Navigating Repression: Social Space-oriented Social Work with Immigrants during the first Trump Era

Susanne Spindler, Sara Madjlessi-Roudi

1. Introduction

This article examines the changes in the fields of displacement and migration caused by the increasing repression of the first Trump administration, as well as the actions and reactions of social work in this context. The study illustrates how restrictive migration policies in the U.S. shape the lives of migrants by reinforcing structural inequalities and precarious living conditions. Migrants with insecure residency status are particularly affected, facing exploitation, marginalization, and violence.

These challenging conditions pose significant obstacles for social work in the community and social space, as high living costs, unstable employment, and a weak social system further aggravate the situation. A critical issue that emerges is the often lacking or insufficient political positioning of institutional social work. As Reisch (2019) analyses, this is due to the increasing focus of social work on individualized casework. Taking a political stance is becoming both more necessary and more difficult in the current context. When migration—and consequently social work with migrants—is dominated by ideological capitalist and racist discourses, when factual accuracy is undermined, when entire institutions such as US Aid are threatened with elimination, when sanctuary cities face financial withdrawal, and when mass deportations are announced—affecting even previously protected groups—resulting in fear and uncertainty among the estimated 9,7 million undocumented migrants without protection from deportation (van Hook 2025) [1], their families, and friends, political action becomes an increasingly difficult endeavor.

Nevertheless, social work initiatives and social movements continue to find ways to foster solidarity and support migrants at both local and national levels. Looking back at the first Trump administration, we also draw on experiences from community-based and social space-oriented work.

It is assumed that the living situation of migrants can be influenced by their social environment and the available support services. Social workers play an active role in this process within the framework of social space-oriented social work (Spatscheck 2019). The goal of this approach is to overcome the treatment of individualized and thereby often isolated problems. Instead, it focuses on incorporating local spaces, fostering cooperation, and promoting strong networking. The social space is formed by the relationships and contexts in which people live. It is where interaction takes place, where resources are created and distributed—and where power dynamics are also at play. Social space-oriented work means systematically including people’s living environments and local conditions in the planning and implementation of social work in order to activate resources, promote self-help, and develop tailored support services (Noack 2022, n.p.). Social work centers users and their perspectives and potentials. It draws on the resources of networks and local neighborhoods and is committed to enabling social-political participation and to developing needs-based support services (Spatscheck/Wolf-Ostermann 2016, 12). Our research highlights the importance of participatory social space oriented and community approaches that strengthen migrants' rights while simultaneously offering valuable insights for social work in Europe.

"When social workers and their clients systematically work to activate, develop, or build previously unused sources of power and support the process of using them to assert legitimate claims, Staub-Bernasconi speaks of empowerment. She emphasizes that such support also takes place against the will of those in power (Staub-Bernasconi 2018, 217)" (Lüttich 2023, n.p.).

This compilation and analysis can serve as an archive of memory, making visible the strategies of social space-oriented approaches that social work—often inspired by and in collaboration with social movements or self-help groups—has already developed. What strategies exist, what has been developed, and how do these approaches function in practice? Which of these strategies could potentially be reactivated?

The field is structured according to the dynamics of different migrant groups, including those with secure status as resettled refugees, undocumented migrants in urban areas, and migrants at the border and in detention centers. To investigate these themes, we traveled to Connecticut and New York in 2019 for research and talked to social workers, activists, and scholars who fight for the rights of migrants and support various migrant groups in their processes of entry, arrival, and residence (Int. NBO). [2] The results provide an overview of the situation of immigrants and social work in the context of migration in the United States in the first Trump Era. Our findings may also provide impulses that could be interesting in a German context.

Furthermore, we conducted field research in connection with migrant’s different statuses of residence. Their life circumstances sometimes differ considerably (besides individual differences and intersectional inequalities) and so, strategies and measures of social work can also vary greatly.

2. Migrants with a Secure Residence Status

The U.S. promotes immigration of highly skilled workers and investors, recognizing their economic value. Additionally, the country has a long history of resettling refugees through UNHCR-coordinated programs. These programs provide accredited refugees with secure residence status. One example is the Karen, an ethnic minority from Burma. Since 2005, the U.S. has accepted over 70,000 Karen refugees (McCleary et al. 2018, 912). However, under the Trump administration, resettlement numbers dropped from 85,000 in 2016 to 30,000 in 2019. In reality, far fewer refugees were admitted, and travel bans severely restricted Muslim applicants (Int. RO B; Immigration Forum 2019; UNHCR 2019).

These policies created uncertainty for immigrants already in the U.S., raising concerns about citizenship eligibility and potential status revocations. Some reported that criminal convictions affected their residence status (Int. RO A). This insecurity impacts their sense of belonging: "You still carry that identity with you," one of our interview partners quoted a resettled migrant he worked with. Resettled refugees can apply for citizenship after five years. Social work organizations, funded by the state, assist with integration, and work permits are issued upon arrival (Int. RO B), because the state’s main interest lies in the early integration into the labor market (Rehklau/Lutz 2018, 244). However, challenges remain, including a housing shortage and limited choice in relocation areas (Int. RO B). While resettled migrants have legal security and freedom of movement, they still face everyday racism. Local networks play a crucial role in their integration (Libal et al. 2019, 93).

Social workers support migrants in the process of arrival and integration. In the context of individual and family-centered casework, clients receive assistance in finding their way around the system, for instance by being trained in how to arrange school for their children (Int. RO A/ Int. NBH B). Another focal point is the issue of health: clients can receive access to psychology specialists, social workers, and cultural mediators. Through this, they learn about the offers of assistance that are accessible to them such as a program about healthy family, which has been called to life to support families in conflict situations (Int. RO A).

Another important part of the resettlement process is the integration of the newly immigrated into the assigned communities. Community health centers, which often accompany refugees in the first year after arrival play an important role in this process (Dubus/Davis 2018, 875). Intercultural competence is one of the essential requirements to conduct this kind of work (Dubus/Davis 2018, 874). Resettlement Agencies carry out explicit awareness work in the communities and particularly with its members by e.g. organizing "open houses", i.e. round tables and talks in community spaces (Int. RO A), as well as cultural events. Over time, many places have created initiatives such as welcoming committees.

From the perspective of Staub-Bernasconi’s concept of social space as a source of power, these integration measures contribute to the formation of informal and formal social memberships. By participating in networks of acquaintances, friendships, and organized community activities, refugees gain access to what Staub-Bernasconi describes as "informal organizational power" (2013, 378). The establishment of welcoming structures and intercultural spaces enables newly arrived individuals to build social capital, facilitating their empowerment within their new environment. In this way, resettlement efforts are not merely about physical relocation but about embedding individuals into the social fabric of a community, which in turn strengthens their agency and participation.

Many social workers are employed by the various agencies that have been commissioned by the government since the 1980s. Their work has been directly affected by the changes in (anti-)migration policy. The drop in the number of permitted resettlements, for instance, has led to structural changes to the extent that fewer people are able to migrate to the U.S., thus having an impact on the raison d’etre and areas of expertise of organizations. Many resettlement organizations have either been shut down or have had to change their specialization because of the reduced number of refugees. One institution we visited has since increased its cooperative measures with undocumented migrants [3] and has expanded its legal aid office (Int. RO B). A social worker we talked to from an institution that focuses on the accompaniment of resettlement processes reported that her organization is expanding its citizenship classes, English language courses as well as green card services. Through knowledge transfer on migrant’s rights, they work on stabilizing residency opportunities and enhancing access to rights.

Due to structural changes, these institutions are now working with a much more diverse audience. To this end, they also often engage in professional fundraising, using the donations as supplementary funding.

Although they have no influence on the decreasing number of resettlement admissions, many organizations have changed their profile to cater to new target groups and are actively raising funds for their work. There has been a considerable increase in donations to support migrants in recent years. Many citizens feel the urge to position themselves politically as opponents of the anti-migration movement and therefore support organizations that fight for the rights of marginalized groups (Int. NBO). In addition, the organizations have received more publicity for their work: “Community mobilization in support of refugees has recently become more visible, representing one manifestation of citizen action to counter what many Americans see as unjust policies.” (Harding/Libal 2020, 248).

On one hand, as social work organizes resources to build power, such tendencies make social work less dependent on state resources and state-funded programs. Yet at the same time, they create new dependencies on private funding and are a driving force behind the shift towards the privatization of social work, simultaneously reducing the accountability of the welfare state.

Immigration within the framework of resettlement programs follows a regulated procedure, granting migrants a comparatively secure residence status. Therein, social work takes on a supportive function in terms of the decision-making process of migration policies. Yet for people with an insecure or no residence status, the living situation is much more complicated, as is receiving support from social services. In the following, we will give insight into the living situation of migrant groups in this context and the consequences of partisan social work.

3. Migrants with an Insecure Residence Status

Legal migration options to the U.S. are extremely limited and have become more restricted in recent years, especially for migrants with limited financial resources or those not classified as refugees. A key example is the Safe Third Country Agreement (July 2019), which designated Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador as safe third countries, allowing asylum seekers to be deported back there. This policy significantly reduced legal entry options for asylum seekers under the Trump administration.

Many migrants enter the U.S. with or without secure status and often live in precarious conditions — either undocumented or detained with the threat of deportation. Fear and insecurity dominate their daily lives. Instead of receiving state support, they face repression, while social work organizations advocate for their rights and challenge restrictive policies.

3.1 Undocumented Immigrants

Most undocumented migrants in the U.S. overstay their visas (Int. NBH A), enter illegally, or lose temporary protection status. In the 1980s, Reagan granted amnesty to those arriving before 1982, but such measures are now politically impossible (npr 2010). Instead, undocumented migrants face criminalization, including rejection notices, deportation, and detention (Bohmer/Schuman 2019, 47). Deportations occur in various settings, even directly in front of schools (Int. NBH A).

Day-to-day life is full of barriers, particularly in housing. In New York in 2019, about 62,000 people are homeless, and one in ten public school children experiences homelessness annually (Int. NBH A). Workplace exploitation is widespread, especially for undocumented Chinese migrants in low-wage sectors who often work long hours for minimal pay (Int. NBH A). Wage theft and sexualized violence, particularly against women, are common. Due to fear of exposure, victims rarely report abuse. Meanwhile, labor unions lack resources to combat exploitative practices (Carrillo/O’Grady 2018, 707ff.).

Access to health care is also limited. Undocumented migrants rarely afford insurance and rely on free emergency clinics, which lack preventative services (Int. NBH A). Social and physical isolation further exacerbates their struggles, including trauma and unstable housing (Chappell Deckert et al. 2018, 893ff.).

Most undocumented people are denied state support and have limited access to emergency medical care (Bipartisan Policy Center 2018, 5; National Immigration Forum 2018). Privately funded services exist but are difficult to access. Many avoid homeless shelters due to uncertainty about their safety. Even knowledge of current legislation does not eliminate fear, as sudden policy changes could lead to prosecution (Int. NBH B).

One interviewee suggests the administration fosters fear through anti-migration policies. In July 2019, mass raids targeted undocumented civilians in 20 cities, including “Sanctuary Cities” like New York and Los Angeles, where local authorities refused to cooperate with ICE (de Bourmont 2019, Al Jazeera). Sanctuary Cities provide protection frameworks that social work alone cannot offer, fostering collaboration between city networks and social work. However, including these cities in raids heightens fear, keeping migrants from accessing services.

Many undocumented migrants are unaware of safe service providers (Int. NBH A, Int. NBH B). They often rely on word-of-mouth and community organization referrals. Media presence and strong networks are crucial (Int. NBH B). The Neighborhood Resource Center offers support, including legal aid and paperwork assistance (Int. NBH A). A key issue is migrants’ lack of knowledge about their rights (Int. RSW C). Organizations provide legal counseling, referrals, and resources like know-your-rights cards and workshops [4] (LoPo 2019). Legal training for social workers, including confidentiality and privacy, is essential (Int. RSW C).

Social work primarily serves the health and psychosocial sectors, reflected in the dominance of clinical social work over macro-social work at universities. Municipal programs like the “Community Wellness Programme” (CWP) offer mental health support beyond biomedical services. The Anti-Oppressive Strategy integrates personal experiences of discrimination into the healing process, reducing power dynamics and strengthening self-esteem (Carrillo/O’Grady 2018, 716ff.). Social workers play a crucial role in preventing exploitation and human trafficking (Chappell Deckert et al. 2018, 891f.).

Within this type of work, it is important to identify and address systemic and community-related issues that involve exploitation. Central issues are access to social services, residence security, mobility, and language support. Cooperation among providers, financial resources, and professional translation services are key. Specialized professional training for social workers is essential. Additionally, greater focus should be placed on social system-related challenges, such as difficulties in the housing market (Chappell Deckert et al. 2018, 901ff.). One initiative addressing workplace exploitation is the "Worker Center Movement," where low-wage undocumented workers, excluded from traditional unions, organize under the slogan "Organize the Unorganizable." These centers operate at both personal and structural levels, offering coordination, advocacy, and public relations. They challenge systemic oppression, including labor and migration policies, and engage in transnational activism (Carrillo/O’Grady 2018, 712ff.).

3.3 Caught in Between: "Mixed-status" and "Dreamer"

A mixed-status family consists of both undocumented and legal residents. In 2012, Obama introduced DACA – Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, allowing undocumented individuals who arrived as children to defer deportation for two years and obtain work permits. This was a temporary measure, as the Dream Act, proposed in 2001, never passed (Drösser 2018, Zeit Online; Zeit Online 2019).

In 2017, Trump moved to end DACA, affecting around 660,000 people who call themselves "dreamers" in allusion to the DACA act and who then lived in fear of deportation (Zeit Online 2019; Int. RO A). Many have started families, and deportations have torn them apart, leading to trauma and crises (Finno-Velasquez/Detlaff 2018, 728; Int. RO A).

Financially, mixed-status families face poverty risks, as deportations reduce household incomes. With limited state support, their vulnerability is heightened (Rodriguez 2018, Medium).

A strong movement has begun to emerge in the context of the dreamer. The Dreamers Movement seeks to disseminate knowledge and empowerment, primarily in a high school setting. Many activists work in advocacy and are trying to stand up for the rights of those affected, for example by conducting know-your-rights training sessions with employees to promote the politicization of high schools. The Dreamers Movement is organized on a grassroots level and can be seen as a playing field for politicization and experimentation for students. The movement also receives support from university lecturers and university presidents. One example is the local movement at UConn, the C4D (Connecticut Students for a Dream), which went to Washington DC to occupy the Senate and was supported by the chair of the UConn. Correspondingly, structures were also created in the university, e.g. with the Institute of Latina/o, Caribbean, and Latin American Studies to support student dreamers: "El Instituto welcomes and is an advocate for our undocumented students" (University of Connecticut).

In addition, social workers are trying to reach and support the communities that may be affected as well as the children of deported parents (Int. RSW B). This is not an easy task, because the fear of deportation inhibits this group from making use of the services. Community-based services such as workshops with community organizing groups or community discussions with undocumented migrants seem to be the most promising measure in this respect. This is the quickest way to mobilize community organizers, who are often social workers and work for non-profit organizations. Their activities are restricted by federal law. Organizations are allowed to influence politics (lobbying) depending on their status. Some of the NGOs that we interviewed, e.g. community centers, are not allowed to explicitly support certain politicians, but they can still make statements against the Trump administration or organize demonstrations pushing for a change of housing market policies (Int. NBH A).

4. Borders: Spheres in which Control, Deterrence, and Limitation are Consolidated

Borders and deportation prisons are key sites of control in the migration regime. While the sea acts as a natural U.S. border, the Mexico border remains contested. Human rights violations have become a deterrence tactic, drawing media attention. The separation of children from parents and their detention in camps sparked outrage (Int. RO A). In 2018, viral images of children in cages led to protests, including activists placing child figures in cages in New York (MSN 2019) and seniors locking themselves in a reconstructed detention camp in Philadelphia (Gammage 2019, The Philadelphia Inquirer). Social work has also taken notice (Int. RSW A).

Meanwhile, U.S. society shows signs of desensitization, similar to Europe’s response to Mediterranean refugee crises. Border closures and immigration restrictions are framed as security measures, making human rights violations appear justified (Mbembe 2018, 3f.; Amnesty International 2019). In July 2019, stricter asylum laws barred refugees traveling through Mexico, Guatemala, or Honduras from seeking asylum in the U.S.; they must apply in these countries instead, resembling Europe’s Dublin Regulation (UNHCR 2019).

Professionals in the field of social work, who work at the Mexico-U.S. border can consult guidelines and reports by national social work organizations such as the NASW and CSWE (Int. RSW B), which are criticizing migration policy approaches of recent years.

One major responsibility of social work – which follows the central normative ideal of human dignity and solidarity – should be to make it more difficult for spaces without laws to exist or be created, says Marciana Popescu, in a lecture at Fordham University (Popescu 2019). Advocacy work and work with the public should not just take place at the border but beyond it. This is negotiated as part of the responsibility of social workers, which, for instance, encompasses the prevention of harm against children (Finno-Velasquez/Detlaff 2018, 727). At the border, social workers on the Mexican side often work in towns such as Nogales Sonora, which for many migrants is the last stop before crossing the border depending on their route. The town houses a shelter for women and children, which is run by volunteers and offers basic health care and board (Popescu 2019). Another initiative that is active in this area is the Kino Border Initiative, a cooperation between several Christian organizations that collaborate with other local organizations and activists to improve the living situation of migrants (Kino Border Initiative).

Repression by the border regime is a common threat to active social workers, but also other professionals and activists. One known example of these types of repressive measures is a list compiled by the Customs and Border Patrol, which names activists, lawyers, and journalists who are active on the border (ACLU 2019). Some of the individuals found on this list reported that in interviews by border officers they were pressed for information on the “Caravan” (Del Real/Kanno-Youngs 2019, New York Times).

5. Deportation and Detention Centers

Detention centers are spread across the U.S., not just at the Mexico border. [5] They hold migrants without residence permits, asylum seekers, and individuals facing deportation (Guskin/Wilson 2017, 216f). Deportations can also affect those without criminal convictions or with minor offenses (Finno-Velasquez/Dettlaff 2018, 730). Families may be separated, even during asylum applications, leading to loss of home, work, and stability (Guskin/Wilson 2017, 210f). Affected individuals and their families may suffer trauma, depression, anxiety, and economic insecurity (Finno-Velasquez/Dettlaff 2018, 731).

Detention and deportation criminalize migrants: “Officially, detention and deportation are not considered a punishment. In practice, they often violate constitutional and human rights principles” (Guskin/Wilson 2017, 205). Facilities are isolated, enforcing their own rules. Life inside is marked by waiting, repression, and constant surveillance.The period of imprisonment in such facilities can vary between 30 days and six months. But in some of the interviews we conducted, we were told that people were sometimes locked up for several years (Int. RSW A). Conditions are inhumane—poor sanitation, lack of medical care (Nugent 2019, Time), psychological abuse, poor nutrition (New Yorker 2019), and forced uniform-wearing (Popescu 2019). Reports document sexual violence in these centers (ACLU 2020).

The neglect of basic human dignity is evident. Detainees live in forced idleness, dependent on aid yet vulnerable to exploitation and violence (Rehklau/Lutz 2019, 249). In "family" detention centers, parents are held with children, but separations occur. Some minors end up in adult facilities, despite legal prohibitions (Guskin/Wilson 2017, 218). This detention causes deprivation symptoms, poverty, and lack of education, affecting children's futures (Berthold/Libal 2019, 234f).

Social workers often lack access to detention centers [6], making it crucial for them to know and assert their rights. The inhumane treatment of migrants at the border and in detention centers violates professional ethics, such as the Code of Ethics of Social Work and Humanity (Int. RO A). Criticism has also been raised about social workers' involvement in border control when employed by detention centers. Some social workers leave prison jobs due to ethical concerns, refusing to act as agents of the system (Int. RSW A). Without access, professional engagement becomes difficult, requiring alternative approaches. Catholic institutions provide services to detainees, including unaccompanied minors, though some focus more on religious aspects than social work (Int. NBH B). Many organizations advocate for access to conduct psychological assessments for vulnerable groups, which can be used in court (Int. RSW A; Guskin/Wilson 2017, 217).

Our research also highlighted activism on university campuses. Professors organize student excursions to the border for awareness and monitoring. Social workers can raise public awareness through talks, advocacy, and reports. They also conduct forensic evaluations, assess country conditions, and provide expert testimony in legal proceedings (Int. RSW A ).

6. Outlook: Remaining Capable to Take Action and Creating a Scope for Action

Strict enforcement of migration policies has deeply affected migrants: Under the Trump administration, resettlement quotas dropped, and many of the 10.5 to 12 million undocumented individuals feel threatened by the increasing threats of deportation. Many are detained in deportation centers, while social work struggles to reach those with limited access to services due to their status.

This creates a contradiction: Social work promotes justice and integration but, when assisting migrants with precarious status, it conflicts with state policies. Advocating for undocumented or detained migrants means resisting restrictive laws, placing social work in opposition to state interests. Guided by ethics and social justice, social work takes on a political role.

What knowledge and strategies are needed to expand social work’s scope? This article explores these issues and raises key questions about its role in this contested space.

Expanding social work’s scope requires understanding migration policies, rights, and their impact on individuals (Finno-Velasquez/Dettlaff 2018, 734f.). Knowledge of rights applies to both migrants and social workers. Since undocumented people often lack legal awareness, organizations provide multilingual legal advice, Know-Your-Rights classes und referrals. However, solidarity-based social work faces restrictions, and state intervention limits its scope. This can cause insecurity for social workers. Knowing their own and their clients' rights is crucial, particularly for confidentiality. Training programs strengthen professional confidence. As a cross-sectional task for various fields, the question arises of how access can be created. Social work finds a multitude of ways to answers this question:

Through Community Work

Social work is often criticized for insufficient political engagement (Reisch 2016, 259). A shift towards casework has depoliticized the field (ibid.). Many initiatives focus on community-oriented work, emphasizing outreach and accessibility (Carrillo/O'Grady 2018, 712ff.). The Neighborhood Resource Center, for example, provides legal and medical aid. “Community Organizing” addresses legal and economic structures and transitions fluidly into empowerment work. Networks in communities promote political participation and protection, such as in Sanctuary Cities, where social work strengthens coalitions and supports resistance against deportations. Social work provides knowledge resources for the city and communities, utilizes networks, tries to build coalitions, and strengthens the options for protection in Sanctuary Cities.

Through Specific Knowledge Resources

Even without direct access to migrants, social workers find ways to help. Along migration routes, aid facilities provide food and medical care. In detention centers, psychological experts assist in court cases. Some refuse to work in deportation prisons to avoid violating professional ethics (Berthold/Libal 2019, 340). In addition, the cross-linkage of social work and the provision of knowledge as a resource for communities and cities is a way to enter into partisan work for migrants. Social work contributes knowledge to communities and cooperates with social sciences, influencing both local and UN-level policies. The NGO Committee, for instance, promoted migration-focused Sustainable Development Goals.

Funding and Shifts in Focus

Resettlement organizations rely on state funding, which has decreased due to lower refugee numbers. Those assisting undocumented migrants depend on donations, ensuring independence from government programs. However, public donations should not replace state responsibility but serve as a supplement. Some organizations adapt flexibly: a Connecticut resettlement facility expanded its legal aid for undocumented migrants after funding cuts. Public support for migrant aid has increased.

Advocacy Work

Advocacy and solidarity are crucial against restrictive policies (Int. NBO). Many organizations are expanding advocacy locally, nationally, and internationally to defend human rights (Popescu/Libal 2018, IV). They counteract mistrust and function as political lobbies to improve refugee treatment (Rehklau/Lutz 2018, 244). One interviewee emphasized the importance of visible support for undocumented people (Int. RO B). Institutions increasingly focus on advocacy, including PR campaigns by NASW and CSWE. Monitoring, media strategies, and targeted messaging help highlight migrant struggles (NGO Committee on Migration).

Berthold and Libal see practitioners and academics equally responsible for giving the public insight into their work "to raise awareness" (Berthold/Libal 2019, 341) and to not only present their findings to a specialist audience (e.g. academic journals). Social work should challenge restrictive policies and stand in solidarity with those excluded (Popescu 2019). The harsher the policies, the more social work must position itself in defense of migrants.

References

ACLU (2019): The Government Is Detaining and Interrogating Journalists and Advocates at the US-Mexico Border. Retrieved May 2020, from American Civil Liberties Union https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/freedom-press/government-detaining-and-interrogating-journalists-and-advocates-us Access: 1 November 2020

ACLU (2020): Sexual Abuse in Immigration Detention. Retrieved May 2020, from American Civil Liberties Union: https://www.aclu.org/issues/immigrants-rights/immigrants-rights-and-detention/sexual-abuse-immigration-detention-0 Access: 23 January 2021

Amnesty International (2019): Kinder werden inhaftiert und schikaniert. Retrieved May 2020, from Amnesty International: https://www.amnesty.de/informieren/aktuell/vereinigte-staaten-von-amerika-kinder-werden-inhaftiert-und-schikaniert Access: 15 March 2025

Berthold, S. Megan/Libal, Kathryn R. (2019): Future Directions to Promote the Rights of Refugees and Asylum Seekers. In: Berthold, S. Megan/Libal, Kathryn R. (Eds.): Refugees and Asylum Seekers: Interdisciplinary and Comparative Perspectives, CA: ABC-Clio Press, Santa Barbara, pp. 337-346.

Bipartisan Policy Center (2018): Immigrants and Public Benefits: What Does the Research Say? Retrieved May 2020, from Bipartisan Policy Center. https://bipartisanpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Immigrants-and-Public-Benefits-What-Does-the-Research-Say.pdf Access: 5 January 2021

Bohmer, Carol/Schuman, Amy (2019): Locked Up and Kicked Out: Detention and Deportation in the United States and the United Kingdom. In: Berthold, Megan/Libal, Kathryn R. (Eds.), Refugees and Asylum Seekers: Interdisciplinary and Comparative Perspectives CA: ABC-Clio Press, Santa Barbara, pp. 44-73

Carrillo, Arturo/O’ Grady, Cailtin L. (2018): Using Structural Social Work Theory to Drive Anti-Oppressive Practice with Latino Immigrants. In: Advances in Social Work, 18(3), pp. 704-726.

Chappell Deckert, Jennifer/Warren, Sherry/Britton, Hannah (2018): Midwestern Service Provider Narratives of Migrant Experience: Legibility, Vulnerability, and Exploitation on Human Trafficking, Advances in Social Work, 18(3), pp. 887-910.

de Bourmont, Martin (2019): Undocumented Immigrants Advocates prepare Mass-ICE-raids. Retrieved May 2020, from Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/07/undocumented-immigrants-advocates-prepare-mass-ice-raids-190712215610835.html Access: 23 January 2021

Del Real, Jose/Kanno-Youngs, Zolan (2019): U.S. Tracked Activists and Journalists as Migrant Caravans Headed to the Border, Retrieved May 2020, from New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/07/us/migrant-caravans-activists-journalists-government-list.html Access: 23 January 2021

Dubus, Nicole/Davis, Ashley (2018): Culturally Effective Practice With Refugees in Community Health Centers: An Exploratory Study. In: Advances in Social Work, 18(3), pp. 874-886.

Drösser, Christoph (2018): “Dreamer” in den USA: Die Angst der Träumer. Retrieved May 2020, from Zeit online. https://www.zeit.de/2018/03/dreamer-usa-daca-donald-trump-migration Access: 21 January 2021

Finno-Velasquez, Megan/Dettlaff, Alan J. (2018): Challenges to family unity and opportunities for promoting child welfare in an increasingly punitive immigration landscape. In: Advances in Social Work,18(3), pp. 727-744.

Gammage, Jeff (2019): Senior citizens pen themselves in makeshift ‘detention center’ on Independence Mall to protest deaths of migrant children in U.S. custody. Retrieved May 2020, from The Philadelphia Inquirer. https://www.inquirer.com/news/detention-centers-trump-senior-citizens-immigration-independence-mall-20190717.html?fbclid=IwAR3P4923_PhrXcjPQJwN-Hv5SOkynlePEOsDGDRhekQTRa-8QRAvAouXiYM Access: 15 March 2025.

Guskin, Jane/Wilson, David L. (2017): The Politics of Immigration. Questions and Answers. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Harding, Scott/Libal, Kathryn (2020): “Doing something to fight injustice”: Voluntarism refugee resettlement as political engagement in the United States. In: Labman, Shauna & Camero, Geoffreyn (Eds.), Strangers to Neighbors, Refugee Sponsorship in Context, McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal, pp. 247-263

Higgins, Maeve (2019): Upset by the scenes at the Border? Look closer to home. Retrieved May 2020, from New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/09/opinion/new-york-immigration-court.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage&fbclid=IwAR1eZFNkv6pBY3qHswN73chKP2n051W07_Eo475E_XiBwE9irAFaObni6o4 Access: 01 March 2025

Ingraham, Christopher (2016): Two new studies find racial anxiety is the biggest driver of support for Trump. Retrieved May 2020, from The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/06/racial-anxiety-is-a-huge-driver-of-support-for-donald-trump-two-new-studies-find/?fbclid=IwAR0wElDjvhelEfdh7Ke92ylXhzht8WEHNMooj9uaT4jjMIp3bPoaWlcJb9k&noredirect=on&utm_term=.16f468d6fad Access: 06 August. 2020

Kino Border Initiative (2020): Our Vision is humane, just, workable migration between the U.S. and Mexiko, Retrieved May 2020, from Kino Border Initiative: https://www.kinoborderinitiative.org/ Access: 8 November 2020

Libal, Kathryn/Felten, Grace/Harding, Scott (2019): Refugee resettlement in the United States: The central role of volunteerism in a time of backlash. In: Berthold, Megan/Libal, Kathryn (Eds.), Refugees and Asylum Seekers: Interdisciplinary and Comparative Perspectives, CA: ABC-Clio Press, Santa Barbara, pp. 74-99

Lüttich, Wencke (2023): Jane Addams und die Machtquellen ihrer Zeit – Eine machttheoretische Rekonstruktion und Neulektüre zum Chicagoer Hull House. In: sozialraum.de (14) Ausgabe 1/2023. URL: https://www.sozialraum.de/jane-addams-und-die-machtquellen-ihrer-zeit.php Access: 31 March 2025.

Mbembe, Achille (2018): The Idea of a Borderless World. Chimurenga Chronic 10/2018, pp. 3-4.

Mc Cleary, Jennifer/Horn, Tonya/Toe, Paw/Dwee, Ehtaw/Sniffen, Shana (2018): The Karen Chemical Dependency Collaboration: Lessons Learned in Using a Collaborative Framework to Promote Refugee Integration. In: Advances in Social Work, 18(3), pp. 911-929.

MSN (2019): Art Installations Depict 'Children' in Cages Around NYC. Retrieved May 2020, from MSN. https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/weather/art-installations-depict-children-in-cages-around-nyc/vi-AACQbFp Access: 8 November 2020

National Immigration Forum (2018): Fact Sheet: Immigrants and Public Benefits. Retrieved May 2020, from National Immigration Forum: https://immigrationforum.org/article/fact-sheet-immigrants-and-public-benefits/ Access: 8 November 2020

National Immigration Forum (2019): Fact Sheet: U.S. Refugee Resettlement. Retrieved May 2020, from National Immigration Forum: https://immigrationforum.org/article/fact-sheet-u-s-refugee-resettlement/ Access: 9 November 2020

New Yorker (2019): Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on the 2020 Presidential Race and Trump’s Crisis at the Border. Retrieved May 2020, from New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-new-yorker-interview/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-on-the-2020-presidential-race-and-trumps-crisis-at-the-border Access: 9 November 2020

Noack, Michael (2022): Sozialraumorientierung [online]. In: socialnet Lexikon. Bonn: socialnet, 09.03.2022: https://www.socialnet.de/lexikon/439, access: 24 April 2025

npr (2010): A Reagan Legacy. Amnesty for illegal Immigrants. Retrieved May 2020, from npr: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128303672&t=1588497834107 Access: 5. November 2020

Nugent, Ciara (2019): Democratic Lawmakers Outraged by 'Dehumanizing' Conditions at Migrant Detention Centers. Retrieved October 2020, from Time. https://time.com/5618919/migrant-detention-border-tour-democrats/ Access: 6 November 2020

Popescu, Marciana (2019): Migration and Borders, Lecture on April 16th 2019, New York City: Fordham University.

Popescu, Marciana/Libal, Kathryn (2018): Social Work With Migrants and Refugees: Challenges, Best Practices, and Future Directions. Editorial. In: Advances in Social Work, 18 (3), pp. I-X.

Rehklau, Christine/Lutz, Roland (2018): Migration und Flucht. In: Wagner, Leonie/Lutz, Ronald (Eds.): Handbuch internationale Soziale Arbeit. Weinheim/Basel, pp. 240-256.

Reisch, Michael (2016): Why Macro Practice Matters. In: Journal af Social Work Education, 52(3), pp. 258-268.

Reisch, Michael (2019): Enhancing the Impact of Research in Social Work & Related Disciplines. Lecture on April 8th 2019, Hartford: UConn.

Rodriguez, Cassaundra (2018): Seven Things to Know About Mixed-Status Families. Retrieved May 2020, from Medium. https://medium.com/national-center-for-institutional-diversity/seven-things-to-know-about-mixed-status-families-92a18a714bb5 Access: 27 November 2020

Spatscheck, Christian (2019): Spatial Approaches to Social Work – Theoretical Foundations and Implications for Practice and Research. In: European Journal of Social Work (22) 5/2019, pp. 845-859.

Spatscheck, Christian/Wolf-Ostermann, Karin (2016): Sozialraumanalysen. Ein Arbeitsbuch für soziale, gesundheits-und bildungsbezogene Dienste. Barbara Budrich, Opladen/Toronto.

Staub-Bernasconi, Silvia (2013): Macht und (kritische) Soziale Arbeit. In: Kraus, Björn/Krieger, Wolfgang (Eds.): Macht in der Sozialen Arbeit. Interaktionsverhältnisse zwischen Kontrolle, Partizipation und Freisetzung, 3rd edition. Lage/Detmold.

University of Connecticut: Undocumented Students. Retrieved May 2020, from El Instituto: Institute of Latina/o, Caribbean, and Latin American Studies. https://elin.uconn.edu/undocumented-students/# Access: 12 December 2020

UNHCR (2020): Resettlement at a Glance (January-December 2019). Retrieved May 2020, from UNHCR. https://www.unhcr.org/protection/resettlement/5e31448a4/resettlement-fact-sheet-2019.html Access: 12 December 2020

UNHCR (2019): UNHCR Deeply Concerned About New U.S. Asylum Restrictions. Retrieved May 2020, from UNHCR. https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2019/7/5d2cdf114/unhcr-deeply-concerned-new-asylum-restrictions.html?fbclid=IwAR1DqjiuzSkufUhaQzAH79fIxY2quRfG5WSiGFvzwudgwxTVjDe2pk919KY Access: 29 November 2020.

Van Hook, Jennifer (2025): Who are immigrants to the US, where do they come from and where do they live? The Conversation, 05.02.2025, Access: 01 March 2025

Zeit online (2019): “Dreamer”- Programm: Supreme Court stellt sich hinter Trumps Pläne zur Abschaffung von Daca. Retrieved May 2020, from Zeit online. https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2019-11/einwanderung-dreamers-usa-daca-donald-trump Access: 1 December 2020

Other Sources: Interviews

Int. LoPo = Interview with a local Politician

Int. NBH A = Interview with a staff member of Neighborhood House A in New York

Int. NBH B = Interview with a staff member of Neighborhood House B in New York

Int. NBO = Interview with a volunteer of a Neighborhood Organisation in Connecticut

Int. RO A = Interview with a staff member of #Resettlementorganisation A in Connecticut

Int. RO B = Interview with a staff member of Resettlementorganisation B in Connecticut

Interviews with Researchers:

Int. RSW A: Interview with Researcher on Social Work and Migration

Int. RSW B: Interview with Researcher on Social Work and Migration

Int. RSW C: Interview with Researcher on Social Work and Migration

Footnotes

[1] Analysis of Census Bureau’s 2023 American Community Survey Data.

[2] We were able to carry out the project entitled "Limits and Scopes of Social Work for Mandate-oriented Work in Contexts of Flight - A Study on Strategies of Social Work in the USA" from 03/2019-07/2019. Part of the study was a three-week stay in Connecticut and New York City. On site we conducted interviews with resettlement organizations (RO A and B), neighborhood houses (NBH A and B), a neighborhood organization (NBO) and a local politician (LoPo), held talks with colleagues from the academic world (RSW A, RSW B, RSW C) and participated in meetings with NGOs on migration-related issues. We would like to thank our colleagues from University of Connecticut for their willingness to cooperate, especially Prof. Dr. Kathy Libal and Prof. Dr. Lisa Werkmeister Rozas for the preliminary organization, their advice and the embedding of our questions. We would also like to thank all of our colleagues from science community and the field of social work who were willing to share their knowledge with us. Last but not least, our thanks goes to the Düsseldorf University of Applied Sciences for financing the project.

[3] With the term "undocumented" we have adopted the terminology typically used in the U.S. It is a bit more precise than illegalized and puts the main emphasis on the papers that are missing.

[4] An example can be found at: https://www.unidosus.org/issues/immigration/resources/rights

[5] „An overview of the over 200 detention facilities (including private ones) can be found here: https://www.freedomforimmigrants.org/detention-statistics

[6] An overview of the over 200 detention facilities (including private ones) can be found here: https://www.freedomforimmigrants.org/detention-statistics

Zitiervorschlag

Spindler, Susanne und Sara Madjlessi-Roudi (2025): Navigating Repression: Social Space-oriented Social Work with Immigrants during the first Trump Era. In: sozialraum.de (16) Ausgabe 1/2025. URL: https://www.sozialraum.de/navigating-repression-social-space-oriented-social-work-with-immigrants-during-the-first-trump-era.php, Datum des Zugriffs: 19.06.2025