,
13 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
My new report based on intakes of over 7,000 asylum-seeking families provides systematic evidence of sub-standard conditions in immigration detention and mistreatment of asylum seekers. In many ways, it's worse than we thought usipc.ucsd.edu/publications/u… 1\ 
From Oct 2018-Jun 2019, the San Diego Rapid Response Network (SDRRN) helped over 7,000 asylum-seeking families who were admitted into the U.S. These families totaled over 17,000 people, including 7,900 children five years or younger. We independently analyzed SDRRN's intakes 2\
Over 1 out of every 3 of the asylum-seeking heads of households reported issues related to conditions in immigration detention, treatment in detention, or medical issues 3\
Among those who reported issues in immigration detention, 62% reported issues related to food and water, including being fed frozen or spoiled food, not having enough to eat, not being given formula for infants, not being given water, and having to drink dirty water 4\
Among those who reported issues in immigration detention, 46% reported issues related to not being able to sleep (sleeping on the floor, lights on 24/7, etc.), overcrowded conditions, confinement, and the temperature being too cold in "la hielera" 5\
Among those who reported issues in immigration detention, 35% reported issues related to hygiene, including not being able to shower, dirty bathrooms, and not having a toothbrush or toothpaste to brush their teeth 6\
232 asylum-seeking heads of households reported verbal abuse, including being told "go back to your fucking country" and "you’re an ape," among other examples 7\
40 asylum-seeking heads of households reported physical abuse, including being thrown against a wall, among other examples 8\
Note: we're likely under-estimating because (1) SDRRN's primary responsibility is to care for asylum seekers, not administer questionnaires, and (2) some may not have spoken out because of concerns that reporting might negatively affect their immigration cases 9\
We also uncover language access issues that give rise to due process concerns. 20% of the asylum-seeking heads of households do not speak Spanish as their primary language. Many speak an indigenous Central American language, such as K'iche', Q'eqchi', and Mam 10\
However, 88% of non-Spanish speakers were given instructions about their immigration court dates, times, and locations (on their NTAs) in Spanish. In addition to indigenous Central American speakers, this includes native Hindi and Vietnamese speakers, among others 11\
If asylum seekers are not being given vital instructions about their immigration proceedings in a language they can understand, how can we expect them to navigate an already complex legal process? 12\
I called this "Part 1" because another report will be out soon. Whereas this report focuses on asylum seekers who have been admitted into the U.S., "Part 2" focuses on asylum seekers who have been returned to Mexico under the "Remain in Mexico" policy. Please stay tuned \end
