The Congressional Hispanic Caucus Is Torn at a Critical Moment
The current chair, Adriano Espaillat, is a formerly undocumented immigrant with a solid political pedigree. But some members are questioning his leadership.
EVEN BEFORE DONALD TRUMP WAS SWORN IN, Democrats and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) had a crisis on their hands.
The party was debating how to handle the Laken Riley Act, a sweeping law that requires the detention of immigrants for minor crimes like shoplifting and empowers states to sue the federal government over immigration. But members felt they didn’t know enough about where the caucus of Hispanic elected officials stood on the legislation beyond its unexpected support from Arizona’s junior senator, Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), who cosponsored the bill.
This was no small matter. When it comes to how best to handle immigration legislation, the Democratic party tends to defer to the CHC. But with the Laken Riley Act looking like it had enough support in Congress to become law, this critical bloc of lawmakers was staying quiet.
Ultimately, the caucus came out against passage, even condemning the bill. But its relatively sluggish response sparked concern about its leadership under chairman Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), the first Dominican American to serve in the House and the first formerly undocumented immigrant elected to Congress.
In conversations with CHC members, chiefs of staff, and current and former CHC staffers—many of whom asked for anonymity to discuss the sensitive inner politics of the caucus—there was uniform agreement: Espaillat has a very tough job. But there was less unanimity about whether he was up for it.
Espaillat leads an ethnic caucus, not an ideological one, which means he’s trying to find consensus among members that range from moderate Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Tex.) to progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).
Espaillat also finds himself trying to pilot the CHC as Trump runs roughshod over many of its priorities: In just the first three weeks of the new administration, the president has attacked birthright citizenship, instituted quotas leading ICE to sweep up U.S. citizens in raids, canceled legal status for refugees, and even shipped migrants to Guantanamo Bay. Some CHC members fear that Espaillat’s methodical, confrontation-averse approach is not bold enough to effectively respond to these attacks.
“There is some concern he’s not the leader the moment calls for,” one Hispanic caucus lawmaker told The Bulwark.
“We’re just missing the moment; we’re reactionary and not talking with one voice, which is hard to do for the CHC,” a second member said. “But we should have been more aggressive on Laken Riley, which represents a fundamental erosion of due process and is going to lead to racial profiling of Hispanics.”
The member relayed a conversation with a non-Hispanic Democrat who said they had been looking for more backup from the CHC before voting against the Laken Riley Act. It “was never clear where the CHC was” on the bill, that Democrat had told them.
Espaillat’s defenders note that he has gone everywhere to defend Dreamers— undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children—farmworkers, and families from Trump’s deportation regime. The congressman has appeared on MSNBC, CNN, and local news in New York City to advocate for these three groups, believing that they will engender the most sympathy among Americans and that, as Trump continues his mass deportation push, voters will come to reject the president and his policies after they see his targets are not just criminals.
In an interview with The Bulwark, Espaillat defended his leadership. “It’s far too early to be frustrated—[Trump’s] only been in office a couple of weeks,” he said.
He also expounded his framework to defend certain groups of immigrants.
“I think that families that are split are weak families and they make a weak nation,” he said. “If families are taken away from each other, if a father is deported, then that family doesn’t have a breadwinner anymore.”
He said the need to defend these three groups was easy for people to understand.
“On Dreamers, 80 percent of Americans understand they should be regularized. With farmworkers, if they’re not working, we’re not getting food on the table, and prices rise,” he said.
ESPAILLAT WAS RAISED IN POLITICS. His great-grandfather was a top official in the Dominican Senate, and his father’s family included several other important political figures in Dominican history. Espaillat himself served in the New York State Assembly and State Senate before he won former long-serving Rep. Charlie Rangel’s old House seat in 2016.
Despite having that gilded pedigree, Espaillat has not always impressed his colleagues with his political decision-making early on in his chairmanship.
Some members within the caucus complained about not being kept abreast of basic CHC functions. While the first caucus press conference the week of Trump’s inauguration featured a robust number of CHC members speaking out against mass deportations, some lawmakers only found out about last Thursday's press conference the night before it took place. Some said they were not invited to attend.
According to private conversations between members shared with The Bulwark, there was also frustration among some CHC members over the larger message that emerged from the press conference: that the caucus was interested in working with Republicans on common goals despite the GOP’s objectionable actions so far this year.
“There were only a handful of CHC members who knew about the press conference, but what we’re concerned about is that it was an attempt to portray the CHC as wanting to work with Republicans who are helping to tear families apart, and supporting Trump’s plan for sending migrants to Guantanamo, and a lot of ugly things like that,” the first member said. “The members of the CHC like and respect Adriano, but there’s a feeling we don’t always know where things are headed.”
Espaillat told The Bulwark that the members invited to speak at the Thursday press conference were chosen because they had shown leadership in introducing legislation related to the groups the caucus is focused on protecting or other areas of interest, like the border. Rep. Sylvia Garcia (D-Ted.) introduced legislation on Dreamers, while Rep. Lou Correa (D-Calif.) has the largest number of Dreamers in his district. Reps. Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) and Vicente Gonzalez (D-Tex.) hail from districts on the southern border, and Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.) was there because he has sponsored legislation protecting farmworkers.
There was no specific legislation aimed at keeping families together at the press conference, but Espaillat that day reintroduced legislation to protect “sensitive locations” like schools, churches, and hospitals from ICE enforcement actions.
The challenges facing Espaillat and the CHC are unique among those facing Democrats these days. The November election results have convinced the party they need to work with Republicans on the border and immigration in general. But just how much bipartisan juice there is to squeeze on the issue remains an open question, with Trump making it U.S. policy that an “invasion” of the southern border has necessitated a national emergency decree and limited military response.
Against this background, lawmakers like Vasquez—who is known for bipartisan work and legislation—are trying in good faith to work with Republicans because they believe not doing so would have them going a full two years without helping Latinos and immigrants across the country.
“I think the border is very dynamic and just as American as apple pie,” Vasquez told The Bulwark. “The message I want to bring to congress and Democrats whose districts are impacted by the border is that it’s one of our best economic assets, from ports of entry like El Paso and Laredo to California and Arizona, as well. I don’t think folks realize what the economic connection is between the U.S. and Mexico.”
But other lawmakers have urged Democrats to take a much harder line, arguing that giving bipartisan cover to elements of Trump's agenda effectively normalizes the worst of it.
In conversations, a couple CHC members defended Espaillat’s work, noting the man is walking a political tightrope. He’s in a “tough” position, one of those members said: Anything passed by a Republican-led Congress with Democratic votes will not be favorably received by the CHC and the communities they represent.
But the general consensus is that at some point Espaillat will have to make a decision between looking for opportunities to forge common ground with Trump or fighting him aggressively. A middle-ground strategy would please virtually no one.
“It’s easy for some to say we care about the Dreamers—no one in our caucus cares about Dreamers more than me, I’m married to one,” Rep. Delia Ramirez (D–Ill.) told The Bulwark. “Yes, it’s about Dreamers, but what does that mean when people want to split us up? We can talk about parents, Dreamers, and farmworkers, but this is a reckoning moment, and a number of us are hopeful we will be clear about who sent us to Congress.”
THERE WILL BE NO SHORTAGE OF FIGHTS going forward to test Espaillat and the CHC. Among the battles that appear imminent is Trump’s attempts to dismantle the temporary protected status (TPS) program, which gives temporary legal status to people from countries ravaged by war or natural disasters. Trump ended TPS for an initial group of almost 350,000 Venezuelans, moving up the expiration date to 60 days instead of October. Now, 550,000 Venezuelans in total appear in danger of deportation, including many who were supposed to be safe through September.
A person who spoke with Espaillat said the chairman acknowledged that as he seeks to defend Dreamers and similar groups, the caucus may not also be able to defend those losing TPS. Espaillat denied the account.
“I never said that,” he told The Bulwark. “I fought for TPS to be extended to Venezuelans. I fought for a TPS bill for Ecuadorians when they were seeing an 800 percent increase in violent homicides, and violent gangs killed a presidential candidate and stormed a TV station.”
There would likely be an uproar within the CHC if the caucus did not come out with a forceful defense of TPS holders. One CHC member said Democrats giving up on TPS holders would be “unforgivable.” Another said the matter was on the docket to be discussed within the caucus this week.
“That ship has not sailed,” the member warned. “We will defend it.”
Taking on Trump is not just about defense, of course, but also offense. Some CHC members believe taking the fight to the administration will require more robust efforts to humanize immigrants. They want Espaillat to broaden the way the caucus frames its messaging on immigration.
“I think we will need [Espaillat’s] leadership to focus on bringing us back to centering human rights in our conversations around immigration,” a fifth CHC member said. “The idea of negotiating with Republicans who don’t believe our parents and families are human—it’s hard to see that path forward, especially when they’re taunting us about putting uncles and aunts into shackles to ship them to Guantanamo Bay.”
Data may suggest an opening in this area for Democrats. Focus groups conducted by Bulwark publisher Sarah Longwell on February 6 featuring Latino voters who backed Joe Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2024 show a split between those who believe Trump is just doing what is necessary on mass deportation efforts, and those who feel his dragnet is out of control, pulling in regular families and workers instead of just the criminals he promised to pursue. But on one issue, both groups agreed the president has crossed a line: sending migrants to Guantanamo Bay.
“It’s way too extreme. There’s been people that have never been seen after they’ve been sent to Guantanamo Bay,” said Brian from Texas.
“That’s a very dangerous thing because, okay, they’re here illegally, but don’t treat them inhumanely either and leave them there,” said Marta from New Jersey.
“It’s for the worst of the worst,” added Jessica from Texas. “That makes it seem like Trump is a Nazi for sure, like, ‘Send them to the camps!’”
One Last Thing
Speaking of Guantanamo Bay, Reuters reports that a federal judge blocked the United States from sending three Venezuelan men there. The Washington Post’s Silvia Foster-Frau adds that lawyers from Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center, the ACLU of New Mexico, and the Center for Constitutional Rights asked for a temporary restraining order over the “legal black hole” migrants are thrown into by being sent to the naval base in Cuba.
It isn't just the Hispanic voters that voted for trump who are about to learn that "Elections have consequences". Everyone who voted for trump are going to learn that lesson in one way or another. The true Magats will revel in it, but the rest will be taught the hard way, impacted in ways too numerous to predict at this point.
They all have my compassion, but even those of us who didn't vote for trump will be hurt, and those are the ones that will have my compassion even more.
Sadly, I don't see any painless ways left to convince people of that lesson. I only hope and pray that we will have free and fair elections in the future, in order to correct course when people awaken to what they have wrought.
Will any of this matter once PINO Trump and President Musk succeed in murdering our Democratic Republic?