Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: Imagine a justice system built on rigorous evidence, not gut instincts or educated guesses about what works and what doesn't.
More people could access the civil justice they deserve.
The criminal justice system could be smaller, more effective and more humane.
The Access to Justice Lab here at Harvard Law School is producing that needed evidence and this podcast is about the challenge of transforming law into an evidence based field.
I'm your host Jim Greiner and this is Proof Over Precedent.
This week we're bringing you a Student
[00:00:36] Speaker B: Voice hello and welcome to my third podcast episode for the Access to Justice Lab at the Harvard Law School. My name is Andrew Garcia, I'm a third year law student and today I am joined by Emily Irigoyen, a second year law student at Harvard. In addition to a full class schedule, Emily maintains a strong presence on campus as co president of the Harvard Immigration project for the 25th to 26th term and as a board member of the
[00:01:02] Speaker C: Harvard Legal Aid Bureau.
[00:01:04] Speaker B: Her unparalleled advocacy has resulted in tens of thousands of dollars in legal judgments for her clients, hundreds of pounds of food and basic supplies distributed to the greater Boston area, and mutual aid efforts that she has organized, and she joins us today to talk about her work on the ground as a student, attorney and active community member. In my podcast with Emily, through several terms and acronyms and refer to several Harvard law organizations, you may not be familiar with some or all of them. To help you out, Here's a quick explanation.
1. The Harvard Immigration Project, or HIP, is a student practice organization that provides students, including first year law students, the opportunity to gain practical hands on legal experience.
HIPP serves immigrant communities with high quality advocacy and the skills students hone in HIP are transferable to men in different legal settings. HIP is proud to play a significant role in fostering a strong pro bono culture in the Harvard Law School community.
Moving on to the Harvard Legal Aid Bureau, or hlab, is the oldest student run civil legal aid organization in the country and is committed to providing free representation to low income and marginalized communities in the greater Boston area.
[00:02:15] Speaker C: Now, a T visa is a temporary
[00:02:18] Speaker B: immigration benefit that enables certain victims of a severe form of docking in persons to remain in the United States.
U visa is also a temporary immigration benefit and is set aside for victims of certain crimes who have suffered mental or physical abuse and are helpful to law enforcement or government officials in the investigation or prosecution of criminal activity.
Cijs or Special Immigrant Juvenile Status is a federal pathway to lawful permanent residency or a green card for undocumented youth under 21 who have been abused, abandoned or neglected by one or both parents.
Uscis, or the US Citizenship and Immigration Services, is the Department of Homeland Security component that oversees lawful immigration to the United States.
It processes applications for citizenship, green cards, and work authorization, focusing on benefits administration rather than enforcement.
The Wyatt center refers to the Donald W. Wyatt Detention Facility in Central Falls, Rhode island and is a maximum security quasi public facility established in 1993 to hold federal detainees.
It primarily houses inmates for the U.S. marshals Service and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Otherwise known as ice.
TPS is the designation of a temporary protected status. The Secretary of Homeland Security may designate a foreign country for TPS due to conditions in the country that temporarily prevent the country's nationals from returning safely or in certain circumstances where the country is unable to handle the return of its nationals adequately. And lastly, an A number or alien number is a unique 7, 8 or 9 digit number that the Department of Homeland Security has assigns to an alien or an immigrant.
[00:04:16] Speaker C: Okay, cool. Hi Emily, thank you for taking the time to speak with me as my name's Andrew. I'm hosting this third podcast episode for the Access to Justice Lab and today we're focusing on my third blog post, which is about legal aid in the immigration space and specifically legal aid as provided to children. But I think the conversation today is really just touching on some of your personal experiences and the things that you have witnessed as a member of Harvard Law, as a part of the Harvard Legal Aid Bureau, and perhaps more specifically as co president of the Harvard Immigration Project.
To give you a quick rundown on the topic, as I'm sure you remember about this time last year, there were those pictures going around of kids sitting in front of judges without attorneys, without legal representation.
And a lot of that was due in part to the federal government's rescission of funding specifically appropriated for providing representation to unaccompanied minors. And while I know that the Harvard Immigration Project isn't limited to helping immigrants of any particular age, you are certainly involved in both detention facilities and just an understanding of what immigrants are going
[00:05:43] Speaker B: through while in custody and while subject
[00:05:45] Speaker C: to immigration enforcement generally. So there's really no expectation that you know exactly the case that I'm talking about or anything like that. But I guess I'm just curious to hear about your year, especially this past year, working with immigrants, helping immigrants connect immigrants to representation of any sort and what that's looked like on the ground.
[00:06:07] Speaker D: Yeah, this is a really important topic. I think what's interesting right now in the legal aid space is a lot of funding and resources, specifically Going to deportation defense. I think before all the current ICE raids and political pressure on so many people of different statuses, there was a lot more legal aid capacity to do affirmative work. And that would look like asylum cases. T visa, U visa, a lot more SIJ was happening. And SIJ specifically involves children, or in the case of Massachusetts, people up to it varies by state because of course that's a family proceeding that then goes to uscis.
But what we are seeing a lot of in ICE presence are targeting specific workplaces.
And so we're, we're seeing a lot of, at least in Massachusetts, adult men being picked up. And when you talk about children and its effect on children, regardless of whether children are also being detained, they are being affected. Immigrant children are being affected by having what is often the primary breadwinner in a lot of situations in Massachusetts by their parent being detained. There's. So what's really interesting about where ICE detains people and how it leads into who's being detained is that there's a couple locations in Massachusetts, you have the Plymouth location and then you have somewhere that's a little bit for a couple hours out, the White center, there's a longer name for it, Wyatt, Donald T. Wyatt, I think is the name. But the Wyatt center, they both only house men. Right. Because these are. ICE is basically renting out a portion of a prison to detain individuals. And so they are, they are basically held at limits at how many they can bring in and also what gender they can bring in based off of the already existing requirements for that prison or jail. And so because of that, you're seeing a lot of workforces where men are located, like construction sites, agricultural sites, restaurants. We have a lot of big food processing here in Massachusetts too, just to name a couple companies like bona fide Wilson Farms, like all these places where our wholesale retailers from bringing food from the farms of West Mass. To the supermarkets of the greater Boston area. There's been ICE presence there and there's also been a lot of ICE presence near the fisheries and both the processing plants. And also I met a client who was literally detained right outside of work from a deli slash fish retail store, like a specialized kind of like miniature market. And ICE has really been taking their direction because based off of where they can store people.
And that's why I do think that we've been seeing less kids being picked up specifically in Massachusetts. But I think that will vary state by state based off of what they. Where they can hold people.
[00:09:01] Speaker C: Totally. So it feels very global as far as the impact on immigrants and their families go. But you were, you mentioned towards the beginning of what you just said on how you feel like funding for and perhaps representation of immigrants has been decreasing significantly. Can you say a little bit more about that?
[00:09:22] Speaker D: Yes. So because so many people have been detained and then also put in removal proceedings, so much legal aid has been going to doing intakes. HIP is involved in this, going into detention centers and doing intakes that we then can hopefully give to PEAR or other immigration partners. And because of that, because every.
Every two weeks or so we go in and frankly, we're meeting a new batch of people. Sometimes people do stay there for weeks, but a lot of the times they're getting moved to different centers, especially if they're in expedited removal proceedings to Louisiana. That's a big processor. And so because of that, original funding that would go to affirmative style cases in an emergency way have been moved to these deportation defense cases. And so it does feel like all hands on deck in a very meaningful way. But also it means that we are having clients come in. I had a potential client literally just walk in, see that it said legal Aid Bureau. And she said, I have an affirmative asylum case. I'm not receiving mail at my actual location. And because that I meet the court deadline, what can I do? And I gave her a list of. Because we don't do immigration work directly, but a list of partners and people in the MIRA coalition. But I had to be very frank with her, and she even knew about this through her friends, through her networks. I told her that much legal aid is going through deportation defense, helping people at the deportation stage. And she knew about this. And I just told her, you have to call and hopefully you get something.
[00:10:55] Speaker C: Okay, that's interesting. So it feels like it seems like
[00:11:00] Speaker B: the posture for a lot of folks,
[00:11:02] Speaker C: for a lot of immigrants has changed significantly, or maybe the trend in litigation has changed. What do deportation proceedings and representation against
[00:11:12] Speaker B: deportation proceedings look like at the stage you're involved in?
[00:11:17] Speaker D: Yeah, so at hip, we typically do intakes. And so these are people that could have a range of different cases I've met. I would call them children because they're like 19 years old, but if you're 18 plus, you can be put in these adults proceedings and I can meet somebody who's very much eligible for sij. Right. However they've been detained. And because either some of these people were originally had status, whether it was through tps, which was a big one that affected the Venezuelan community, it's also why we're seeing so much ICE enforcement because so many people became deportable that originally were not on anyone's radar, like specifically him. He had tps. He had an asylum case that he kind of stopped once he got tps.
And then because the asylum case was basically dismissed because of his lack of following up, even though he was a minor during that time. Right now he's getting put in deportation proceedings because of his involvement in the law, which was like a very minimal. Police were called for a domestic issue at his home that he was not involved in. However, the cops realized he did not have status, took him in. And when I had met him, he had been there for a month already.
Yeah. And they let us know that at that point he wanted to be deported. Because I think older, and this is like a. I think a more larger generalization, but the older you are, as long as you're not too old where you're senior, and this is very hard in your body. Older men are able to last a little bit longer in these detention facilities. But if you meet a kid who's 19 years old and has never been through something like this, he was actually still in high school because he was held back when he came here from a different country.
This is completely new to him. He is here with people that he's never met before, has no connections. All his family's back in his home country. Right. He was like, I can't be here anymore. I need to go back. How do I navigate that process? And so even that is not a clean cut process. We're meeting these people at really different levels and with different desires. And so in that case, we're not looking at a referral. We're basically giving him the language that he would need to go to his next master calendar hearing, which is basically like a, like a conference. Check in and tell the article, the judge who's not an Article 3 judge, like tell the day basically that I want to be deported and I waive my rights. And even then that could take weeks.
Right. And because processing takes so much time, they need to also.
They also need to make sure that this isn't. Cat is an issue. Like all the Convention Against Torture. These are all things that you could have not received asylum, but you could have received a lower level of protection where you can't be sent back to your home country, but you can't stay in the U.S. right. So now you're in this weird middle ground where you've lost on your asylum case. And people are asking us, what do I do now.
And really it's a waiting game, waiting for the US to find a different country to deport you to. Right. And so in that case. Yeah, so in that case, when we're doing the intake, it's more. Let's think about where would you like to go? Like, where do you have support systems? And so sometimes I'm talking to a person who's from a country where if they go back, they could be killed by the gangs. And so we're like, do you have family in Spain maybe? Do you know anyone in Spain? Let's think about countries where you speak the language. Right? And then you're able to obviously put that as a preference as to where to go, but that's nothing guaranteed. Right. And it's hard to make a generalization as to where we're meeting them because we are frankly meeting everyone at different stages there. And it's also, there's so much overlap with the criminal system where people get picked up for. Let's say they get picked up right after a bond hearing for a criminal charge, maybe like a dui, for example, they get picked up right outside of the courtroom after appearing in person, doing what they need to do, waiting for their court date. When they're in detention, they can't make their court date. Now, that can negatively affect an open asylum case that they have that could prevent them from getting deported. Right. And so you have all these overlapping things. And sometimes when we're doing triage at the detention centers, it's like, who has the nearest master calendar hearing where they can basically say, I need more time to find a lawyer. We try to help them get a lawyer if they have an individual calendar hearing, which means they're going to hear the merits of the case. Typically it's a little bit too late for us to get involved, but those are the ones that, if we can, we'll try to get them to immediate assistance.
But again, that's not guaranteed because it takes a long time to prepare for an individual.
[00:15:54] Speaker C: And something that you had mentioned that comes up and is happening nationally is everything is sped up. Right. And those who are in detention in one state can be moved to another state, whether it's Louisiana, Texas or some other state, rather quickly. So when you're triaging and having these conversations that end up perhaps being the only legal support or anything close to representation that some of these folks are at the very least receiving from you, is that playing in the back of your head? Like, how does that. How has that changed? Perhaps the triaging process, but Specifically what can even be done if you know that within a week they could be either summarily deported or change put somewhere and not updated in the system and kind of just lost in the limbo.
[00:16:45] Speaker D: Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up because getting lost in the system is actually really common. I think people don't realize that eoir, which is where you can check based off of country of national origin and also your A number where a person is. But I had a client in hlab whose son was detained and they never wrote down his A number properly.
When he called me asking can you help me find my son? I was like, let me look for Eoir. This is publicly available, we can do this together. This is not even though it's necessarily outside the scope of my representation. It wasn't necessarily a legal matter that you needed an attorney for. Um, but when he had called, his son had given him an 11 digit number. An A number is a 10 digit number. So we tried different variations to get to that 10 digits and clearly he just read off a different number.
And after that his son was moved from one facility to another. I had asked people who were gonna go to the next detention center visit, can you ask around if you see my client's son? And they had seen him, but not anymore. And I had closed the case off with that client cuz it was a labor case that was not involved with immigration or anything like that. And basically what he's doing now is I, I, I gave him some immigration resources and hopefully together they'll be able to track down his son. But there, there really is not much you can do other than tell people while I'm there, hey, talk to your family, be very clear, this is your A number. Memorize this. People need to memorize that. The way people know their Social Security, that's something that people don't realize until it's too late. And so having that number, obviously knowing the country of origin and having a person on the outside that is your safe person that has like a copy of your documents, copy of your A number so that if something were to happen, you can be tracked down because eventually eoir will be updated. Or if you call, which is sometimes, sometimes better than Eoir and somebody can track it in the system, they can tell you where that person is. And that's also influenced a lot of what we're doing in hlab now, which is through the family practice, family preparedness. Because sometimes when you are visiting a client or a potential client in a deportation scenario where they're detained by then it's already too late for a lot of intervention on a student practitioner side. Unless you're doing direct legal services work like HERC does, or crimmigration, something like that. But from an H lab or HIP perspective, what we're doing a lot is sending people out to immigration partners. But what can we do on the preventative side is family preparedness. And, and I could talk a little bit about family preparedness if you want.
[00:19:25] Speaker C: Yeah, that'd be great. Just to really give us understanding of how issues that are affecting immigrants, unaccompanied minors or otherwise really go beyond the confines of immigration court. That'd be great to hear a little bit more about family preparedness.
[00:19:41] Speaker D: Yeah. So basically, family preparedness is this idea that family unity is of the utmost importance. And that includes not just children in a typical sense, but also if you are a caregiver for a disabled family member or from a cousin, that may be not your child, but you often get caregiving roles, things like that. And so we're really trying to expand the concept of what family is. So family preparedness, but it's meeting people in the community. A couple weeks ago, I, for example, went to a labor center out New Bedford. And at first you really need to have a discussion with the community of what family preparedness is. And it's basically having a document organized with different people's, a number in the family, so they have it, country of origin, a copy of those documents that they need, and then also an emergency plan set in place.
So that emergency plan could be, let's say the children are US citizens, but the parents are not. If the parents were to be detained, what would happen to the US citizen children? Because a lot of the times what parents want is reunification, right? They want somebody to take the minor children to another country, wherever they're going to be deported to, so that they can be reunified. That's really difficult if there's no assigned caregiver with that child's documents and with permission to help them leave the country. Same thing if the child is undocumented. It's actually harder, I think, if the child is undocumented, because in that case it's possible the child doesn't even have any paperwork. Right. A lot of times people come here with the paperwork in mind. They cross, they go through a very hard journey, whether it's going through Africa, through then South America, then going through the Rio Grande, or whether you're starting in America and going to Rio Grande. Right. Paperwork can be lost and it's really hard to get a copy of that paperwork from your original country, especially if you're like from a very rural area. A lot of these people don't speak the primary language of their country. They speak an indigenous language or they don't have the ability to read in that language. And so all these issues create it where we will meet families that have a child born in different countries that they cross the border with, who don't have documents. Right. And so family preparedness is in part helping them get those documents in the first place, because we have the resources to ask the country of Guatemala to send over this person's birth certificate and passport or whatever is necessary. Right. But also making sure that there is a plan in place, that there's something that they've thought about.
[00:22:12] Speaker B: Sure.
[00:22:13] Speaker C: About simply having the awareness. Yeah, yeah.
[00:22:16] Speaker D: Because. And this is something that families don't want to think about. Families never want to think about the worst because it becomes more real.
And that's why it's actually more of an intervention in a family's life than you would think. Because really this is just a paperwork.
But the lead up to the paperwork is a lot.
[00:22:34] Speaker C: Yeah, I imagine.
[00:22:35] Speaker B: Thank you.
[00:22:36] Speaker C: Thank you for that explanation. Thinking about this issue perspectively, because there are still several years left of this federal administration and there are likely going to be ongoing impacts to this space moving forward, regardless of who or what apparatus is in charge, I wanted to first conceptualize the issue as it has developed over the years. And what I'm talking about specifically is federal funding.
So as I'm sure legal aid is funded at varying levels, whether it be federal, private, state, what have you, in different ways across different states, blah, blah, blah. But for example, GBLs, which you are, I'm sure, are aware of, Greater Boston Legal Services is an organization that receives no federal funding and that affords them an extraordinary amount of flexibility. For example, like they have. They don't have any qualms in accepting someone who's undocumented or someone who isn't a citizen or anything of that sort of. That that particular functioning gives them a lot of flexibility. Right. And they are mirrored in both function and practice with the Volunteer Lawyers Project, which is also in the Boston area, but does receive federal funding. And so they, when federal funding came with certain strings that these two organizations split to be able to touch on different populations and types of cases.
[00:23:59] Speaker B: Right.
[00:24:00] Speaker C: And something that has happened in the past year, as I mentioned at the start of this call, is the federal government rescinding money that was appropriated specifically for providing legal representation to unaccompanied minors in the U.S. right. Or moving through the immigration system. And a lawsuit that was started by a bunch of legal aid organizations filed against one, the hhs, right. One of the funding departments out of the federal government for having rescinded that funding.
That was actually a success. And they got the both the district court out of the Northern District of California and the ninth Circuit to restore that funding as required by law. Which is great development as far as working and fighting against some of the harms that the federal government is perpetuating against immigrants and families of immigrants. But interestingly enough, the federal government pivoted in its approach. So instead of getting rid of all the money outright, what they've started to do is change the RFP or just the bidding process for the legal aid organizations who could receive federal funding. And what they've done is severely restricted. Who can even afford to apply? By diluting legal representation, by no longer requiring in person intakes, by trying to make legal services for children as young as three years old, something that can only be delivered via a computer screen or some other more limited, ineffective, what we understand to be an ineffective tool or method. And it has really undercut the historical legal aid organizations. And someone who has recently won one of those contract bids is actually a private tech vendor that has worked with DHS for over 20 years. They don't have a lot of lawyers. In fact, they actually had to work with another nonprofit to cover their bases in that sense. But it's working to change what legal representation even means. So if kids are really only getting one phone screen and being put in front of a screen without really checking to make sure that they're needs are being met, whether they even understand what's happening to them is something that a lot of advocates are concerned about. And a new development in the immigration legal aid space. Whether it's what I'm talking about, specifically what you've seen on the ground, or things that have come up in conversations with other advocates? Where do you see this space going in response to all the things, all the terrible things that have come out of this particular administration, but also out of an immigration system that hasn't really worked for immigrants for many decades?
[00:26:48] Speaker D: Yeah, I think I have two kind of very distinct thoughts on this. I think one is we've been seeing a lot of remote proceedings like IJ Court, like specifically immigration court is specifically held remotely for most jurisdictions now. And I think some people saw that as a good thing. Initially. This was something that happened during COVID this is like something that's just carried over. It was thought originally to be more accessible, things like that. However, in reality, and this is anecdotal, but something that we've talked about is it's really easy for an IJ to deport someone that they can't see other than through a computer screen. Right. When we do court, watch for hip. When there's a family member in the room of the actual courtroom, not just on the call, but in the room, and IJ will typically engage with them in some way, and bond is more often than not given.
And so that's just like a very small sample size, but a trend that we've seen, like, this past year. And so I think I'm a little bit hesitant on using remote means to make the court more accessible, because oftentimes it does make it easier to create this cycle of deportation.
And it's also easier for a lot of misunderstandings to happen because people are. These people are zooming in. Oftentimes, if they are with a lawyer, it'll be like with a lawyer in a room and. And that those cases are pretty fine. But when they're in a detention center and an officer trying to get the camera on them, and they have this microphone set up, and there's this lag where they're interrupting the IJ because of the lag, and the IJ starts to get annoyed and upset and then starts to not explain the concepts as clearly, you can really see the effect that having these proceedings virtual can have.
It's also another thing that, like, when there are, like, a language barrier, it's really hard for somebody to feel like they can step in a remote situation.
Like somebody to advocate for themselves saying, hey, I understand a little bit of English, and I don't think this translator got it exactly right. Kind of trying to step in in remote proceedings because they can't see the face of the judge, they can't see the face of the interpreter. Oftentimes they're looking at a very blurry computer screen on their end. And so we're seeing a lot of mistranslations happening. And we see the person.
Their reaction is like, wait, I don't know if I said that exactly right. But they don't feel comfortable saying anything because they're just in a room by themselves with an officer.
[00:29:22] Speaker B: Yeah.
[00:29:23] Speaker D: And that power dynamic makes it so they don't feel like they can speak up. Right. They don't feel like this is a time for themselves to advocate. It feels like they're still in the detention center, in a space where they have to be quiet and listen to the guard.
And so we're seeing that I can see the effects of not only in doing the legal work. Right. As I can 100% understand that having. With children and with adults alike. Right. There's such a human aspect of legal representation that you're losing by having a screen and making that something you need to do rather than a necessity because of other reasons. I think the second point that I know that a lot of legal aid organizations. This past spring, Breakthrough Hip, we did a field trip, I would say, where we volunteered at two different legal aid organizations. I was assigned to a really amazing, very small nonprofit called the Southern California Immigration Project in San Diego. And they do a lot of work in Calexico, which is for people who aren't aware it is very close to the border, but very inland in California. And so it is very far away from any legal provider. And so the creator of Skip specifically created that. That nonprofit because she saw a gap in legal representation for people at that facility, and she really wanted to create an organization that specifically does work for that facility. Right. And so something that I was talking to her about ways that she was structuring the nonprofit that she started around 11 years ago, how she thinks about her funding, basically said she refuses to ever apply for federal funds.
And this was 11 years ago when it was obviously a different administration.
And she was. She had been. This has been her brainchild for the past 15 to 20 years. Right. And so this is something she's been thinking about. It was obviously in a different administration.
And she said, I knew that there was gonna be waves.
Right. She was an older lady, and she said, I had lived through the creation of ICE and everything after 9 11. Right. And I knew that kind of powerful event could happen again, and it could lead to administration change, it could lead to policy change. And I felt more confident in the state of California as a more stable source of funding, that I didn't even want to give myself the opportunity to receive federal funds. So she's never applied for federal funds. She's only ever applied for city funds, like municipal funds or state funds from California. So it's a very small operation. But she said, frankly, when everything happened with Trump and Trump won, it did not affect her work, like, other than the actual on the ground things, but regarding funding, it did not change anything.
[00:32:04] Speaker C: It's amazing. It's. It's astounding, the brilliance that people bring to the space, you included, I guess, as I close this out. When you're work, when you're part of a space that can be so difficult to navigate, and working alongside clients who are going through so many things, what are the motivations that kind of keep you moving? As such a nimble advocate, as such an empathetic person, and as someone who really cares about the people that they represent and support, what are the things that kind of keep you going?
[00:32:36] Speaker D: I think everyone has a story, right? And it's really interesting to meet somebody because obviously they're the main character in their life. Right. And you're meeting someone in a very hard moment of their life. And a lot of these people that I'm meeting have had so many hard moments, and yet when they're finally talking to a legal advocate and they feel listened to, there could be such joy.
Right. And so if they're able to maintain hope and joy in recounting some of the hardest things, who am I to take away that joy or not to pursue it the same way that they do?
[00:33:13] Speaker C: Amazing.
Okay, thank you, Emily.
[00:33:16] Speaker D: Of course. Of course. I hope this is helpful.
[00:33:18] Speaker C: This is so helpful. Thank you so much.
[00:33:20] Speaker A: Proof Over Precedent is a production of the Access to Justice Lab at Harvard Law School.
Views expressed in student podcasts are not necessarily those of the A J Lab.
Thanks for listening. If we piqued your interest, please subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Even better, leave us a rating or share an episode with a friend or on social media.
Here's a sneak preview of what we'll bring you next week.
And Ben. Your Honor, tell me if I've got this wrong, but I believe that the the article takes place in the context of a debate about how to try to achieve or improve at least access to justice in the United States. A debate among those who agree that there is a problem that requires action, about whether we should try to solve it primarily by seeking a civil. Gideon. Right. Which is a phrase we'll have to unpackage, or whether we should seek it primarily through other measures, and if so, what those other measures might look like.
