Janet Murguía: ‘The threat is not only for immigrants, but for all americans’

Two weeks ago, the Supreme Court dealt a severe blow to Black and Latino minorities in Louisiana, issuing a ruling that weakens the protections of the Voting Rights Act. The decision also legitimizes an aggressive redistricting effort in favor of the Republican Party that will dilute Black electoral power across the South, and by its broad reach, it strikes Latino voters equally. Days later, in Virginia, the state Supreme Court struck down a redistricting plan approved just weeks earlier by referendum, nullifying an electoral map redesign that would have allowed Democrats to gain seats through multiracial coalitions. Until then, recapturing the House of Representatives in November’s midterms had seemed almost certain. Now, no one is so sure.

Janet Murguía knows that all of this is very bad news. She has led UnidosUS, the largest Latino civil rights organization in the United States, for over 20 years. Rarely before has this minority — the largest in the country — faced a landscape this hostile: culture wars and openly aggressive policies driven from the highest levels of power. The primary target is undocumented immigrants who have crossed the southern border, but the assault reaches established Latino communities as well. And that is only one front: cuts to the health care system threaten to leave more than six million Latinos who depend on the Affordable Care Act without coverage; the Supreme Court is eroding their political representation; electoral disinformation pursues and confuses them at every turn. As Murguía says: “Misinformation is also a form of voter suppression.” In short, what’s at stake isn’t one political stance or another. It’s Latinos’ very ability to stand up for themselves. The Democratic Party’s lack of a coherent response only heightens the sense of urgency.

Murguía weighs the moment, chooses her battles, and sets her sights on what she considers the next critical juncture: the midterm elections.

Question. Over 600,000 deportations in the first year of Trump’s second term. That number has already surpassed his entire first presidency. What qualitatively differentiates these mass deportations from previous administrations, including Obama’s, which was also criticized for the harshness of its immigration enforcement? Let’s not forget Barack Obama was called the “deporter-in-chief.”

Answer. I would say it’s significantly different. This is an administration that has prioritized the policy and execution of mass deportations in a way that has an significant impact: not just from a moral perspective, not just from a civil rights perspective, but also from an economic perspective. And we’re seeing the culmination of all three of those related areas undermining the ability of our country to function and move forward. What we’re seeing is this extreme enforcement having a direct impact on the civil rights not only of our Latino community, but also on long-standing contributing immigrants, and on U.S. citizens. We’re seeing the government’s overreach and abuse impacting the entire country. This policy is a threat not only to people who look like immigrants, not only to Hispanic or Latino communities, but to every American. And I want to repeat this clearly: President Trump is targeting people who are workers and who are not criminals; people who have been described as essential workers to our economy, who have been contributing to this country for decades. That is precisely what he said he wasn’t going to do. The disruption this policy is causing in local economies is reverberating across the country, and it is undermining our overall economic strength in ways we are only beginning to fully understand.

Q. Why is a large part of the American electorate still supporting Trump? If you look at what happened in Minnesota, or what we’re seeing in Los Angeles, his support seems to be holding.

A. I don’t think we can say that a large part of the American electorate is still supporting Trump. Every poll we have seen nationally, including polls we have conducted, shows that the president is at his lowest approval rating in the history of his presidency, either in his first term or his second one. In an April poll we did with Third Way, Donald Trump’s approval rating with Latino and Hispanic voters is down by 34 points, with over 66% disapproving. On the economy, it’s close to 70%.

Q. You’re right. I should have been more precise. What I meant to ask is why his core MAGA base remains strong, despite some fractures among traditional Republicans.

A. I do think we’re seeing a splintering of sorts among traditional Republicans. What changed significantly was the Minnesota surge in enforcement, which tragically resulted in the killing, some would say the murder, of two U.S. citizens by ICE and CBP agents. We saw a political backlash from that moment. Even Republicans who had supported the hard line are now changing the way they talk about immigration because it has hurt them. And we will see that playing out in the primaries. The actions themselves have not changed dramatically, but the politics are beginning to catch up. I don’t think we’ll ever fully penetrate the MAGA base. But beyond that, we are seeing real fracturing among traditional Republicans who are acknowledging they need to approach this issue differently.

Q. Is there any real possibility that the administration moderates its immigration policy?

A. I don’t think so. They may talk about immigration differently, but the actions are unlikely to change. What I do see is institutional friction. In Congress, there is a standoff over funding for ICE precisely because guardrails have not been put in place: judicial warrants before entering homes without consent, clear identification by federal agents, protections for sensitive locations like schools, churches, and hospitals, body cameras with privacy protections and public access to footage. These are the guardrails we are insisting on, and so far there has been no agreement. Democrats have said they will not provide additional funding without them. That withholding of dollars can have some impact. But on the contrary, I do see this administration doubling and tripling down on another front: threats to elections, voter suppression, and what we are calling election subversion. If they can’t get their way on immigration, they are going to work very hard to challenge democratic norms and break them down in every way they can as it relates to elections. What we’re seeing play out right now with congressional redistricting maps is a sign of exactly that intent.

Q. You have documented that fewer than 10% of those detained in current raids have convictions for violent crimes. Is the national security narrative simply a cover for systematic racial profiling?

A. What we have seen, astonishingly, is the Supreme Court becoming so politicized that the court’s majority has given this administration the green light to use extreme tactics that anyone would describe as racial profiling: roving patrols stopping individuals based on appearance alone, without any probable cause beyond how they look. That would have been considered unconstitutional not long ago. The real catalyst for this administration’s actions has been this ruling by a Supreme Court that is acting in a political manner unlike anything we have seen in decades. That is what I think is contributing to so many of the changes we’re seeing, and why checks on the balance of power by this executive become even more important. It’s why the outcome of the midterm elections this coming November will be so consequential. We need to see whether Congress will ultimately assert its own authority and challenge this administration’s actions, many of which have been carried out by executive order, far beyond what the Constitution permits.

Q. Can citizen mobilization like the protests we saw in Minneapolis effectively pressure Congress to halt mass deportations?

A. I believe that citizen mobilization — people power, to use a phrase that’s popular right now — using our voice to mobilize, to protest peacefully, to resist in a nonviolent way, is essential. A lot of the work we’ve been doing has been part of coalitions that challenge these extreme and unconstitutional enforcement actions where we can, providing training so that people know their rights and know how to document what is happening. That very evidence, video representations of what has occurred, helps us make the case for what is true and what is not. We know that this administration, and certainly under the helm of former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, blatantly lied about what occurred in some of these enforcement actions. Being the eyes, the ears, and the voice of people who cannot speak for themselves is something we can all do, and it can make a difference. But beyond that, we firmly believe that our vote ultimately can change things. If we’ve learned anything in these past years, it’s that who we elect matters in a very big way in terms of how our government leads and the impact its actions have on its citizenry. The November elections may be among the most important we have ever had.

Q. Looking ahead to the midterms, what is your concrete strategy to mobilize the Latino vote in key states like Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, and Pennsylvania? And how do you plan to counter the disinformation that is circulating about candidates, issues, and the voting process itself?

A. Over the last 10 to 12 years, we’ve registered over a million Hispanic voters, and we are going to continue to build on that record. We’re working in coalition with other organizations that have deep community-based connections, and voter turnout will be our top priority this year. But registration is not enough. We have to mobilize, inform, and fight disinformation. And in this cycle, disinformation is one of the biggest obstacles we face. So much of what we’re up against is the misinformation about candidates, about issues, and about actual voting processes. That is why trusted organizations like ours that are rooted in community matter so much. We are not an app or a social media account. When people don’t know who to trust, they tend to turn to those who have been there for them. We’ve been advocates for our community for decades, and we’re going to count on that authenticity as we communicate with them. We will also be using every social media platform that our community looks to. At the end of the day, people are going to turn to those who have helped them and their communities to make distinctions. We are going to make sure they are getting truthful, accurate information about how to vote, when to vote, and what is at stake.

Q. Recent analysis shows Black voters’ identification with the Democratic Party fell from 77% in 2020 to 66% in 2023. And 40% of Latino voters who voted for Trump in 2024 now consider it a mistake. Do you fear this simultaneous partisan realignment becomes an existential crisis for Democrats in 2026 and 2028?

A. There is a lot of disillusionment with the Democratic Party, and I think we have to acknowledge that plainly. In the Texas primaries this past spring, we did polling and post-election interviews, and what we found was that over 50% of Hispanic voters were not contacted by either party or either candidate. That is something both parties should be ashamed of. Democrats cannot take comfort in the fact that a lot of people are dissatisfied with President Trump and the Republican Party right now. They need to paint a vision for this country, one where Latino voters, where African American voters, see themselves as a central part of the future. And that means, inevitably, overcoming their fear of immigration. When a party is afraid of an issue, it does not lead on that issue. Democrats need to reset and think seriously about an immigration solution that is integrally tied to the economic future of this country, one that recognizes we need more workers, not fewer, and that moving a generation of people who have worked and contributed out of the shadows is not only morally right, it is an economic imperative. Until we see that kind of leadership, I don’t know that we’ll see the full-throated engagement our community needs and deserves.

Q. Latinos generate over $3 trillion in economic output, larger than all but four of the world’s largest economies. Why doesn’t that economic power translate into proportional political power?

A. The figure is $4.1 trillion. And the answer is the systematic underinvestment in our civic engagement. It is a pattern that repeats itself, and what we saw in Texas is not an exception. Both parties have underinvested in registering our community, in mobilizing eligible Latino voters, in doing the meaningful outreach that would actually move people to the polls. And now we have a new and serious threat layered on top of that: the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which essentially eviscerated the safeguards Congress had enacted to protect the voting power of minority communities. That case was highlighted with Black voters in the South, but the decision will impact Hispanic representation in California, Arizona, Texas, New York, and other states across this country. So we are facing both an economic resource challenge and direct threats to our constitutional protections. But we are going to continue to engage, and to do our part to make sure that more Latino and Hispanic voters are represented in these elections.

Q. You grew up in Kansas and have said your family embodied the American dream. For millions of Latinos today, that dream seems out of reach. What is the Latino dream in 2026, and how does it differ from the traditional American dream?

A. I don’t think it differs a lot from the traditional American dream. What I do believe is that there is a very real threat to that dream today, from both an economic and a civil rights perspective. But our community does not give up easily on the big dreams and hopes they have for their future, and for their families and their children. We have proven that we are willing to work hard and sacrifice for it, that we have been resilient through all of this. The dream is still centered on what it has always been: access to health care, to education, a job, a home. Economic opportunity is central to breaking down barriers and creating a future for our community, and we have more than shown that we are worthy of that chance, and that our contributions benefit this country. But we need to be able to show our families that those contributions will benefit their lives too. We are never, ever going to give up on keeping that dream alive. It is being threatened, there is no doubt about it. But we will continue to fight for it.

Q. And not only economically. The cultural space seems to be under threat as well, the ability to contribute and be recognized culturally within this society. If that space is denied, it becomes much harder to truly belong and to thrive.

A. You’re right, and it’s an important point. Beyond the immigration policies, what we are seeing from this administration is an effort, and I’m not going to shy away from saying this, that goes beyond flirting with white supremacy and white nationalism. There are key representatives in this White House with ties to people who do not recognize the contributions of our community and want to minimize our future ability to make them. That is a deeply worrisome and concerning challenge. But in the meantime, we are going to continue to focus on what we can do to see a shift and a real check on the balance of power of this administration, which we believe has acted in ways that are unlawful and unconstitutional. That fight is not only about policy. It is about who we are, and about the place we have earned in this country.

Boris Muñoz is a journalist and editor. He founded and led the Opinion section of The New York Times en Español. He is a columnist for EL PAÍS.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition