Phyu Phyu Thant
Professor [Instructor Name]
Ethnic Studies [Course Number]
13 Feb. 2026
Reflection Summary: Latinx Worker Resistance and the Politics of Immigration
Paul Ortiz’s Truthout article, “Latinx Workers Are Organizing Fierce Resistance to Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Agenda,” offers a powerful and timely perspective on immigration, labor, and political struggle in the United States. Ortiz challenges popular media narratives that suggest Latinx communities are moving politically to the right. Instead, he argues that Latinx workers have been leading fierce resistance against Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant agenda, especially after the 2024 presidential election. The article explains that immigration enforcement, deportation threats, and ICE militarization are not only political actions but also tools used by the state and capitalism to control immigrant labor. Ortiz’s main point is clear: Latinx worker resistance is not new, and it may shape the future of the labor movement and the broader fight against authoritarian politics in the United States.
One of the most important ideas in Ortiz’s article is that the escalation of ICE raids and state violence is a reactionary response to immigrant organizing. He suggests that immigrant communities in Los Angeles and other cities have not remained silent or passive after the election. Instead, they have organized democratic insurgencies, protests, strikes, and public actions that challenge Trump’s deportation plans. Ortiz frames these actions as a threat to “the rule of capital,” meaning that immigrant workers have power because they are essential to the economy. This argument helps the reader understand why the government may respond with fear and force. If immigrant workers organize and refuse to be exploited, the system of cheap labor and inequality becomes unstable. In this way, Ortiz connects immigration enforcement to labor control, showing that anti-immigrant policies are also anti-worker policies.
Ortiz places Latinx worker resistance in a long historical timeline. He references labor struggles from the antebellum period, the Haymarket insurrection of 1886, and other organizing movements that included immigrants. This historical approach is meaningful because it shows that immigrant workers have always played an important role in U.S. labor history. They have organized unions, built coalitions, and challenged exploitation. Ortiz argues that ICE and deportation have been used for decades as weapons to break organizing campaigns. This is an important point because it shows how immigration enforcement is not only about borders. It is also about power. When immigrant workers are threatened with deportation, they are more likely to accept low wages, unsafe working conditions, and abuse. Ortiz explains that the current moment is a “renewed effort” to keep Latinx workers in terror and powerlessness. This framing made me reflect on how fear is used as a political tool and how state violence often targets those who are most economically vulnerable.
A major strength of the article is how it challenges the idea of a “Latino turn to the right.” Ortiz argues that this media narrative hides the reality of resistance happening across the country. According to him, Latinx workers have been in the vanguard of protest and anti-Trump organizing since the early days of Trump’s presidency. After the 2024 election, protests against Trump’s immigration and labor threats took place in over 100 cities. Ortiz emphasizes that these protests involved not only immigrants but also human rights advocates, small business owners, union members, students, and other community allies. This shows that resistance is not isolated. It is collective. It also shows that Latinx communities are not politically uniform. Just as Ethnic Studies teaches, identity categories like “Latinx” contain diverse political views, class positions, and experiences. Ortiz’s article reminds readers that focusing only on voting patterns can erase the organizing, activism, and solidarity work happening at the grassroots level.
Ortiz also describes the wide range of protest strategies used by Latinx communities after the election. These included hunger strikes, boycotts, rallies, teach-ins, and “stay at home” actions. These actions were not random or emotional reactions. They were organized efforts to show the economic power of immigrant labor. This part of the article connects directly to a major concept in Ethnic Studies: resistance. Immigrant communities are often portrayed as victims, but Ortiz shows them as agents of change. They do not only endure oppression; they actively challenge it. I found this part inspiring because it shows that ordinary people can create collective power even when they face fear and uncertainty.
One of the most powerful moments in the article is Ortiz’s discussion of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON) and its “Day of Action and Solidarity” on December 18. Ortiz highlights a statement from Pablo Alvarado, co-executive director of NDLON, who declares that the fight is not for dignity, because immigrant workers already have dignity. Instead, the fight is for respect and equality. This statement is important because it reframes the immigrant struggle. Immigrant workers are often treated as if they must prove they deserve rights. Alvarado rejects that logic. He argues that immigrant labor is already essential to the country and that the people who benefit from immigrant labor must accept immigrant humanity. This statement strongly connects to ideas of human rights and structural oppression. It also reflects the importance of dignity as something inherent, not something granted by the state.
Ortiz also provides a detailed example of organizing in Los Angeles, where thousands marched from La Placita Olvera to an ICE center. This description stood out because it shows how resistance is tied to place, history, and community identity. Ortiz mentions that Mexican Los Angeles was founded in 1781 by Afro-Mexicans, which adds another layer of racial and historical complexity. The march included signs supporting immigrants and opposing walls, and it included educators such as Angélica Reyes, who described herself as an Indigenous immigrant. This detail is significant because it shows how intersectionality appears in real movements. Reyes is not only immigrant; she is also Indigenous, a woman, and an educator. Her identity shapes her activism and her role in teaching students about political threats. This example connects well to our course transition into intersectionality and centering women of color. Ortiz’s inclusion of her voice suggests that immigrant resistance is not led only by men or only by political elites. It includes women, teachers, and youth.
Another key part of the article is the role of social media and community organizing. Ortiz describes Sam Ruiz, a Latinx activist who used TikTok to call for a general work stoppage. Ruiz’s message shows that immigrant workers understand their economic importance. He compares the treatment of migrants to modern slavery and argues that a strike could force the country to recognize immigrant contributions. Ortiz lists workers from many industries: truckers, construction workers, field workers, restaurant workers, and hospitality workers. This list is important because it shows how deeply immigrants are connected to the U.S. economy. It also supports Ortiz’s claim that immigrant resistance can influence the future of the labor movement. If immigrant workers stop working, entire industries slow down. This creates leverage. It also shows that immigrants are not powerless. They are central to economic life.
Ortiz provides additional examples of organized resistance, such as rallies in St. Louis and weeklong strikes of labor and businesses. He describes how business owners supported the strike, even though it meant losing money. One business owner said that no amount of money can replace peace of mind. Another said that losing money was worth it because they would gain more in the long run. These examples are meaningful because they show cross-class solidarity. Ethnic Studies often emphasizes coalition building, and Ortiz’s article provides a clear example. Workers and small business owners worked together. Community members supported each other. This challenges stereotypes that immigrants only take from society. Instead, it shows immigrants building community power and mutual support.
Ortiz also describes the national “Day Without Immigrants” actions held in February. He notes that strikes and demonstrations took place in at least 120 cities, 40 states, and Puerto Rico. Many businesses closed in solidarity, including large numbers of Latinx-owned businesses in California. These details show the scale of immigrant organizing. It was not a small protest. It was a nationwide movement. Ortiz also includes voices from business owners who emphasize that immigrants are the backbone of the food industry and local economies. These statements show that immigrant labor is not replaceable. The economy depends on it. This reinforces Ortiz’s main argument that the state’s attack on immigrants is also an attack on labor power.
Ortiz argues that immigrant resistance had immediate effects. He mentions that when Trump targeted sanctuary cities, officials complained that immigrant communities were learning how to avoid ICE. This is significant because it shows that education, organizing, and community knowledge can resist state power. Sanctuary cities, community training, and mutual aid networks make deportation harder. This suggests that resistance is not only symbolic. It has real consequences. Ortiz frames these actions as part of a larger democratic struggle, and he argues that the future of anti-MAGA resistance depends on joining immigrant workers in this fight.
Finally, Ortiz connects today’s movements to a longer history of Latinx labor organizing, including Mexican American railway strikes, the Industrial Workers of the World, the Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers union, and the historic 2006 immigrant strike known as El Gran Paro Estadounidense. This historical context strengthens his argument that Latinx labor resistance is not new. It is part of a long tradition. Ortiz also highlights Latinx participation in Black Lives Matter and in modern union organizing efforts such as the Amazon Labor Union. These examples show coalition building across racial groups, which is central to Ethnic Studies. They also show how struggles against racism, policing, and labor exploitation are connected.
In conclusion, Paul Ortiz’s article offers a strong argument that Latinx workers are leading ongoing resistance to Trump’s anti-immigrant agenda. Ortiz challenges simplified media narratives and shows that immigrant communities are actively organizing through strikes, protests, and solidarity actions across the country. His article highlights how immigration enforcement is tied to labor control and how state power uses fear to maintain exploitation. Most importantly, Ortiz emphasizes that immigrant resistance is essential for democracy and the future of the labor movement. After reading this article, I better understand that immigration struggles are not only about borders. They are about human rights, economic justice, and the fight against authoritarianism. Ortiz’s article supports a core lesson of Ethnic Studies: liberation requires collective action, coalition building, and centering the voices of those most targeted by oppression.
Latinx Workers Are Organizing Fierce Resistance to Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Agenda
Media narratives about a Latinx shift to the right obfuscate ongoing anti-Trump insurgencies led by Latinx communities.
No comments:
Post a Comment