
Apu Gomes / AFP via Getty Images
What Feminist Wins Can Teach Us About Immigration
Past feminist policy victories can guide the way toward more humane and effective immigration reform. The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994 is a prime example—its architects successfully integrated immigration protections for women into a broader effort to combat gender-based violence. By framing immigrant women’s rights as part of protecting all women from abuse, advocates made it harder for opponents to isolate or attack these provisions. That approach, centered on shared values rather than political fault lines, offers a valuable lesson: Immigration reform succeeds when it’s connected to the broader goals of safety, equality and community well-being.
Today, we need a similar framework to move the immigration debate beyond fear and division. A new vision—what I call the RESPECTED framework, for Restoring Economic Opportunity, Protecting Every Community, and Treating Everyone with Dignity—invites us to see immigration policy not as an isolated crisis but as part of building a fairer, safer and more prosperous society.
Legalization, for example, shouldn’t just be about paperwork—it’s about removing barriers that keep women in low-wage, unsafe jobs and making economic opportunity real for everyone.
Ultimately, the RESPECTED approach asks a simple but transformative question: How can immigration policy help us build the future we want together? By embedding immigration reform within shared priorities—economic security, community safety and human dignity—we can replace the politics of exclusion with a politics of belonging.
The struggle is far from over, especially for women fleeing violence and seeking asylum. But if we listen, learn and lead with respect, we can carry forward the feminist lessons that made change possible before—and make them work again today.
Get the Ms. Weekly News Digest:
Sign UpThe Supreme Court Is Back in Session. What Fresh Hell Awaits? (with Steve Vladeck)
This last Supreme Court term was harrowing—from momentous merits decisions about the First Amendment, parental rights, trans rights and more, to the stream of shocking “shadow docket” decisions and its enabling of many of the Trump administration’s executive actions. What does the 2025-2026 term have in store for our nation? What do we think will advance through the Court? What do we think will come up, when it comes to the shadow docket? And perhaps most importantly, how will the Court choose to mediate the Trump administration’s continued onslaught of executive actions?
From the Magazine:
Get Ms.’s award-winning feminist reporting delivered directly to your mailbox!
-
Immigration Isn’t a Problem—It’s Part of the Solution
The challenges facing women seeking asylum are just one piece of a much larger immigration crisis decades in the making. Since the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, the U.S. system has skewed toward deportation, introduced new barriers to asylum and limited judges’ discretion.
Advocates say the resulting system fuels chaos, disrupts families and touches every aspect of society—from economic opportunity to civic trust.
Cynthia Buiza, former executive director of the California Immigrant Policy Center, argues that fixing immigration requires a broader vision. “Rather than focus solely on reforming immigration laws, we need to pass laws that incorporate immigration into broader objectives such as improving the economy, promoting opportunities for youth or addressing disparities in the judicial system,” she says.
Programs like Welcoming America show that community-based solutions can help. By fostering inclusion and mutual understanding, local initiatives demonstrate that immigration reform doesn’t have to exist in isolation—it can be part of a larger framework that benefits everyone.
Jose Eduardo Torres Cancino / Anadolu via Getty Images

Yearning to Breathe Free
In the matter of K-E-S-G-, a Salvadoran woman stalked and threatened by gang members was denied asylum by the U.S. Board of Immigration Appeals on July 18, even though her persecution stemmed from her gender in a country that treats women as property. Advocates warn that this ruling could make it much harder for women fleeing violence to prove gender-based claims and may embolden immigration judges to discount their stories.
“This isn’t the first time the Trump administration has singled out women seeking asylum, and we know where this path leads,” said Neela Chakravartula of the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies. “More judges denying protection to women who qualify for it. More refugees being deported to danger.”
The decision highlights the ongoing struggle to recognize gender as a protected basis for asylum. Afghan and Salvadoran women, among others, may now face even steeper barriers to protection—a chilling effect that experts say could deter survivors from seeking safety in the U.S.