Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Building a Stronger “We”: How to Talk About Immigrant Youth

News

Building a Stronger “We”: How to Talk About Immigrant Youth

Person standing next to a "We Are The Future" sign

Photo provided

The speed and severity with which the Trump administration has enacted anti-immigrant policies have surpassed many of our expectations. It’s created upheaval not just among immigrant communities but across our society. This upheaval is not incidental; it is part of a deliberate and consistent strategy to activate anti-immigrant sentiment and deeply entrenched, xenophobic Us vs. Them mindsets. With everything from rhetoric to policy decisions, the Trump administration has employed messaging aimed at marking immigrants as “dangerously other,” fueling division, harmful policies, and the deployment of ICE in our communities.

For those working to support immigrant adolescents and youth, the challenges are compounded by another pervasive mindset: the tendency to view adolescents as inherently “other.” FrameWorks Institute’s past research has shown that Americans often perceive adolescents as wild, out of control, or fundamentally different from adults. This lens of otherness, when combined with anti-immigrant sentiment, creates a double burden for immigrant youth, painting them as doubly removed from societal norms and belonging.


It is easy to feel overwhelmed and disheartened by these ongoing attacks. Communicating about immigrant youth has always been challenging, but the stakes today require more than routine messaging. They demand a shared framing strategy, one that pushes back against dangerous rhetoric and policies today while building support for immigrant youth over the long term. We have proven tools to change how the public understands immigrant youth, and those tools work best when we use them consistently and together, now and in the future.

Here’s the strategy:

  1. Appeal to our shared humanity.
    Lead with the idea that we all value human dignity and that supporting immigrant youth is an essential expression of that shared humanity. Start with this idea before discussing human rights.
  2. Link immigrant youth’s wellbeing to our collective wellbeing.
    Make clear connections between their wellbeing and the wellbeing of our communities and our society. Explain how we all benefit – now and in the future – when immigrant youth have what they need to thrive.
  3. Spotlight healthy adolescent development.
    Talk about adolescence as a critical period of opportunity and growth for immigrant youth. Draw on the well-framed elements of the Core Story of Adolescence to demonstrate what immigrant youth need to thrive and how we can support them.
  4. Pivot to humane, pragmatic solutions.
    When encountering opposition, shift toward practical, achievable, nonpunitive policies that benefit everyone. Describe solutions in concise, concrete, and collective ways.
  5. Move from crisis stories to policy stories.
    The current immigration situation is a crisis, but crisis framing can backfire. Rather than build sustained momentum, crisis messaging can lead to fatalism and fatigue. Instead, illustrate the urgency of this issue by contrasting humane and pragmatic immigration policies with the current punitive policies that negatively impact immigrant youths’ development. Counter fatalistic thinking by explaining how policies that provide pathways to legal status, protect families from separation, and allow access to health care, education, and social services support immigrant youth’s development and wellbeing.
  6. Center lived expertise.
    Build understanding and drive support for policy change through storytelling that highlights how young people’s experiences as immigrants have cultivated deep expertise and unique insights into the immigration system and the moment at hand.
  7. Explain how harmful policies affect all immigrant youth.
    Avoid the “worthiness trap” by clearly explaining the role of harmful policies for all immigrant youth, regardless of status or circumstances, then discuss effects for particular subsets of young people.
  8. Frame your data.
    Contextualize data with explanations and solutions. Instead of merely showing data, explain what it conveys, what solutions it calls for, and why we should care.

Building a Stronger “We”: How to Talk About Immigrant Youth was first published on FrameWorks and was republished with permission.


Read More

Group of young adult students sit at desks in classroom listening to teacher

Why do Americans respond so differently to hard history lessons? A look at the three psychological mindsets driving the patriotism debate — and a path past it.

Lighthouse Films/Getty Images

“They Hate America”: Patriotism in the Face of Historical Updates

I happened upon a civil discussion blog and read a post by a man who said he was happy to report that when he attended a panel discussion about teaching patriotism in the schools, all went well. He said that’s because most of the people in the bridging organization that hosted the event are “pretty patriotic.” He clarified that by writing, “None of the type of bad actors (and there are many) who want to teach kids to hate America and Western Civilization were represented.”

Someone made a comment about why we can’t incorporate historical change into curriculum and objected to the notion that a segment of the population wants to teach kids to hate America. The man who posted cited what he believes is proof. A last commenter simply input the emoji for a sleeping person, as though the argument was boring or unimportant.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Utah Governor Spencer Cox

Utah Governor Spencer Cox

Getty Images

Spencer Cox’s Off Ramp and Utah’s Tradition of Bipartisan Leadership

Utah has long impressed me as a place where governors take bipartisan leadership seriously, and my own experience confirms it. I first saw this more than a decade ago when I met former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman through No Labels. In January 2013, Huntsman, then a Republican, joined Democrat Joe Manchin as national co‑chairs of the organization, a partnership built on the belief that durable solutions require leaders willing to cross the aisle. Working with both of them during that period left a lasting impression on me. Their partnership embodied a simple but powerful truth: when leaders choose cooperation over contempt, they expand what’s possible for the country. Huntsman and Manchin worked deliberately to model cross‑partisan problem‑solving—demonstrating that principled disagreement can coexist with shared purpose.

That experience left a lasting impression on me, and it’s one reason Governor Spencer Cox’s new book Off Ramp: How to Be a Peacemaker in an Age of Contempt resonates so strongly with me today.

Keep ReadingShow less
Windows of a house

Low-angle view of two dormer windows protruding from townhouse roof

Grace Cary, Getty Images

Go Home

The distance from Washington, D.C., to my hometown of York, Pennsylvania, is 100 miles. When I worked as a Congressional staffer in D.C., I could get out of town and be back where I grew up in about an hour and a half, at least so long as I avoided rush hour traffic. Those last miles as I crossed the Pennsylvania-Maryland border brought a sense of gratitude for the relationships I would be keeping up. At my nephew’s soccer game, at an English-style pub with my long-time best friends, with my mother at the breakfast table having a local newspaper in her hands, life was ordinary.

I would return to work in D.C. feeling grounded. I felt better connected to

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol with a flag waving in front of it.

As Washington stalls, young bipartisan lawmakers in Alaska, Mississippi, and beyond are proving that cross-partisan collaboration still wins.

Douglas Rissing/Getty Images

The Politicians Who Can Fix America's Polarization Problem Will Win

Political predictions are notoriously unreliable, but here is one I am willing to stand behind: the elected officials who figure out how to govern across difference will dominate the next decade of American politics. With dysfunction and paralysis having become the status quo in Washington, elected officials who work together to get things done will turn heads, offering desperate voters a much-needed alternative to a broken system.

Consider what happened in Alaska last year. The state’s lawmaking structure does not encourage political independence. Alaska has the nation's highest veto-override threshold: three-quarters. So when a popular education bill promising smaller class sizes, a cellphone ban, and vocational training funding cleared the legislature, only to be vetoed twice by the governor, it looked dead in the water.

Keep ReadingShow less