A coalition of Connecticut advocates wants lawmakers to strengthen the state's immigration law.

Lawmakers have discussed bolstering the Trust Act after President Donald Trump signed 10 executive orders targeting undocumented immigrants, though some face legal challenges.

Chelsea-Infinity Gonzalez, director of public policy and advocacy for the ACLU of Connecticut, said bolstering the Trust Act aligns with similar regional action.

"Ensuring effective enforcement to a private right of action, ensuring there are pathways for individuals to report any violation to the Trust Act, eliminating unnecessary data sharing and collection, and making it clear Connecticut resources and officials can't be used for any federal immigration enforcement," Gonzalez outlined.

She added the Trust Act is a good first step but strengthening the enforcement mechanism ensures immigrants do not have to fear law enforcement. The primary challenge to get reforms is resistance from lawmakers because of what Gonzalez called the politicization of immigrants. Lawmakers' feedback ranges from strong approval to deep concern for public safety.

Beyond politicization, Gonzalez argued immigrants and the Trust Act have been victims of misinformation from lawmakers. Gonzalez noted some falsely claimed the Trust Act would make Connecticut a sanctuary for immigrants to commit crimes. She acknowledged a hyper-focus on cases like the killing of Laken Riley becomes political talking points and distracts from the issues immigrants face.

"A lot of it is rooted in isolated instances that are being overly politicized to undermine protections for immigrant families who rely on things like the Trust Act or on other protections," Gonzalez contended.

There are concerns the newly passed federal Laken Riley Act, mandating detention for illegal immigrants arrested on some minor charges, could also impact the Trust Act. Gonzalez noted there is plenty of overlap but strengthening state laws protects immigrants from federal actions spurred on by the new law.


get more stories like this via email

Immigrants' rights groups are speaking out against the Trump administration's decision to start requiring people who did not enter with a visa to register with the federal government - a first step toward deportation. Immigrants would have to carry proof of their registration at all times, or risk criminal prosecution.

Minerva Mendoza, program coordinator with the Pan Valley Institute in Fresno, says this policy - combined with recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids - has created a pervasive sense of fear in the community.

"I've been with organization, I want to say 12 years, and I haven't seen it this bad. Some of the farm workers I know have limited their public outings. Many of them don't feel safe going grocery shopping," she explained

The Pan Valley Institute is distributing door hangers that let people know they don't have to open the door unless ICE agents have a warrant. They also recently organized a celebration for International Women's Day in the town of Madera - in order to bring the community groups together. They also sponsor the ArteVism Fellowship Program, which fosters civic engagement through creative artistic expression among local youths of color.

The U.S. Nationality Act of 1940 required Japanese-Americans to register at their local post office. And FDR's executive order forced Japanese Americans from the West Coast into internment camps.

Estela Galvan, also a program coordinator with the Pan Valley Institute, says she's troubled by the parallels to this administration's policies.

"It's history repeating itself. If it wasn't the Chinese Exclusion Act or the Japanese internment camps, it's the same thing, unfortunately. This is the time we really need to get together, support each other, protect each other," she explained.

The Institute is now planning a public forum later this spring where Japanese Americans share their experiences with the government registry and internment camps during World War II.

By Arielle Zionts for KFF Health News.
Broadcast version by Zamone Perez for Virginia News Connection reporting for the KFF Health News-Public News Service Collaboration

A growing number of states have made it easier for doctors who trained in other countries to get medical licenses, a shift supporters say could ease physician shortages in rural areas.

The changes involve residency programs — the supervised, hands-on training experience that doctors must complete after graduating medical school. Until recently, every state required physicians who completed a residency or similar training abroad to repeat the process in the U.S. before obtaining a full medical license.

Since 2023, at least nine states have dropped this requirement for some doctors with international training, according to the Federation of State Medical Boards. More than a dozen other states are considering similar legislation.

About 26% of doctors who practice in the U.S. were born elsewhere, according to the Migration Policy Institute. They need federal visas to live in the U.S., plus state licenses to practice medicine.

Proponents of the new laws say qualified doctors shouldn’t have to spend years completing a second residency training. Opponents worry about patient safety and doubt the licensing change will ease the doctor shortage.

Lawmakers in Republican- and Democratic-leaning states have approved the idea at a time when many other immigration-related programs are under attack. They include Florida, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

President Donald Trump has defended a federal visa program that many foreign doctors rely on, but they could still be hampered by his broad efforts to tighten immigration rules.

Supporters of the new licensing laws include Zalmai Afzali, an internal medicine doctor who finished medical school and a residency program in Afghanistan before fleeing the Taliban and coming to the U.S. in 2001.

He said most physicians trained elsewhere would be happy to work in rural or other underserved areas.

“I would go anywhere as long as they let me work,” said Afzali, who now treats patients who live in rural areas and small cities in northeastern Virginia. “I missed being a physician. I missed what I did.”

It took Afzali 12 years to obtain copies of his diploma and transcript, study for exams, and finish a three-year U.S.-based residency program before he could be fully licensed to practice as a doctor in his new country.

But a commission of national health organizations questions whether loosening residency requirements for foreign-trained doctors would ease the shortage. Doctors in these programs could still face licensing and employment barriers, it wrote in a report that makes recommendations without taking a stance on such legislation.

Erin Fraher, a health policy professor at the University of North Carolina who advises the commission and studies the issue, said lawmakers who support the changes predict they will boost the rural health workforce. But it’s unclear whether that will happen, she said, because the programs are just getting started.

“I think the potential is there, but we need to see how this pans out,” Fraher said.

Afzali struggled to support his family while trying to get his medical license. His jobs included working at a department store for $7.25 an hour and administering chemotherapy for $20 an hour. Afzali said nurse practitioners at the latter job had less training than him but earned nearly four times as much.

“I do not know how I did it,” he said. “I mean, you get really depressed.”

Many of the state bills to ease residency requirements have been based on model legislation from the Cicero Institute, a conservative think tank that sent representatives to testify to legislatures after proposing such programs in 2020.

The new pathways are open only to internationally trained physicians who meet certain conditions. Common requirements include working as a physician for several years after graduating from a medical school and residency program with similar rigor to those found in the U.S. They also must pass the standard three-part exam that all physicians take to become licensed in the U.S.

Those who qualify are granted a restricted license to practice, and most states require them to do so under supervision of another physician. They can receive full licensure after several years.

About 10 of the laws or bills also require the doctors to work for several years in a rural or underserved area.

But states without this requirement, such as Tennessee, may not see an impact in rural areas, researchers from Harvard Medical School and Rand Corp. argued in the New England Journal of Medicine. In addition to including that condition, states could offer incentives to rural hospitals that agree to hire doctors from the new training pathways, they wrote.

Lawmakers, physicians, and health organizations that oppose the changes say there are better ways to safely increase the number of rural doctors.

Barbara Parker is a registered nurse and former Republican lawmaker in Arizona, where the legislature is considering a bill for at least the fourth year in a row.

“It’s a really poor answer to the doctor shortage,” said Parker, who voted against the legislation last year.

Parker said making it easier for foreign-trained physicians to practice in the U.S. would unethically poach doctors from countries with greater health care needs. And she said she doubts that all international residencies are on par with those in the U.S. and worries that granting licenses to physicians who trained in them could lead to poor care for patients.

She is also concerned that hospitals are trying to save money by recruiting internationally trained doctors over those trained in the U.S. The former often will accept lower pay, Parker said.

“This is driven by corporate greed,” she said.

Parker said better ways to increase the number of rural doctors include raising pay, expanding loan repayment programs for those who practice in rural areas, and creating accelerated training for nurse practitioners and physician assistants who want to become doctors.

The advisory commission — recently formed by the Federation of State Medical Boards, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, and Intealth, a nonprofit that evaluates international medical schools and their graduates — published its recommendations to help lawmakers and medical boards make sure these new pathways are safe and effective.

The commission and Fraher said state medical boards should collect data on the new rules, such as how many doctors participate, what their specialties are, and where they work once they gain their full licenses. The results could be compared with other methods of easing the rural doctor shortage, such as adding residency programs at rural hospitals.

“What is the benefit of this particular pathway relative to other levers that they have?” Fraher said.

The commission noted that while state medical boards can rely on an outside organization that evaluates the strength of foreign medical schools, there isn’t a similar rating for residency programs. Such an effort is expected to launch in mid-2025, the commission said.

The group also said states should require supervising physicians to evaluate participants before they’re granted a full license.

Afzali, the physician from Afghanistan, said some internationally trained primary care doctors have more training than their U.S. counterparts, because they had to practice procedures that are done only by specialists in the U.S.

But he agreed with the commission’s recommendation that states require doctors who did residencies abroad to have supervision while they hold a provisional license. That would help ensure patient safety while also helping the physicians adjust to cultural differences and learn the technical side of the U.S. health system, such as billing and electronic health records, the commission wrote.

Fraher noted that doctors in programs with supervision requirements need to find an experienced colleague with the time and interest in providing this oversight at a health facility willing to hire them.

The commission pointed out other potential hurdles, such as malpractice insurers possibly declining to cover physicians who obtain state licenses without completing a U.S. residency. The commission and the American Board of Medical Specialties also pointed to the issue of specialty certification, which is managed by national organizations that have their own residency requirements.

Physicians who aren’t eligible to take board exams could lose out on employment opportunities, and patients might have concerns about their qualifications, the board wrote. But it said a majority of its member boards would consider certifying these doctors if states added requirements it recommended.

Lawmakers’ plans to use these new licensing pathways to increase the number of rural doctors will require the foreign-trained doctors to navigate all these obstacles and unknowns, Fraher said.

“There’s a lot of things that need to happen to make this a reality,” she said.


Arielle Zionts wrote this story for KFF Health News.


get more stories like this via email

As the immigration debate continues, many children of immigrants in Texas who are American citizens are caught in the middle.

An elementary school student in Cooke County reportedly committed suicide after being bullied at school with false threats ICE Agents were going to take her parents away.

Lorena Tule-Romain, cofounder and chief people officer at Imm Schools, participated in a panel on bullying offered by Children at Risk. She said school districts must recognize warning signs.

"Have protocols for 'How do I address these situations?'" Tule-Romain recommended. "And for educators and all supporting staff to be trained on 'What are the identifiers or behaviors that I can keep an eye out to ensure that all our students feel safe and welcome when they are in our care, in our campuses?'"

She pointed out school districts across the state are reporting increased absences among immigrant students. More than 2 million children in Texas have at least one immigrant parent.

Statistics show immigrant children face racist bullying more than their counterparts because of their accents, cultural differences or economic backgrounds.

Jaime Freeny with the Center for School Behavioral Health in Houston said parents play a role in how their children perceive and treat others.

"Oftentimes, students are picking up on the attitude and the beliefs and the stereotypes that they hear among their own parents and grandparents and family members," Freeny explained. "Then they bring that into the school environment. We know for all kids bullying has long-lasting effects on cognitive, emotional and academic development."

She added the current political climate means school districts must give staff the tools they need to respond.

"We have to provide schools a way to enforce zero tolerance policies that specifically address race, ethnicity, immigration status and language-based bullying," Freeny urged. "We have to teach students and educators how to stop it in the moment. What are the words that you can say to pivot the conversation so that it becomes one of celebration?"


get more stories like this via email