By the Human Rights Watch

The 118-page report, “Carbon Offsetting’s Casualties,” concerns a project carried out by the Cambodian Ministry of Environment and the conservation group Wildlife Alliance, operating without consent from the Chong people, who face forced evictions and criminal charges.

The Human Rights Watch, February 28, 2024, 118 pages

By the Human Rights Watch

The 74-page report, “Everything is by the Power of the Weapon: Abuses and Impunity in Turkish-Occupied Northern Syria,” documents abductions, arbitrary arrests, unlawful detention, sexual violence, and torture by the various factions of a loose coalition of armed groups, as well as Turkish forces.

The Human Rights Watch, February 29, 2024, 74 pages

By the Human Rights Watch

The 40-page report, “‘My Marriage was Mistake after Mistake’: The Impact of Unregistered Marriages on Women’s and Children’s Rights in Iraq,” documents the impacts of unregistered marriages on women and girls who enter them, and the downstream effects on their children.

The Human Rights Watch, March 3, 2024, 40 pages

By the Human Rights Watch

The 50-page report, “Breaking Barriers to Justice: Nepal’s Long Struggle for Accountability, Truth and Reparations,” describes the decades-long struggle for justice by survivors and victims. Human Rights Watch and Advocacy Forum analyzed the proposed law and reviewed some emblematic cases that faced obstruction by the authorities.

The Human Rights Watch, March 5, 2024, 50 pages

By the Human Rights Watch

The 60-page report, “‘We Can’t See the Sun’: Malaysia’s Arbitrary Detention of Migrants and Refugees,” documents Malaysian authorities’ punitive and abusive treatment of migrants and refugees in 20 immigration detention centers across the country. Immigration detainees can spend months or years in overcrowded, unhygienic conditions, subject to harassment and violence by guards, without domestic or international monitoring.

The Human Rights Watch, March 5, 2024, 60 pages

By the Human Rights Watch

The 60-page report, “‘I Just Want to Contribute to Society’: The Need for Legal Gender Recognition in Tabasco, Mexico,” documents the pervasive socioeconomic disadvantages that trans people experience due to a mismatch between their gender and their identity documents. A lack of accurate documents, often in combination with anti-trans bias, has led to discrimination, harassment, and violence for trans people.

The Human Rights Watch, March 6, 2024, 60 pages

By the Human Rights Watch

The 148-page report, “‘A Sense of Terror Stronger than a Bullet’: The Closing of North Korea 2018–2023,” documents the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s (DPRK or North Korea) overbroad, excessive, and unnecessary measures during the Covid-19 pandemic, including quarantines and new restrictions on economic activity and freedom of movement. The government’s new measures have severely affected food security and the availability of products needed by North Koreans to survive that previously entered the country via formal or informal trade routes from China.

The Human Rights Watch, March 7, 2024, 148 pages

By the Human Rights Watch

The 36-page report, “In Harm’s Way: How Michigan’s Forced Parental Consent for Abortion Law Hurts Young People” examines the impact of a Michigan law that requires people under age 18 seeking an abortion to have a parent or legal guardian’s written consent or get approval from a judge in a process known as “judicial bypass.”

The Human Rights Watch, March 28, 2024, 36 pages

By the Human Rights Watch

The 49-page report, “‘The Boot on My Neck’: Iranian Authorities’ Crime of Persecution Against Baha’is in Iran,” documents Iranian authorities’ systematic violation of the fundamental rights of members of the Baha’i community through discriminatory laws and policies that target them. Human Rights Watch found that Baha’is face a spectrum of abuses. Government agencies arrest and imprison Baha’is arbitrarily, confiscate their property, restrict their education and employment opportunities, and even deny them dignified burial.

The Human Rights Watch, April 1, 2024, 49 pages

By William H. Herndon (Author), Jesse W. Weik (Author), Colin Heston (Editor)

Abraham Lincoln: The True Story of a Great Life, Volume 2 by William H. Herndon and Jesse W. Weik continues the intimate and revealing portrait of Lincoln’s life, focusing on his political rise, personal struggles, and moral convictions. This volume delves into Lincoln’s early legal and political career in Illinois, his evolving views on slavery, and his growing prominence within the newly formed Republican Party. Herndon, who knew Lincoln personally, offers firsthand insights into Lincoln’s character, including his honesty, wit, and deep empathy. The narrative explores Lincoln’s debates with Stephen A. Douglas, his election to the presidency, and the immense pressures he faced as the nation moved toward civil war. The authors emphasize Lincoln’s internal conflicts, his sense of duty, and his unwavering commitment to preserving the Union. Through letters, speeches, and personal anecdotes, the book presents Lincoln not as a distant icon but as a complex, thoughtful man shaped by hardship and driven by principle. Volume 2 concludes with reflections on Lincoln’s leadership during the early years of the Civil War, setting the stage for the final chapters of his life and legacy.

Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2025. 220p.

By William H. Herndon (Author), Jesse W. Weik (Author), Colin Heston (Editor)

Abraham Lincoln: The True Story of a Great Life, Volume 1 by William H. Herndon and Jesse W. Weik is a deeply personal and detailed biography that explores the early life and character development of Abraham Lincoln. Written by Herndon, Lincoln’s former law partner, and Weik, a collaborator and researcher, the book offers a unique insider’s perspective on Lincoln’s formative years. It begins with an exploration of Lincoln’s ancestry and family background, emphasizing the hardships and humble circumstances that shaped his upbringing. The narrative delves into his childhood in Kentucky and Indiana, highlighting his early education, intellectual curiosity, and moral development. The authors portray Lincoln as a self-made man whose values were forged through personal struggle, rural labor, and a relentless pursuit of knowledge. The book also reflects on the influence of his mother, Nancy Hanks, and other key figures in his early life. Through anecdotes, letters, and recollections, the biography paints a vivid picture of Lincoln’s growth from a frontier boy into a thoughtful, principled young man destined for greatness. The tone is both reverent and analytical, aiming to present Lincoln not as a mythic figure, but as a real human being shaped by his environment and experiences.

Read-Me.Org Inc. New York-Philadelphia-Australia. 2025. 256p.

By Al. Ujazdowskie

Armed forces are an integral part of a democratic state and society. By fulilling their defence and national-security functions, the armed forces play a key role in enabling a security environment that allows us to enjoy the inalienable rights and freedoms to which we are all entitled as human beings. As representatives of the state structure, armed forces personnel are bound to respect human rights and international humanitarian law in the exercise of their duties. But only when their rights are guaranteed within their own institu- tion will armed forces personnel be likely to uphold these in the discharge of their tasks — both when in the barracks and during operations.

OSCE Oice for Democratic Institutions and

Human Rights (ODIHR), 256p.

By Stevie Glaberson, Emerald Tse & Emily Tucker, 

In every cell in your body, there resides a complete copy of your genetic code. As you moveabout the world, you shed cells without even realizing it, leaving your DNA, like a geneticcalling card, wherever you go. You probably don’t think about the trail you’re leaving. Itwouldn’t really matter if you did, because you can’t stop shedding cells, and you can’t leave your DNA at home.

But what if the government had access to a copy of your DNA and could track you based on thisinvoluntary, unstoppable trail without your consent? How would it change your behavior toknow that the government had a drop of your blood — or saliva — containing your “entiregenetic code, which will be kept indefinitely in a government-controlled refrigerator in awarehouse in Northern Virginia”?1 Would you feel free to seek out the medical or reproductivecare you needed? To attend protests and voice dissent? To gather together with the people ofyour choosing?This dystopia is fast becoming reality for millions of people, many of them already vulnerablebecause of over-policing, excessive surveillance, or economic insecurity. The federal governmentis amassing a huge trove of DNA, starting with a racialized, often traumatized, and politicallypowerless group: noncitizens. And it is using the federal agency that operates with the fewestpractical constraints and least oversight — the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) — todo it. That’s what this report is about.In the waning days of the Trump administration, riding a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment andwith the resources of the immigrant rights movement depleted by four years of emergencyresponses, the Department of Justice made what it billed as a technical, boring rule change: Iteliminated an exemption in the government’s existing DNA-collection rule that previously hadallowed DHS to refrain from building out a labor-intensive and expensive DNA-collectionprogram.In so doing, it effectively set off a bomb that had lain dormant in federal law since2005.3 The 2005 DNA Fingerprint Act — which passed with little public scrutiny as anamendment to the reauthorization bill for the popular Violence Against Women Act — for thefirst time extended compulsory DNA collection to people outside of the criminal legal context:detained noncitizens.4 But because of the exceptions in the implementing regulations, andbecause previous administrations thought it was a good idea to use those exceptions to avoidescalating DNA collection from noncitizens, DHS never mounted a large-scale DNA collectionprogram. That is, until 2020.This report, which is based on publicly available records, as well as interviews with people whohave had their DNA taken by immigration authorities and legal service providers working withthem, is the first attempt to examine in-depth what happened after the 2020 rule change, and toexplain the legal and political implications of these developments.

Washington, DC, Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law (2024)., 108p.

By Matt Herbert

On 7 May 2025, reports emerged that the US was preparing to deport irregular migrants to Libya. While no deportations had occurred as of mid-May, and the US government has neither confirmed nor denied such plans, the potential for expulsions has raised urgent concerns among international observers, particularly regarding Libya’s fragility, human rights conditions, and entrenched criminal economies.

This publication explores the multifaceted risks associated with these possible transfers. Authored by Dr. Matt Herbert, the report presents a detailed analysis of how migrant expulsions could exacerbate instability in Libya and fuel smuggling and extortion networks.

The brief underscores that deportations would risk reinforcing cycles of violence and impunity, placing vulnerable individuals in harm’s way and undermining regional stability. Rather than viewing deportations through short-term political calculus, the US should assess the long-term risks to its broader interests in Libya and the region that such a policy would entail.

Geneva: Global Initiative AGainst Transnational Organized Crime, 2025. 17p.

By Nina Wang, Allison McDonald, Daniel Bateyko and Emily Tucker

When you think about government surveillance in the United States, you likely think of the National Security Agency or the FBI. You might even think of a powerful police agency, such as the New York Police Department. But unless you or someone you love has been targeted for deportation, you probably don’t immediately think of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This report argues that you should. Our twoyear investigation, including hundreds of Freedom of Information Act requests and a comprehensive review of ICE’s contracting and procurement records, reveals that ICE now operates as a domestic surveillance agency. Since its founding in 2003, ICE has not only been building its own capacity to use surveillance to carry out deportations but has also played a key role in the federal government’s larger push to amass as much information as possible about all of our lives. By reaching into the digital records of state and local governments and buying databases with billions of data points from private companies, ICE has created a surveillance infrastructure that enables it to pull detailed dossiers on nearly anyone, seemingly at any time. In its efforts to arrest and deport, ICE has—without any judicial, legislative or public oversight—reached into datasets containing personal information about the vast majority of people living in the U.S., whose records can end up in the hands of immigration enforcement simply because they apply for driver’s licenses; drive on the roads; or sign up with their local utilities to get access to heat, water and electricity. ICE has built its dragnet surveillance system by crossing legal and ethical lines, leveraging the trust that people place in state agencies and essential service providers, and exploiting the vulnerability of people who volunteer their information to reunite with their families. Despite the incredible scope and evident civil rights implications of ICE’s surveillance practices, the agency has managed to shroud those practices in near-total secrecy, evading enforcement of even the handful of laws and policies that could be invoked to impose limitations. Federal and state lawmakers, for the most part, have yet to confront this reality. This report synthesizes what is already known about ICE surveillance with new information from thousands of previously unseen and unanalyzed records, illustrating the on-theground impact of ICE surveillance through three case studies—ICE access to driver data, utility customer data and data collected about the families of unaccompanied children.

Washington, DC: Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law , 2025. 114p.

By Cecilia Schenetti, Valentina Mazzucato, Sally Wyatt, Djamila Schans

European states employ migration information campaigns (MICs) to discourage irregular migration to Europe by people from the Global South. Campaigns are justified by their initiators in various ways. On the one hand, campaigns are said to protect ‘potential migrants’ by helping them to make informed decisions (‘care’). On the other hand, campaigns respond to Europe's security objective of restricting migration flows (‘control’). Researchers have looked at various intermediaries involved in these campaigns. Yet, little attention has been given to individual European policy actors who decide on the funding and design of campaigns and how they navigate between campaigns' contradictory intentions to care for ‘potential migrants’ and to control borders. How do European campaign initiators justify the need for MICs? And what does this tell us about the migration imaginaries of those who develop migration governance measures? Based on interviews with European policymakers and campaign designers in the Netherlands and Senegal, this article examines their discursive acts of legitimation. It shows that in justifying their everyday work, they imagine themselves as humanitarian actors, and ‘potential migrants’ as depoliticized subjects in need of care. While initiators do sometimes examine campaigns critically, they build a worldview in which care is instrumental to border enforcement and in which compassion becomes a form of repressive ‘soft’ bordering.

International Migration, Volume63, Issue3 June 2025, 14p.

By Tadgh McMahon, Sukhmani Khorana, Ingrid Culos, Liam Magee, Emilie Baganz

COVID-19 resulted in global restrictions on migration, with pronounced consequences in Australia, where the resettlement of refugees was significantly curtailed from March 2020. This research, comprising a third phase in an ongoing study on refugee settlement and integration, seeks to understand the broader implications of these restrictions on family separation and reunion among resettled refugees in Australia. Employing a mixed-method approach of surveys and family interviews conducted in late 2021, we explored various themes that emerged from the pandemic's effects on family reunion, such as concerns about living difficulties, maintaining contact with family overseas, financial hardship, and reunion challenges specific to the pandemic. The findings reveal the negative impact of COVID-19 on refugees' ability to reunite with families, with evidence pointing to differences between gender, visa category, and language group/ethnicity. The research underscores the need for innovative approaches in resettlement to address the negative impacts of family separation and for governments to expedite family reunion pathways to alleviate isolation and uncertainty among resettled refugees.

International Migration, Volume63, Issue3, June 2025, 20p.

By Bridget Collrin, Harald Bauder

The concept of migration governance has captured scholarly attention in recent decades. In this paper, we present the results of a bibliometric analysis and a scoping review of this concept and explore how it is defined by authors across the social sciences. Based on our sample of literature, we find that a majority of definitions assume a state-sovereignty perspective of migration governance, leading to discussions that can fail to account for the role of migrant rights and autonomy. Our review reflects upon this result and discusses other findings on the conflation of migration governance with migration management and on the significance of externalized, multi-level and transnational migration governance in the literature. We conclude that migration governance is a complex concept that must pay closer attention to migrant rights and autonomy.

International Migration, Volume63, Issue3, June 2025, 17p.

By Matthew Lisiecki, Kevin Velasco, and Tara Watson

The Trump administration has begun to carry out activities connected to its campaign promise of a nationwide mass deportation program for undocumented immigrants. What will this mean for the estimated 5.62 million U.S. citizen children with an undocumented household member, and for the state and local child welfare systems charged with protecting their safety and well-being?

Changes in immigration enforcement policy

In fiscal years 2021 through 2024, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrested around 125,000 immigrants in the nation’s interior each year and deported an average of 38,000. These numbers were lower than during the first Trump administration, which in turn were lower than during Obama’s first term.

Under Biden, immigrants most often came to the attention of ICE through the criminal justice system because they were already in custody of local law enforcement. Fewer than half were “at large” arrests in the community, meaning enforcement activity was mainly focused on those in contact with local jails and prisons. In addition to a more aggressive border stance, the Trump administration has signaled its intention to ramp up and broaden interior enforcement.

In his first term, Trump slightly increased enforcement, but the bigger change was making it more chaotic and unpredictable. This pattern appears to be resuming in 2025. The administration has revoked the sensitive locations guidance that previously prevented enforcement activity in hospitals, schools, and churches, with legal challenges underway. It has expanded expedited removal for migrants who recently crossed the border—which bypasses the usual legal process for undocumented residents—to include anyone arriving in the last two years encountered anywhere in the United States. The recently passed Laken Riley bill requires the detention of any undocumented person charged with certain crimes, even if not convicted, including crimes as trivial as shoplifting. The administration has also amplified efforts to involve state and local law enforcement through the 287(g) program, and has shifted priorities across federal agencies such as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) away from their usual work toward immigration enforcement. And in mid-March Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act, which is contested in court but would allow deportations of Venezuelans without the usual due process protections.

It is too early to know how much the numbers of arrests and deportations will increase. Certainly, the administration may fall short of its stated goal of deporting all undocumented immigrants, but between enforcement activities already underway and immigrants faced with no good options electing to leave the country—so-called “self-deportation”—the level of enforcement will be significant from an economic and humanitarian perspective. There will also be chilling effects on activities including free speech, appearing in public, seeking medical care, and going to work as immigrant communities struggle to make sense of the new policy environment.

Washington, DC: Brookings, 2025. 16p.

By Immigration Equality, the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC), and Human Rights First

Asylum in the United States is a lifesaving necessity for LGBTQ and HIV-positive people. For decades, many have fled to the United States to seek refuge from persecution and torture. However, the United States subjects hundreds of thousands of people yearly, including LGBTQ and HIV-positive people, to its massive network of jails and prisons. These jails, run by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), are infamous for their inhumane and abusive conditions. For LGBTQ and HIV-positive people, these conditions routinely include high rates of physical and sexual violence, improper and prolonged solitary confinement, and inadequate medical care among other forms of systemic abuse and neglect. For this report, Immigration Equality, the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC), and Human Rights First (HRF) surveyed 41 LGBTQ and HIV-positive immigrants who were detained by CBP and ICE. This survey revealed: • Approximately one third of survey participants (18 out of 41) reported sexual abuse, physical assaults or sexual harassment in immigration detention due to their LGBTQ identity; • Nearly all of the participants (35 out of 41), reported being targets of homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, racist, or other verbal and nonverbal abuse in ICE and CBP jails that included threats of violence and assault; • A majority of participants (28 out of 41) reported receiving inadequate medical care or asking for medical care and not receiving it while in ICE or CBP detention. • Nearly half of participants (20 out of 41) interviewed reported new or increased mental health symptoms while in detention, including hives, panic attacks, mental health crises, flashbacks, and self-harm; • Roughly half of participants (20 of 41) were subject to solitary confinement; • Nearly half of participants (18 of 41) reported having their sexual orientation, gender identity, HIV status or other confidential medical information disclosed in custody without their consent; • More than a quarter of survey participants (12 out of 41) reported that ICE or CBP separated them from their loved ones, whether a partner, spouse, or sibling; • Survey participants routinely struggled to access their attorneys or find one, while in ICE or CBP detention; • The majority of survey participants living with HIV (13 out of 17 participants) reported medical neglect or denial of medical HIV treatment. The executive branch and Congress can take steps to end this unnecessary suffering and protect the rights of LGBTQ/H individuals. These include steps to apply parole authority, issue guidance on vulnerable populations, support legislative action and phase out immigration detention.

Brooklyn, NY: Immigration Equality, 2024. 53p.