News » Feature

St. Louis Dreamers Hope for a Future in the U.S. Trump Doesn't Make That Easy

by

comment

Page 2 of 3

Areli Reyes' mother, Maria, grasps her rosary. - ZIA NIZAMI
  • ZIA NIZAMI
  • Areli Reyes' mother, Maria, grasps her rosary.

To live as a Dreamer means to live in a state of fallbacks, contingency plans, workarounds.

Originally, Reyes had gone to Forest Park to study nursing. But then she learned that, because she lacks permanent legal status, she could not get a nursing license in Missouri. That's when she moved on to human resources.

Juan Carlos Valladares-Hernandez, 25, graduated from Ritenour High School in 2012. He started pre-med studies in the fall of 2017 at the nearby University of Missouri-St. Louis. But UMSL became unaffordable because the school charged him the same rate as non-resident students — $930 per credit hour instead of $345, the rate for residents.

Valladares-Hernandez transferred to Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, which is more affordable since it charges in-state tuition rates through a reciprocity agreement between Missouri and Illinois.

Now planning to graduate with a degree in biology in December, Valladares-Hernandez has the grades and the test scores for medical school but is not sure how he's going to pay for it. Because he is not a fully legal resident of the U.S., he cannot access federal or state loan and grant programs.

"Getting into medical school is already hard enough," he says. "And then putting that additional burden of not having state or the government aid makes it even harder."

And even if he figures out how to pay for it, there's the matter of finding a job. He hopes one day to become an emergency room physician, but that could prove tricky if DACA — which is only guaranteed to exist for one more year after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a review of it in January — ends by the time he graduates medical school.

"Where would I practice residency?" he says. "Because to get into residency you need to legally work. If that protection is no longer valid, then all this hard work I'm doing now is potentially down the drain until they do something."

For DACA recipient Eric Reyes (no relation to Areli Reyes), 23, getting loans for a car or a house is more complicated because of his lack of permanent legal status. He also feels intense pressure not to screw up on the job or even get a speeding ticket. Job loss or a minor criminal charge could mean being dropped from the DACA program, thereby risking deportation.

"Every single day I wake up and try to do the best I can that day," says Reyes, who works as a cloud computing specialist for a Chesterfield tech company. "Because I have to ... you have to put an effort into doing things that won't put you in danger, won't put you at risk of them saying you are not fit to be here in the U.S."

When DACA began in 2012, it was greeted with relief, says Reyes. For the first time, young people brought to America could work legally, get driver's licenses and pay taxes.

"But it was also a very risky thing," he says. "Because before you were in the shadows and no one really knew where you were, no one knew where you lived. And now with DACA, every time you renew your permit you have to update your household, update your work, update every single detail. You run the risk because they have all your info. Every time you're up for renewal, you're left guessing, 'What if they don't renew it for some reason?'"

Valladares-Hernandez, like the other Dreamers interviewed for this story, considers self-deportation to Mexico an unrealistic option.

He arrived in the U.S. with his parents at five. This is the only home he has ever really known.

Returning to Mexico "would pretty much put my whole life on hold," he says. "My relationships formed here would pretty much be gone. I would pretty much have to start a new life."

Nicole Cortes, co-director and attorney for the Migrant and Community Action Project in St. Louis, says that many DACA recipients she works with deal with the uncertainty surrounding their lives through a form of denial.

"[Dreamers think], 'I don't want to dwell every day that my future is uncertain,'" Cortes says. "'I'm going to continue to study, to go to work.' I don't think it's a comfortable psychological place to be. It's tough and it wears on people, especially in the last year."

Under the policies of the Trump administration, Dreamers are weighing the risks and benefits of remaining in the program, Cortes says.

"It was a bait and switch, right?" she says. "We induced people to give this information, now we pulled it from them, and in doing so, it seems really unjust. Yeah, I think people are really scared."

Still, even if DACA were suddenly shut down and immigration officials began targeting Dreamers, the agency "does not have the resources to deport anywhere near the number of DACA recipients," Cortes says. "It would be impossible even if they decided to focus on DACA recipients to remove them in any sort of efficient way."

Still, for Dreamers, the program's ending is a constant source of anxiety, Cortes says.

"Realistically what they're thinking about is, 'What if I have to go back into the shadows?'" she says. "'What if all of a sudden I can't work to pay my tuition bill? When my DACA expires, what is it going to look like going back into the shadows?' It's draining. Can you imagine how psychologically draining that is?"

Dreamers stand on the center of a basic question at this moment in the United States: Do immigrants add to the nation's strength, or do they subtract from it?

That question, in turn, folds into an even bigger, more fundamental one posed recently by conservative columnist Gerald Seib. In writing about President Donald Trump's demand for a border wall, Seib observed that the debate over it "has crystallized a deep cultural divide, between those happy with the evolving face of America, and those alarmed by it."

Trump surfed into the White House in 2016 on a wave of racial resentment and anti-immigrant animus. It was no coincidence that when he announced his candidacy for president, in June 2015, he took aim at Mexico, which he claimed was "sending people that have lots of problems ... they're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists." He added, "And some, I assume, are good people."

In promoting the lie that Mexico was sending violent criminals to the United States, Trump was merely repeating falsehoods propagated earlier by Ann Coulter, the right-wing author and pundit who has emerged as one of the most strident foes of immigration across America's southern border.

In her book Adios, America: The Left's Plan to Turn Our Country Into a Third World Hellhole, published just a few weeks before Trump's announcement that he was running for president, Coulter refers repeatedly to how America's main immigrant groups express a "gusto for gang rape, incest and child rape."

Elsewhere in her book, Coulter writes, "A sixteen-year-old girl at her homecoming dance was gang-raped and left for dead because the Democrats need more voters. We could save a lot of soul-searching about our violent culture if journalists didn't hide the fact that gang rapes are generally committed by people who are not from our culture."

Such attacks on immigrants, whether DACA recipients or refugees, stem from long-entrenched ideas about white identity, says Sara John, executive director and program coordinator for the St. Louis Interfaith Committee on Latin America.

"These are all part of a larger agenda that is seeking to preserve a white supremacist identity for our country," says John, a leader of the St. Louis church sanctuary movement. "And I think that is appalling and contrary to majority values of people of faith and good will in our country."

It is no coincidence that critics of immigration focus on people from Mexico and Central America, John says.

"They're brown people," John says. "Brown people that also bring brown families and brown parents. If you're afraid of white somehow becoming less important, less supreme, then your action would be to stop any possibility that could lead to other cultures, right?"

America's anti-immigration lobby is funded by billionaires like Robert Mercer, a major Trump backer, and well-funded foundations with links to the Trump White House.

One of the most powerful groups is the Federation for American Immigration Reform, or FAIR. After Trump announced he was ending DACA, FAIR issued a statement called "The DACA Myth." The article slammed DACA as "unconstitutional" and falsely claimed many DACA recipients had lost their status because of violent assaults, were not really children when they came to the U.S. and did not hail from nations suffering from poverty or violence.

"The DACA program was illegal," FAIR argued. "But it was also bad from a long-term policy perspective. Rewarding people who violate our laws only encourages more people to become lawbreakers. Accordingly, President Trump's decision to cancel the program is a welcome one."

Yet statistics show that American voters support legislation to allow Dreamers to stay in America.

An April 2017 survey of registered voters found that 78 percent support giving Dreamers the chance to stay permanently in America, including 73 percent of Trump voters. Only 14 percent of all voters, including 23 percent of Trump supporters, believe Dreamers should be deported, according to the Washington Center for American Progress.

Even Trump and his advisers have indirectly acknowledged that Dreamers and other protected immigrant groups pose little threat to public safety.

In late January, in a bid to end what turned out to be a 35-day partial federal government shutdown, Trump offered three years' protection for Dreamers and others covered under the "temporary protected status" program.

Democrat leaders in Congress rejected the offer because it failed to provide a permanent solution.

Riverfront Times works for you, and your support is essential.

Our small but mighty local team works tirelessly to bring you high-quality, uncensored news and cultural coverage of St. Louis and beyond.

Unlike many newspapers, ours is free – and we'd like to keep it that way, because we believe, now more than ever, everyone deserves access to accurate, independent coverage of their community.

Whether it's a one-time acknowledgement of this article or an ongoing pledge, your support helps keep St. Louis' true free press free.