This statement can be attributed to Wendy Chun-Hoon, president and executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
Washington, D.C., September 16, 2025—On September 8, 2025, the Supreme Court issued an unsigned order stating that federal agents could continue to detain people and question them about their immigration status based on one or more of these factors: presumed race or ethnicity; speaking Spanish or speaking English with an accent; type of employment; and being in an area deemed to have a high concentration of migrants and immigrants. These factors amount to racial profiling and permit policing based on assumptions, biases, and prejudices. Lower courts had issued temporary restraining orders prohibiting the government from employing these aggressive tactics, which violate the Fourth Amendment.
The Court’s order has, at least temporarily, legitimized racial profiling across an untold number of populations, putting millions of U.S. citizens and noncitizens alike at immediate risk. This order erodes the constitutional right of due process, normalizes and expands pre-emptive and discretionary powers given to law enforcement agents, and negates a core tenet of the American justice system: “innocent until proven guilty.”
The case is still pending at the Ninth Circuit, which will hear the full appeal. CLASP supports the previous lower court ruling and will continue to advocate against administrative actions that harm immigrant communities and communities of color.
Washington, D.C., September 12, 2025—This week, rulings on two different court challenges ensured that immigrant families will continue to have access to Head Start and other important programs. Earlier this year, several federal agencies issued notices that would reinterpret the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) to restrict eligibility for some federal programs to “qualified immigrants,” in some cases expanding the list of what are considered “federal public benefits.” Last month, CLASP submitted comments in opposition to this harmful new interpretation. At the same time, several court cases challenged the legality of these actions.
The first case, filed by attorneys general in 20 states and Washington, D.C., challenged the federal government’s reinterpretation of PRWORA and resulted in a preliminary injunction blocking the implementation of the reinterpretation in those states and D.C. This challenge was across three government agencies: the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Education, and the Department of Labor. In states not covered by the lawsuit, any changes to program eligibility and an implementation timeline are still contingent on additional guidance.
The second case, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, challenged this interpretation, specifically as it relates to Head Start. Yesterday, a federal judge granted a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking the directive to exclude immigrant children in Head Start nationwide.
“These court rulings are important victories for immigrant families and our country. Unfortunately, so much damage has already been done because these directives have instilled fear, along with the fact that other actions of this administration—including unprecedented immigration enforcement measures—have caused significant harm,” said Wendy Chun-Hoon, CLASP’s president and executive director. “We believe that every family should have access to the programs and services they need to thrive, and we will keep fighting until that happens.”
Administration officials have already taken steps to challenge these rulings, as their goal is to reduce access to and ultimately dismantle these important programs. The well-being of our next generation depends on protecting these programs and the children and families they have served for decades.
By Wendy Cervantes
As Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activities continue to impact communities and more children face the loss of a parent to deportation, it’s important to remember that policymakers across party lines have taken steps in the past to mitigate the harm of immigration enforcement on children. There has been an understanding that, regardless of differing views on immigration policy, ultimately no child should be unnecessarily separated from a loving parent. It is one of the reasons there was so much public outcry against the first Trump Administration’s horrific zero-tolerance policy that ripped kids away from their parents at the border.
For example, for more than 30 years there has been some form of a policy in place to restrict enforcement actions in places like schools and hospitals. Similarly, longstanding guidelines have ensured that during large enforcement actions, like worksite operations, protocols are in place to screen for parents and to provide advance notice to schools and child protective services. And for over a decade, an ICE directive has sought to ensure that parents detained by ICE have the ability to make decisions about their children’s care and participate in necessary proceedings if they have a child in the state child welfare system.
While some of these protective policies have been rescinded, the directive related to protections for detained parents was replaced by a new directive under the Trump Administration in July 2025 entitled “Detention and Removal of Alien Parents and Legal Guardians of Minor Children” (“2025 directive”), replacing the Biden-era parental interest directive from 2022.
This blog identifies key changes in the latest directive; what ICE protocols are still in place; how the directive can be used for oversight and accountability, even in today’s environment; and actions Congress can take to protect the rights of parents in ICE custody.
While the 2025 directive is, overall, weaker than the 2022 parental interest directive, it continues to provide guidance on many important protections to preserve parental decisions and keep ICE accountable to procedures that are meant to protect parental rights. Among the main differences are the removal of protections for legal guardians of incapacitated adults, which was a new expansion under the 2022 directive, and the removal of humanitarian parole to enter the country for a termination of parental rights hearing. However, several protocols that are intended to afford parents the time and ability to make informed decisions and appropriate preparations for their children are still in the 2025 version.
The 2025 directive outlines the ways in which ICE is to enable parents to make decisions about their children’s care and safety at the point of arrest, prior to removal, and throughout the removal process. It also provides protocols to help enable parents to visit with their children, and ensures that parents who have children in the child welfare system are able to engage in the reunification process, including the ability to participate in relevant court hearings. Importantly, the directive is applicable to parents and guardians of all minor children, not just U.S. citizen children.
Organizations, attorneys, advocates, community members, and lawmakers can use the directive to help bring ICE into compliance with its own policies. It is important for attorneys and providers who are working with parents preparing for possible deportation to know about the policy and the protections they should demand from ICE if they are detained and facing deportation. For child welfare practitioners, it is important for them to understand how they can ensure ICE is allowing detained parents to participate in child welfare proceedings and meet other requirements.
Advocates and other stakeholders must demand transparency, including access to information that the directive is required to track—such as the number of people with parental interests in ICE custody, the number who have been deported, and whether or not they were afforded the opportunity to make decisions regarding their children. This both ensures consistent implementation of the directive and that the public more fully understands the extent to which ICE enforcement actions affect children.
Codifying and strengthening the types of protections included in the directive is the best solution to preserve the rights of parents in ICE custody. Legislation should allow for parents and legal guardians of minor children to be considered for release to continue to care and provide for their children. This was a key piece of the original 2013 directive, but was later removed. Legislation should also extend protocols to all entities working with ICE, including local police who are collaborating on conducting enforcement actions. Additionally, legislation should strengthen data collection and transparency related to the directive. Short of legislation, Congress can also hold ICE accountable to its implementation of the directive through oversight measures.
Research has consistently found that immigration enforcement harms children and families. A study by CLASP conducted under the first Trump Administration found that even children as young as three were demonstrating symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder simply due to the fear of possibly losing a parent. The heartbreaking reality is that millions of children are living with that same fear today as increased ICE arrests—fueled by unprecedented funding levels—tear through communities across the country. Thus, while it is expected that deportation efforts will continue to escalate and families will continue to be at risk, the 2025 directive serves as an important tool to help protect the rights of parents facing deportation.
For more information on the detained parent directive, please see these resources:
Washington, D.C., September 9, 2025—Today’s release of the U.S. Census Bureau’s national Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance data for 2024 shows that while the overall economy is strong, the nation has much more to do to reduce poverty, especially among women and Black Americans.
For the most part, the poverty rate remained largely unchanged from 2023 to 2024. But the poverty rate among Black Americans increased from 17.9 percent in 2023 to 18.4 percent in 2024. And while overall child poverty rates dropped very slightly from 2023, the number of Black children living in poverty increased from 20.3 percent in 2023 to 22.7 percent in 2024, according to the Supplemental Poverty Measure. This measure looks at not simply earnings, but the resources people have after factoring in work and medical expenses, taxes, as well as tax credits and non-cash benefits.
For the second year in a row, women faced a large earnings gap. The median earnings for women in 2024 were $45,380, while the median earnings for men were $60,020. This gap is greater than in 2023, when median earnings for women were $43,200 and $57,740 for men.
“These numbers are not surprising,” said Wendy Chun-Hoon, president and executive director of CLASP. “The wage gap between men and women has existed for decades, as has the disparity in Black poverty rates compared to the rest of the country. While the nation has made incremental improvements, the reasons for these disparities are systemic, and we must do more to disrupt them. There’s no silver bullet to remedy these inequalities; rather, we need sustained investments to close the gender-racial wage gap—higher wages, more equal access to quality jobs, affordable family care, equitable tax policy, and paid leave. We should solve for people’s basic needs, not eviscerate our social safety net.”
Signs already point to a weakening economy in 2025. For instance, the August 2025 Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) jobs report showed an addition of only 22,000 jobs last month, well below economists’ expectations, and unemployment at a four-year high of 4.3 percent.
Black families are the last to do well, even when the economy is growing. The most recent BLS report made that clear, showing the unemployment rate for white men was 3.7 percent, but was 7.1 percent for Black men. The report also showed the unemployment rate for Black women was 6.7 percent, compared to 3.2 percent for white women.
The gender wage gap persists for a variety of reasons, notably that women are still concentrated in some of the lowest-paid jobs, the price of child care remains out of reach for families, and employers are implementing return-to-office policies. The real-world effects of inflexible work policies and unaffordable care are already being felt: the share of working mothers ages 25-44 in the labor market has fallen every month in 2025 and dropped three percentage points between January and June. This is the lowest level of labor force participation from women with children in more than three years.
Increased poverty in 2025 is all but assured due to the severe restructuring of programs that support basic needs in July’s reconciliation bill and the Trump Administration’s executive actions aimed at people with low incomes, immigrant families, women, people of color, and other historically marginalized communities. Congress, with the administration’s approval, has consistently chosen to exclude many families with low incomes and immigrants from the Child Tax Credit, cut Medicaid and SNAP, increase immigration enforcement, and boost tax breaks for the ultra-rich.
“The president promised to lower costs. He and this Congress have clearly broken that promise for so many, making it more expensive for families to afford not just gas and milk but other family basics like housing, health care, and child care. This is not just a broken promise. It’s a breach of contract to the American people,” said Chun-Hoon.
Poverty is not inevitable. It’s the direct result of policy decisions. We know how to reduce it, and now it’s time for policymakers to choose dignity for all and invest in our communities.
By Lulit Shewan
Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is a legal status that was created by Congress in 1990 to provide work permits and protection from deportation to migrants from designated countries where conditions like war and natural disasters can make it unsafe for people to return. While this program was initially intended to be temporary because it does not provide a pathway to permanent legal residence (green card) or citizenship, over a million people have relied on the program and built enduring ties to the United States. TPS has allowed them to better adjust to life in the U.S., earn money to support themselves and their families, and contribute to their communities.
The Trump Administration and its Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are following through on their plans to come after TPS and strip hundreds of thousands of migrants of their legal status. Discontinuing TPS status will immediately render beneficiaries undocumented, deprived of legal standing, and exposed to the threat of detention and deportation. Curtailing TPS is yet another instance of the Trump Administration demonizing a humanitarian program to satisfy its anti-immigrant agenda and create new deportation pathways for those who have established their lives here.
The author would like to thank CLASP colleagues Lorena Roque and Suma Setty for their data extraction of TPS-eligible individuals by state, as well as Sivan Sherriffe for the design of this paper. The author would also like to thank former Hunger Fellow Emily Rodriguez for her thoughtful contributions to the writing and data analysis in this paper.
By Rachel Wilensky and Stephanie Schmit
As Congress negotiates the fiscal year (FY) 2026 appropriations package, another year of level funding for the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG), which has been proposed in the House Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies bill marked up this week, would result in more children losing access to child care. CLASP estimates that the impact of level funding will mean approximately 24,000 fewer children will have access to child care through CCDBG in FY26. The compounded impact of two years of stagnant funding would mean nearly 50,000 fewer children have access to child care assistance.
>> Read the full fact sheet here
This statement can be attributed to Wendy Chun-Hoon, president and executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
Washington, D.C., September 3, 2025—On September 9, the U.S. Census Bureau will release national Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance data for 2024. We expect the numbers to show more poverty in 2024, particularly among children, and more people without health insurance. When we see the data, however, we must consider that the outlook for 2025 and beyond is ominous, given how precipitously the conditions for people facing economic insecurity have declined this year.
Since the beginning of President Trump’s second term, the administration and Congress have unleashed a cascade of attacks on people with low incomes, including communities of color, immigrants and their families, and others who have been historically marginalized. These attacks have included slashing public benefit programs; issuing executive orders dismantling diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility initiatives; ripping families apart through a horrific mass deportation effort and gutting protections and services to immigrants, including U.S. citizen children; eliminating labor protections for millions of workers; and decimating the nation’s data collection efforts that are critical to accurate and equitable decision-making. Through these and other actions, the Trump Administration’s reckless disregard for people’s health, safety, and well-being will have dire consequences for the future of the country.
These attacks are particularly evident in the reconciliation bill passed by Congress, which is causing unprecedented harm to workers, people of color, immigrants, women, and children. In addition to excluding many families with low incomes from the Child Tax Credit, the bill cuts essential benefit programs, including Medicaid and SNAP. Although these changes will not be fully implemented until 2026 and beyond, they are already having a chilling effect among people who rely on these programs to meet their basic needs. Congress made these cuts to fund historic increases in immigration enforcement that undermine family unity and well-being and to provide tax cuts to the wealthy, which will only exacerbate poverty and wealth inequality.
The September 9 data will likely show another annual increase in people without health insurance coverage. The end of Covid-era protections for Medicaid coverage caused many people to lose coverage in 2024, although the availability of enhanced premium tax credits in the Marketplace likely offset some Medicaid losses. Congress’s action in 2025 to cut Medicaid and enhanced Marketplace tax credits by more than $1 trillion is estimated to cause nearly 15 million people to lose coverage in the coming years.
The full effect of millions of people losing health insurance, food assistance, and other supports—and how that loss will harm not just individuals but their families, communities, and the larger economy—will drive even more people deeper into poverty and instability for years to come.
We will have more to say after the Census Bureau releases the data next week. For now, CLASP reiterates our commitment to fighting for policies that center the dignity and autonomy of all people, especially those whom the Trump Administration and the current majority in Congress are most focused on harming with their punitive and dangerous actions.
By Parthenia Tawfik*
No child should have to think about whether their mom ate breakfast. But in many immigrant families across the United States, that small sacrifice is not an exception—it’s the norm. So are lunch boxes packed with too little, and school days that start with hunger pangs. These moments may feel invisible, but they have deep consequences. They affect how children learn, how caregivers function, and how families feel a sense of belonging in the communities they call home. And as the impact of President Trump’s budget reconciliation law becomes clear, even more families will find themselves making these same dreadful choices.
While policy decisions shape the framework of who has access to food, the story doesn’t end there. Even when families technically qualify for benefits, factors like social and cultural barriers, language gaps, stigma, misinformation, and fear often determine whether that access becomes reality. If we want to address child hunger in immigrant communities, we can’t just look at eligibility. We must also look at the lived experience of trying to feed a family in a country where accessing benefits means filling out numerous forms, navigating a language barrier, and encountering far too many snap judgments and assumptions.
The effects of food insecurity ripple far beyond the dinner table. Children who don’t eat regularly experience more behavioral issues, lower academic performance, and higher rates of emotional stress. Research shows both that students facing hunger score lower on reading and math assessments and that providing school breakfast is associated with fewer disciplinary infractions and better attendance and tardiness rates. These outcomes make it clear why federal nutrition assistance programs are so critical to both addressing immediate hunger relief and supporting long-term health, education, and stability.
Yet in 2025, access to these programs became significantly harder. Most SNAP recipients are U.S. citizens. Lawful permanent residents become eligible after five years, while refugees and asylees can qualify sooner; as can certain children and pregnant individuals. But under President Trump’s recent budget reconciliation law, major changes went into effect that directly target immigrant families.
The bill expanded work requirements, mandating that most adults between 18 and 64, including those with dependents, work at least 80 hours per month to maintain eligibility. But the reality is that most SNAP recipients are already working, caring for a family member, or temporarily between jobs. Research consistently shows that work requirements do not improve employment outcomes but instead create red tape and make it harder for people to keep the support they need.
For immigrant families, who already face eligibility restrictions like five-year bars for lawful permanent residents, pro-rated benefits in mixed-status households, and confusion over public charge messaging, these expanded work mandates risk deepening food insecurity by raising barriers just when access is most crucial. The bill also shifted financial responsibility to states, creating a chilling effect as local administrators face the difficult task of implementing the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) upcoming guidance on this provision. Most alarmingly, the reconciliation bill barred eligibility for asylum seekers, temporary protected status holders, trafficking survivors, and refugee populations, groups that previously had immediate or easier access to food assistance.
A request from the USDA that states share SNAP applicant data, including immigration status and details on non-applicant household members, has only further compounded fear and confusion. While a number of states have sued the USDA over these requests, for many mixed-status families, this has created a chilling effect, where eligible members choose not to apply at all. The Urban Institute projects that over 22 million families could lose benefits under the bill, including 5 million that may lose at least $25 per month. These policy shifts don’t just tweak technical rules. They fundamentally alter who gets to eat and who doesn’t.
Even when families remain eligible, navigating the system isn’t straightforward, especially if English isn’t their first language. Many SNAP applications are only available in English or have poor-quality translations. For Limited-English-Proficient (LEP) families, that means relying on community whispers, social media threads, or outdated news. Misinformation spreads easily, and in immigrant communities, which are reeling from years of punitive policies and currently seeing ramped–up enforcement activities, fear is potent.
Some programs are working to bridge this divide. Cornell University’s Translator-Interpreter Program (TIP), an organization I am proud to be a part of, connects multilingual students with over 300 local organizations to expand access to key services and benefits for non-English-speaking communities. These students have translated everything from food safety trainings for immigrant dining hall workers to SNAP applications for local families. Every time someone says, “Now I get it,” the barrier shrinks a little.
Policy and paperwork are only part of the issue. For many immigrant families, the deeper barrier is cultural. In some communities, accepting food aid is equated with failure, something shameful, or embarrassment. Parents worry that neighbors will judge them; children skip free meals to avoid being labeled “poor.” These internalized beliefs can be just as limiting as ineligibility itself, and the result is the same: families who could get help don’t.
There are ways to address this barrier without adding to stigma. For instance, both the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and Urban Institute note that schools that adopt universal free meals or “Breakfast in the Classroom” programs see participation rise significantly, especially among children of immigrants. In Detroit, when schools began offering halal options, immigrant student participation in breakfast programs rose by 60 percent. When food feels familiar, students feel like they belong. They show up ready to learn, to socialize, and to connect. And when children thrive, their families do, too. Caregivers can work, study, and build consistent routines with less stress and more dignity. When everyone eats, no one feels singled out. Meals become moments of community, not reminders of need.
There are many myths around SNAP, including fraud, cost, and whether immigrants should use public aid. SNAP is explicitly excluded from public charge evaluations under current Department of Homeland Security rules. In addition, research from the National Conference of State Legislatures shows that expanding translated applications and using trained interpreters actually increases uptake without increasing misuse. Finally, cutting SNAP doesn’t save money. It simply shifts the burden to emergency rooms, food banks, and schools – places that aren’t built to bear the weight of widespread hunger.
Ensuring equitable food access also strengthens public health, economic efficiency, and community resilience. Every SNAP dollar spent generates $1.50 to $1.80 in local economic activity. When children are well-fed, they miss fewer school days, perform better academically, and grow into healthier, more productive adults. Over time, that means lower health care and emergency aid costs and fewer lost wages.
But beyond the numbers, this is about who we are as a society. How we treat our neighbors, especially in moments of vulnerability, reflects our collective values and our commitment to human dignity. Expanding SNAP access and outreach in immigrant communities and protecting the privacy of recipients is not only sound policy. It is a statement that every person’s well-being matters.
Ultimately, there need to be policies and practices backed by public investments that are responsive to the real needs of people in this country. Until then, schools and community centers can adopt TIP-style interpreter programs to break down language barriers. School districts and other child-focused settings should incorporate culturally familiar foods into their menus to ensure every child feels seen.
Policymakers and funders need to protect and expand outreach in immigrant neighborhoods, not scale it back. And for the rest of us, small actions matter such as volunteering at food banks, asking how programs serve LEP clients, or starting language-access efforts in our own communities. We must also have honest conversations within our communities to destigmatize receiving public benefits. Normalizing support helps ensure that everyone feels empowered to access the resources they need.
Imagine a cafeteria where every lunch tray reflects a different culture, and every stomach is full. Imagine a food system built not on fear or paperwork, but on dignity and belonging. That’s not a fantasy. It’s a future we can build. One plate, one program, one translated form at a time.
*Parthenia Tawfik was a Zero Hunger Intern at CLASP, where she supported the Child Care and Early Education Team. She is a student at Cornell University studying Political Science and Near Eastern Studies, and a member of the Translator-Interpreter Program, which works to support immigrant and refugee communities by bridging language gaps in access to public services. As an Egyptian American, Parthenia brings a strong commitment to language justice, cultural inclusion, and community-centered policy solutions.
CLASP is grateful for the opportunity to work with Parthenia this summer and for all her important contributions.
This statement can be attributed to Wendy Cervantes, director of Immigration and Immigrant Families at the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)
August 21, 2025, Washington, D.C.,—On Monday, August 25, a Trump Administration rule will go into effect that strips health care coverage through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) from Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients. This comes at a time when DACA recipients and their families face harsh immigrant enforcement actions and increased barriers to basic needs programs.
Due to the persistent advocacy of CLASP, immigrant leaders, and other organizations, the Biden Administration issued a rule that allowed individuals with DACA to purchase health coverage through the ACA Marketplace starting on November 1, 2024—after more than a decade of being wrongfully denied such coverage. With access to health insurance, DACA recipients have been able to build healthier, more stable lives for themselves and their families.
A 2024 survey found that DACA recipients were nearly three times more likely to be unsinured than U.S. citizens. Removing access to ACA coverage will leave thousands of DACA recipients without anywhere else to turn for affordable health coverage. This rule will not only impact DACA recipients, but also the children in their households who benefit when their parents are healthy and are more likely to have access to health care themselves when their parents do. Nearly a third of DACA recipients are parents, according to a 2023 survey.
The end of health coverage for DACA recipients comes as the DACA program itself faces an uncertain future and families across the country are beginning to feel the devastating effects of Trump’s budget reconciliation bill, including cuts to health care coverage, food assistance, and other programs that help keep children and families out of poverty. With tax cuts for billionaires and the largest budget in U.S. history for immigrant detention and deportation, it is clear that the administration’s strategy of gutting basic needs resources for individuals and families has nothing to do with cost savings—it’s about cruelty.
CLASP firmly condemns this rule that will deny thousands of parents, breadwinners, entrepreneurs, and students the hard-won and short-lived lifeline of access to affordable health coverage. As members of Congress prepare to return to Washington in just a few weeks, we urge them to finally deliver on a pathway to citizenship for DACA recipients and other immigrant youth, and invest in solutions that ensure all parents and children can lead healthy lives with dignity.
CLASP writes in opposition to the harmful new interpretation the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is taking in regard to the definition of a “Federal public benefit” under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. We respectfully submit this comment urging the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to withdraw this proposed rule in its entirety.