023 and 2024, 1.1 million international students arrived at US colleges and universities and contributed $43.8 billion to the US economy and supported more than 378,000 jobs. For every three international students, one US job is created or supported. Now all these international students as a result of the chilling impact with regard to the attacks on freedom of speech on campus, with regards to the kinds of harassment they're facing at airports, with regard to the way the travel bans will be rolled out will mean that international students will look for alternative educational industries. This means they will also seek out alternative labor markets which, again, will impact the US economy significantly.

25:00      MM: Thank you both for that. I think we've underscored this thus far in the episode, but I think it's important to highlight that actions taken by presidential administrations on US immigration policy have significant impacts on thousands of people, including folks in our local community. Maria, I know you work with several local community partners focused on immigration rights and advocacy. And I know you mentioned this a little bit in your previous answer, but I wanted to ask, what are you hearing from them about these recent policy shifts and their impact?

25:34      MDJ: So, yes, thank you. I am hearing significant concerns about the recent shifts in US immigration policy, and I want to provide some perspective from my local partners, including the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, which focuses on immigration rights and advocacy, legal defense, and strategic litigation for immigrant children and adults facing detention and deportation.

25:58      MDJ: First, they're stating that these policy shifts criminalize immigrant communities to the maximum effect, or the maximum extent, rather. Firstly, they're detaining people, which will drastically increase the number of people in ICE and customs and border protection facilities. People in immigration detention are not guaranteed access to counsel or the protections afforded to individuals in the criminal justice system. The advocacy groups I work with are also seeing an increased demand for legal assistance as people try to understand their rights and navigate changing immigration laws. However, there are few legal resources available to them, especially pro bono lawyers, which reduces asylum seekers' chances of successfully fighting their cases.

26:44      MDJ: And the legal system is also overwhelmed by the demand for legal services. For example, Amica is helping detained immigrants at the Caroline Detention Facility, which is a 336-bed correctional facility located near Bowling Green, Virginia. It's surrounded by the army base, even though it's not part of the installation. It used to be a regional jail, and it features a campus-style layout. It's designed to operate as a direct supervision facility. And many of these detained immigrants are experiencing what I'm calling a shock-and-awe strategy, where ICE raids are taking place in the community where they live or where they work and detaining these individuals, including those who are documented.

27:29      MDJ: A recent case I learned about involved a family consisting of a husband, wife, and two children. The husband is of European heritage and is a US citizen, and the wife is of Colombian heritage, and she is documented, but not a US citizen. Both children were born in the United States. There was a ICE raid at her workplace, and she was brought to the Caroline Detention Facility. It took a week for the husband to locate his wife, and he still has not been able to visit her. And the reason for her detention remains unclear, but a lawyer is working with her now.

28:05      MDJ: I also wanted to highlight, as Professor Sajjad was mentioning earlier in terms of the impact on mental health, so my local community partners report that immigrant families and refugees are increasingly facing mental health challenges due to the stress of living in fear. The uncertainty has made it difficult for people to plan for the future, leading to anxiety, depression, feelings of isolation. Some are even planning to voluntarily depart the United States, including those who are documented but feel unwelcome and no longer wish to stay. So one example is an older Guatemalan couple who've lived in the US for over 20 years. They are documented. They live in Langley Park, Maryland, where there's a large immigrant community, and they've witnessed raids at Latino grocery stores, and they are now planning to move to Guatemala within the next two months.

28:56      MDJ: My local partners are also observing that federal agencies are maximizing the 287(g) agreements. So a 287(g) agreement, also known as a Memorandum of Agreement, or an MOA, is a partnership between ICE and state or local law enforcement agencies allowing designated local officers to carry out federal immigration enforcement programs. And they are witnessing racial profiling, an erosion of trust in communities, the wrongful detention of individuals who are not subject to immigration enforcement. Other non-profit organizations that work with immigrants are being targeted to determine whether they're, quote, promoting or facilitating, end quote, violations of immigration laws. These actions are aimed to block legal and social services for immigrants by attacking their advocates. And some of my community partners are worried that they could be charged with obstruction of justice and find themselves on the wrong side of the law. They're actively seeking a criminal lawyer to help them navigate these challenging

30:00      MDJ: ... challenging issues. And lastly, there is an increased fear among immigrant communities and the nonprofits that work with them. Trump revoked a policy that prohibited agents from making arrests in what's known as sensitive locations, such as churches, schools, mosques, and hospitals. And as a result, my community partners are having to think very strategically about where to offer their educational and health interventions. For example, they must carefully choose where to park their healthcare van, which provides health screenings to immigrants seeking care.

30:33      MDJ: But I did want to say, despite these challenges, there has been a surge in grassroots mobilization. The local groups are working even more closely together. They're providing mutual aid, legal support, and community organizing. They've offered Know Your Rights sessions, they're creating networks of support for people facing deportation or seeking asylum, and are focusing on educating the public about the human side of immigration policy. And there is a strong sense of solidarity among immigrant advocacy groups.

31:05      MM: Maria, thank you so much for sharing that; zooming in on that local impact in our DC region. I mentioned this earlier, but at SIS, both of you teach courses on migration, and currently you're collaborating on a new Global Migration Certificate that will launch this fall at SIS.

31:24      MM: So Maria and Tazreena, last question. As you both consider the current landscape of US immigration policy, what skills and perspectives will students gain from this program? What does the certificate entail? And what do you hope to instill in the next generation of folks working on migration issues?

31:44      MDJ: So yes, we are really excited. We're launching a graduate certificate in global migration, as you said, this fall at the School of International Service. It's a certificate co-sponsored by both our departments. That is Peace, Human Rights, and Cultural Relations and Environment, Development and Health, and students will gain a foundational understanding of global migration studies, including scholarly policy and ethical issues.

32:09      MDJ: Successful completion of the certificate requires 12 credit hours of approved graduate coursework, which includes a foundational course. For example, I'll be teaching Global Migration Policy and Human Perspectives in fall 2025. And in a future semester, Professor Sajjad will also be teaching a foundational course called Refugees, Migration, and Trafficking. Students will select two electives that are being offered across Â鶹Æƽâ°æ, including at SIS, the Washington College of Law, and the Sociology department.

32:42      MDJ: And in terms of their capstone, which they can choose to do a practicum, a substantial research paper, a master's thesis on a topic relevant to global migration, they'll also have the opportunity to engage in a cohort co-curricular professional development activity with an organization working on migration policy or practice. So the field of migration studies is rapidly evolving and we aim to equip students with both analytic and practical skills to navigate this complex landscape, including first critical thinking and policy analysis skills to analyze and assess policies, real-world impact on migrants, communities, refugees, and economies, as we just talked about; empathy and ethical engagement to understand migrants lived realities and foster compassionate and ethical policy responses; data analysis and research skills to interpret migration trends using quantitative and qualitative data to shape informed policies and advocacy efforts; global and comparative perspectives to gain knowledge of different migration governance systems, international agreements and regional dynamics; and finally, advocacy and communication skills to advocate for evidence-based policies and public awareness.

33:59      MDJ: Given the evolving landscape of US immigration policy, future migration professionals are going to have to be adaptable, informed, and proactive in crafting inclusive human rights-based solutions. And we hope that this certificate will empower students to become leaders in global migration.

34:18      TS: It's really important that students in our program learn and reflect on the fact that the sources of migration is extremely complex, that they're interrelated and interconnected, such that the legal definitions and state policies that students may be aware of, including those who are actually in the field of practice, does not actually capture the full range of why people move, why people choose not to move, what makes them return to contexts that they may decide to call their home, or continue in secondary and tertiary migration patterns.

34:54      TS: There's also an important emphasis for many of our classes to really think on the racialization, the criminalization, and the securitization of migration, because these are part of broader politics as well as political processes. And so looking at this link or the way in which migration and criminality have been linked, questions of migration and security have been linked, these need to be unpacked by the next generation of thinkers, advocates, policy makers, practitioners, and indeed scholars.

35:26      TS: There's also the need to de-securitize migration, which is going beyond the national security framework that has really been dominant in the way migration has been looked at, particularly in contexts of Global North, including in Global North Scholarship, but also that has certain echoes in the context of the broader Global South perspective, especially now.

35:48      TS: It's really important also for our students to engage with questions of how the growth of the border tech industry and its link to militarization has shaped our understanding and our perceptions of migrant flows, as well as context from which migrants, particularly those who are forcibly displaced, move. It's important for our students to engage with the histories of regimes and laws of migration management and control, and unpack why and whose migration needs to be controlled and for what purposes.

36:18      TS: It's also important for our students to learn from and engage more with the Global South perspectives and constraints, because a lot of the scholarship and a lot of the focus continues to be highly Eurocentric and US-centric, and we need to go beyond that.

36:33      TS: Several of our faculties certainly focuses on the importance of centering migrant voices, their perspectives as well as their agencies. And so this is a very exciting and a very important time for students interested in migration to delve deeper into both the scholarship, but also have those important conversations with scholars in migration to unpack as well as explore the many different dimensions in which migration happens in today's world.

37:01      MM: Maria De Jesus and Tazreena Sajjad, thank you for joining Big World to discuss US immigration policy and the upcoming Global Migration Certificate. It's been a pleasure to speak with you.

37:14      TS: Thank you so much for the invitation. It was wonderful to have this conversation at this very important time.

37:20      MDJ: Likewise. Thank you so much. It was wonderful to be able to do this with you as well, who I consider a friend and colleague. Tazreena Sajjad, thank you.

37:29      MM: Big World is a production of the School of International Service at Â鶹Æƽâ°æ. Our podcast is available on our website, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever else you listen. If you liked this episode, please leave a rating or review. Our theme music is, It Was Just Cold by Andrew Codeman. Until next time.