Anti-immigrant Trump policies not a threat to Filipinos, says US lawyer

(Last of two parts)

Read part 1: Trump going berserk, targets birthright, naturalized citizens

MANILA, Philippines—The re-election of convicted felon Donald Trump has sparked fear among some Filipino-American (Fil-Am) communities over his immigration agenda, including plans to strip naturalized citizens of their status. However, an immigration expert assures there is nothing to fear at this time.

During the election period, Trump vowed to intensify efforts from his previous presidential term to strip citizenship from individuals deemed to have obtained it illegally while also pursuing another contentious policy: ending birthright citizenship.

He pledged to implement the “largest deportation program in US history,” a cornerstone of his reelection campaign, with Vice President-elect JD Vance estimating the crackdown could result in up to one million removals annually.

This has sparked concerns among many in the US, including Fil-Ams residing in the country and those seeking to petition family members from the Philippines to join them.

“I feel like the impact on the Fil-Am community has been fear. Let’s face it – emotion sells. Fear is part of the reason Trump got reelected,” Fil-Am immigration lawyer Jath Shao told INQUIRER.net.

However, Shao emphasized that the “average” Filipino — whether holding a working visa, a green card, or US citizenship — has nothing to fear from Trump’s immigration agenda.

“People need to realize – the average rural American is more probinsyana than the average Filipino,” he said.

“Unless there is serious fraud in how you got here — such as lying about being single when you were actually married, lying about your identity, or committing serious crimes involving drug or violence — you shouldn’t be worried,” he added.

Denaturalization: Rare but feared

During Trump’s first term, his administration took an aggressive stance on denaturalization — the process of stripping US citizenship from naturalized individuals. Efforts were launched to investigate cases where people were suspected of gaining citizenship through fraud.

READ: 3 types of immigrants at risk of being stripped of U.S. citizenship

“These efforts to strip citizenship from Americans are systemic and chilling. They have made US citizens fearful that mistakes made years ago on their past applications could be used to target them, take away their citizenship, and destroy their lives,” the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a nonprofit civil rights organization, said.

The organization noted that the Trump administration’s push for denaturalization has instilled fear among lawful permanent residents, discouraging them from pursuing citizenship and fully participating in civic life.

“What was once a celebratory moment recognizing an immigrant’s integration into American life now comes with an undercurrent of fear and suspicion. The Trump administration yet again uses draconian and constitutionally questionable tactics in pursuit of its nationalist vision of who belongs in the United States,” ACLU said.

However, Shao clarified that denaturalization, while a hot topic in the news, is actually quite rare.

“Historically, there are only about 11 cases per year, usually stemming from lying about something important about your identity. Getting caught for using false documents is probably the most common reason — if they find that you lied about who you are.,” he said.

He cautioned against believing everything said or promised by politicians, explaining that “[i]t’s illegal to deport American citizens, and denaturalization doesn’t happen easily unless there’s a serious issue with the truthfulness of your application.”

Moreover, experts point out that losing citizenship through denaturalization is a complicated process with a high standard of proof.

The Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) explains that the government must prove in court that someone wasn’t eligible for citizenship when it was granted. This requires strong evidence — either clear and convincing proof in a civil case or meeting the stricter “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard in a criminal case.

During the first Trump administration’s initiative in 2018, Shao recalled, around $200 million was spent investigating roughly 700,000 individuals, which ultimately led to about 200 denaturalizations.

Shao pointed out that it translates to about $1 million of taxpayer money per denaturalization.

“While 50 denaturalizations [per] year under Trump is over [four times] as high as average years, it still pales in comparison to almost [one] million naturalizations of new citizens every year,” he explained.

Constitutional safeguard

Under the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, individuals born on American soil — regardless of their parents’ immigration status — are granted automatic citizenship. It specifically states that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

This doctrine, known as jus soli (right of the soil), has been a defining feature of US identity and inclusivity since its ratification in 1868.

“As opposed to the Philippines, where citizenship is through your parents, America grants citizenship to anyone born here, with the sole exception being children of diplomats with diplomatic immunity,” Shao added.

In comparison, Trump’s proposed policy would grant citizenship only to children with at least one parent who is a US citizen or legal resident. In a May 2023 campaign video, Trump clarified that the policy would not apply retroactively, indicating it would only impact children born after its implementation.

He also highlighted that the policy is intended to address “birth tourism,” a practice Republicans allege involves foreign nationals traveling to the US late in pregnancy to secure citizenship for their children.

READ: How Trump’s mass deportation plan will impact undocumented Filipinos

However, Shao clarified that this proposed policy to end birthright citizenship through executive order makes no sense and is not legal or possible.

“In the American system of government, the President can only execute laws. A supermajority of both houses of Congress would have to propose a constitutional amendment, which a supermajority of states would have to then approve — a change in the Constitutional protection of birthright citizenship,” he explained.

According to the American Immigration Council, removing birthright citizenship for children born in the US would require a new constitutional amendment.

This process would need a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and Senate and ratification by three-quarters of the states — which the advocacy group described as an almost impossible political hurdle.

Shao also stressed that Trump’s argument that children of undocumented parents are not subject to US jurisdiction is legally baseless.

“This is a nonsense argument, because logically, if someone is not subject to American jurisdiction, then they are also not subject to American prosecution or deportation,” said Shao.

“Going back to the 14th Amendment, after saying that all persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens with full rights, the Constitution continues to say that all persons within the jurisdiction of the United States have the rights of due process and equal protection,” he added.

“They cannot deport you without giving you due process, which can take many years and layers of courts and appeals,” he continued.

Fil-Ams as low-risk group

“Despite the concerns surrounding Trump’s immigration policies for his upcoming presidential term, Shao remains optimistic that Fil-Ams in the US have little reason to fear, unless they or their ancestors used false documents to gain immigration benefits.

He also implied that statistically, they are less likely to face denaturalization or deportation issues.

“I am not personally aware of any cases of Filipino Americans being [denaturalized]. We are about 1 percent of the US population, but we are disproportionately law-abiding, better educated, and higher earning than the average American, let alone the average immigrant,” he said.

However, Shao emphasized that Filipino green card holders — also known as legal permanent residents — are at greater risk compared to Filipino US citizens.

“In some ways, it’s more dangerous to commit serious crimes as a green card holder. I’ve seen cases of people who came here as green card holders, committed crimes, and then got deported back to the Philippines,” he said.

“If they or their parents had gotten citizenship while they were kids, US citizenship is an absolute defense against deportation. I have actually gotten clients out of deportation proceedings by proving they were US citizens and couldn’t be deported,” he added.

’Tell the truth’

Shao’s advice to the Fil-Am community is straightforward: “[T]ell the truth. If you have a completely clean case with no criminal or immigration worries, then you should be fine. No matter who is president, good cases will win and bad cases will lose.”

However, he noted that administrative differences can impact cases in gray areas.

“If there is anything that you are worried about in your case — be it criminal violations, prior immigration overstays, false statements made by agencies on your behalf, or if you just want to stress less — please at least consult a professional immigration attorney for advice about your case. It is much better, cheaper, and less stressful to prevent problems than to go back and fix them after,” he said.

As a Filipino immigrant who has spent years navigating and addressing numerous cases of deportation, while consistently advocating for immigrants and their rights, he has emphasized the critical importance of seeking expert advice.

“Like you, I’m Filipino and an immigrant — I like saving money. But I have also learned that it is less stressful to hire an expert who can objectively weigh the strengths and weaknesses of your situation and offer you options. If you are worried, maybe it’s worth having a professional take a look at your case.”

Advocating for systemic change

Beyond addressing individual fears, Shao also highlighted systemic issues, such as long wait times for family reunification petitions.

“People forget that on the other side of the petition, there is an American citizen or green card holder wanting to be reunited with their loved one, or an American business in need of a Filipino to do work that no American worker is qualified for or willing to do,” he said.

“We need to continue to advocate for our community and not let the few bad durians ruin the reputation of Filipino Americans,” he added.

For many Filipino Americans, the family-based immigration system serves as a vital avenue for bringing their loved ones to the US. The system has been a lifeline, allowing them to support aging parents, care for siblings, or provide opportunities for their children.

However, immigrants from countries with high numbers of applicants, like the Philippines, often face years-long waits to receive a green card.

READ: What’s next for Fil-Am family petitions if Trump wins?

According to Shao, under Biden, over three-fourths of Filipino visa applications have been approved, and even under Trump, two-thirds were approved.

“The reality is not always what people perceive. If you look at actual data, most Filipino Americans are law-abiding people who shouldn’t be worried. The only people who should worry are the people who have done something wrong.”