Jenna Ellis, Student at St. Mary’s University in Twickenham, UKHistorically as well as contemporarily, immigration has been a key and extremely polarizing issue in American political discussion and discourse at all levels of US society. Certain leaders have maintained more open and accepting immigration policies but while others have used their position and leverage to launch anti-immigrant campaigns. With the rise in forced disapearenced attributed to ICE raids, illegal detainment and deportation under Trump’s leadership during his second term in what the IFIMES reported as a decisive yet telling victory (IFIMES 2024), it has become necessary to reflect on his past term. From 2015-2021, discussions surrounding migration became the forefront of media, connected to Donald Trump’s campaign rhetoric. While Donald Trump was not the first, nor the last politician to blame and misrepresent migration for political gain, there is little denying the sensational nature of the topic following his speeches and statements. Blaming latinx migrants as a threat and blurring the definition of what it means to be a latinx as well as a migrant, Trump was able to exploit misinformed US citizens into believing migrants from the southern border were a threat to American safety, prosperity and cultural identity- a narrative amplified by mainstream and conservative outlets. Drawing on scapegoating theory as present by authors Mellema and Glick, this paper explores the ways in which the Trump administration and American media collaborated both explicitly and implicitly in constructing false narratives of Latinx migrants as scapegoats for national grievances related to crime, the economy and cultural change. In examining this dynamic phenomenon, it can be seen and understood how systematic discrimination and racialized narratives are legitimized and established in present day United States society,
Immigration of Latinx Migrants in US- a historical review
As previously mentioned, immigration is considered globally to be a highly contested topic and is at the forefront of most American political and social discussions. From its founding until the present day, there have been over 75 million individuals who have migrated to the United States, Mckay, MC 2013). The United States is home to many first-generation and second-generation immigrants and is a nation that was built upon diversity and migration itself. Within the diversity, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, 18.5 % of the national population identifies as Latin. Of the foreign-born population, more than half have Latin American heritage and ancestry, to varying degrees, (United States Census Bureau, 2025). The term Latinx is used by individuals whose ethnic and racial background can be traced back to Central America, South America, and parts of the Caribbean. It includes those who speak Latin-based languages such as Spanish, French, and Portuguese (Lopez, Mora et al. 2020). The close connection between the United States and Latin American cultures and communities is illustrated by the use of gender-neutral language. In the United States, it is more commonly used by Latin American citizens to attempt to de-gender the Spanish language and allow more openness of identity (Lopez, Mora et al. 2020). While the term was initially coined in the early 2000 in order to incorporate gender neutrality into gendered language, it wasn’t until 2016 that it became used more frequently following the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida (Lopez, Mora et al. 2020) and the legalization of gay marriage under Obama’s Administration. This was followed by an increase again in the use of the word in 2020 during the Black Lives Matter Movement, the Covid pandemic, and Trump’s first term (Lopez, Mora et al. 2020).
However, while newly introduced and identity-sensitive terminology might manifest in contemporary ways, migration from Latin American countries to the United States is neither a new phenomenon nor a contemporary issue. However, the rate at which people are migrating from these countries increased from 1 million in 1960 to 19 million in 2010, (Tienda and Sánchez 2013). Despite major misconceptions that perpetuate the idea that Latinx migrants are undocumented, they make up about one-third of individuals with legal permanent resident status, (Tienda and Sánchez, 2013). Many Latinx migrants from Nicaragua, Honduras, and El Salvador became eligible for the temporary protection status after 2001 following environmental disasters within their respective countries, (Tienda and Sánchez, 2013).
There has been historic discrimination on behalf of the US government towards migrants of the Latinx community. The narrative of illegal migrants taking away jobs existed from American citizens long before Donald Trump’s Administration and has been used to allow and disseminate harm. During the Great Depression when the United States was in an economic crisis, people who looked “Mexican”—including U.S. citizens—were repatriated to Mexico in order to reduce competition for scarce jobs or conserve relief benefits for those viewed as “true residents”. In Los Angeles alone, these actions cut the Latino population by one-third, (Johnson 2019). This was reversed shortly after due to labor shortages during World War two following a mandatory draft with the Bracero Program. Initially presented as a positive opportunity to support labor shortages in the US and Mexico, the United States permitted millions of Mexican men to come to the US on short-term worker visas specifically focused on agricultural positions to address the shortage. Despite promises and assurances of the protection of workers’ rights, the Bracero program quickly became exploitative, and the workers were surcharged for room and board, deducted pay, and exposure to deadly chemicals, (Library of Congress, 2019). Ultimately this program is considered a failure of implementation and directly correlated with an influx of undocumented and trafficked workers in the US, (Library of Congress, 2019).
Anti-latinx rhetoric during Trumps First Term
To understand how scapegoating of Latinx immigrants intensified, we must first examine Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and administration which started in 2015 before he was elected in 2016. He entered office January 2017 and maintained the position until 2021. He represented and attempted to align with the conservative GOP parties’ interests during that time and ran against democratic powerhouse Hilary Clinton. Infamously known for his highly covered promises to build a wall along the southern US border and to slash funding for sanctuary cities, or cities that limit the jurisdiction of immigration authorities to deport individuals, (Smith 2017), it was clear under his administration that migrants from Latin America were being targeted by his agenda. The social climate preceding the Trump administration fostered an unsympathetic environment and the media alongside the US government perpetuated these ideas even further.
The Trump Administration in conjunction with media elevated and amplified these narratives to the highest levels of political and social discussion, blaming them for societal grievances. This is exemplified through rhetoric spread during Donald Trump’s first administration by both himself at rallies, his administration’s policy, and media networks. Local, national, and global news all covered this topic, presenting it from a variety of perspectives, diverting based on political leaning and media bias that then made it easy for both individuals and communities to enact prejudice and scapegoat the Latinx community.
From his first day, NBC News quoted President Trump claiming that “Mexico is not sending its best people. He took it a step further saying that they are bringing both drugs and crime into the US, (Terkel and Lebowitz, 2024). This narrative continued throughout his entire campaign, referring to Latinx migrants as “bad hombres”, (PBS 2016). However, the media shared this commonality and echoed rhetoric spread by the government at the time – Latinx migrants were illegal, criminals and rapists, and taking public resources and jobs meant for US citizens. Not only did the administration target Latinx migrants without proper documents, but they also considered Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA and Dreamer recipients a threat, and pushed for a removal of their status, even though these individuals had arrived in the US from a young age and considered the USA their home, (Gomez and Perez Huber 2019).
The administration and media presented migrants from Latin and South America as a threat to public safety and raised a key campaign point. In 2015, during the same period as the first Trump campaign, the FBI reported that violent crime rates had increased by 3.1 percent from the previous year. The murder and nonnegligent manslaughter rate had increased by 10%. Along with that concerning trend, the report indicated that rape had increased by 6.3% from the previous year as well. Crime rates can be attributed to many dimensions and situations, ranging from socio-economic factors ((Wikström and Sampson, 2009) to changes in legal definitions and frameworks surrounding crime itself. This can be seen in the aforementioned FBI report about rape. The legal framework and definition of rape changed between 2014 and 2015, therefore more instances can be evaluated and considered in that category from the previous year which is reflected in the report. With crime rates increasing and a general feeling of insecurity growing, Mellema’s structures on scapegoating are seen in action. The insecurity and lack of perceived safety fostered a hostile environment in the United States that allowed the Trump administration and media to perpetuate narratives, built upon preexisting stereotypes and avoid addressing the root cause of the issue at hand.
Scapegoating Theory
Historically, the term scapegoat was used in religious contexts. Typically, a goat would be sacrificed by a priest or rabbi, passing the community guilt onto the animal as a sacrifice to god, (Faherty 2019). This could be understood as a means to an end to protect society from evil spirits and sin. Today, this terminology carries a transfer of guilt, but rather, is used politically and socially to refer to another group that has been ostracized, othered, or blamed by the majority for grievances that a community is facing, (Mellema 2000). These groups often are forced to bear the responsibility of society for the blame that should be prescribed to others. Peter Glick defines scapegoating as “an extreme form of prejudice, in which an outgroup is unfairly blamed for having intentionally caused an ingroup’s misfortune,” (Dovidio, Glick and Rudman, 2005). Gregory Mellema highlights key structures and elements that exist and lead to society scapegoating certain groups, starting with unfavorable and undesirable conditions, for which the scapegoat can be blamed, (Mellema 2000). These unfavorable conditions must be current and exist as a present threat, regardless of if the threat is perceived or real, (Mellema, 2000). A crucial element of Mellema’s scapegoating theory emphasizes that It is not necessary to know anything of significance about the identity of a person or persons whom one is making a scapegoat”, (Mellema, 2000) and it can be argued that the less known about the scapegoated group, the easier it will be to other and ostracize individuals through the intentional or unintentional spread of misinformation. Glick’s definition provides the same connotation, referring to someone who is “unfairly blamed”. This can alter the individuals’ sense of belonging in the community which is highly important and valuable to maintain a feeling of personal safety, (Dovidio, Glick, and Rudman, 2005).
The motivation for scapegoating and prejudice can vary. Glick references self-enhancement as a key factor and driver for developing prejudice. Low self-esteem, insecurity, fear, and anxiety can be identified as motivators and can be considered a functional aspect and goal of prejudice. The desire to maintain a position of power to gain and preserve individual security over another and Glick argues that there are inherent positions of power that exist in all societies and the group that maintains this power is acutely aware of the potential they have to exploit that position in the case of minorities, (Dovidio, Glick and Rudman, 2005). This discrimination can be proliferated and enacted even further when there are ethnic and racial differences that make the minority group easily identifiable.
While the context of scapegoating has changed as media has evolved, there is little doubt that there is a direct correlation between media portrayal of minorities and public response to these groups as well as how individuals see themselves (Ordway 2020). Both obvious and subtle influences affect this process and evolve to foster a hostile environment and transmit prejudice toward a specific group (Dovidio, Glick, and Rudman, 2005). This fosters social prejudice that becomes embedded in social norms and behavior translates forward through society and normalizes unjust, unreasonable, and baseless narratives. Media can be considered to amplify these narratives; however it is not exclusive- legal frameworks and policy can be understood to shape narratives surrounding social bias, (Dovidio, Glick, and Rudman, 2005). This gives power and validity to the use of terminology such as “criminal” and “illegal” and supports the construction of a narrative that includes law enforcement intervention and criminalization of the scapegoated group. This language limits and impedes a sense of belonging as well as threatens to recategorize communities based on stereotypes that are not factually based, (Dovidio, Glick and Rudman, 2005). These biases eventually develop into stereotypes, or reflections of social and cognitive structures that form our thoughts, feelings, and interactions (Dovidio, Glick, and Rudman, 2005).
Media Representation of Latinx Migrants
The IFIMES has researched and followed trends related to the spread of misinformation and disinformation within the media, and latinx migrants are not exempt from these phenomena, but rather further victimized due to inaccurate stereotypes portrayed in the online media in what the institute labels a lack of digital accountability in the digital space (IFIMES 2025). In real life, this translates to increased rates of violent crime directly correlated with ideas from Trump’s campaign. In his 2015 campaign announcement, he stated, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best… They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people,” (Trump 2015). Not only are these narratives extremely dangerous, but they also lack any empirical evidence at all and were widely condemned by NGOs, democrats, and civil rights organizations, (Nava, 2019). However, despite the backlash, the media continued to play a crucial role in exploiting feelings of insecurity felt by the American people. This can be attributed to the immense power that mainstream TV media has in the US. The public relies on major media channels and 66% of Americans heavily rely on visual media such as news, television, and cinema to gather information rather than reading online articles or social media, (Bisconte 2025).
A study conducted by Figueroa-Caballero and Mastro in 2019 explored this topic by looking at the perception that US citizens of Latin American descent have regarding Latinx migrants. Using a survey methodological approach, the results of their study contended with Glick’s theory of media having the ability to foster social prejudice. It explains that specifically, Mexican Americans are more likely to distance themselves from the news and immigrant communities to protect themselves, (Figueroa-Caballero and Mastro 2019). The results of the survey indicated feelings of shame and anger and therefore it is likely that Latinx Americans experience undue and damaging effects about their ethnic identity.” (Figueroa-Caballero and Mastro 2019).
When looking at visual media, a report that analyzed 338 images that appeared in three national news magazines between 2000-2010 described how Latinx migrants were framed as criminal and illegal, half a decade before Trump ran for office. The study found that most images portrayed Latinx migrants as “unauthorized to live in the US,” (Farris, Mohammad, 2018). The same study found that forty percent of images contained some imagery related to law enforcement at the Mexico/US southern border and of that forty percent, nineteen referenced either directly or indirectly building a wall or fence along the southern border, (Farris, Mohammad, 2018). While the researchers analyzed data before Trump’s first term, the social climate that facilitated his discrimination was already visible at this time. Images examined in the study also proved that many depictions of Latinx migrants displayed them doing labor or other work that is considered “low-skilled” positions, further contributing to the social stigma around Latinx migrants being uneducated compared to high-skilled middle-class American workers (Farris E, Mohammad H, 2018). These narratives are harmful, not only because they are untrue, but because social attitudes are amplified by the media and carry immense power in shaping and framing immigration policy, foreign policy, and community health.
Not only does direct language contribute to the isolation, lack of belonging and eventually scapegoating of minority communities but the lack of representation in the media contributes to the lack of knowledge and awareness of the community itself. Despite making up 18.5% of the US population, there are very minimal depictions of Latinx migrants in major cinemas and films. A report done in 2019 indicated that of 47,268 characters analyzed from major Hollywood movies from 2007-2018, only 4.5% of these characters had Latinx names or referenced Latin American ancestry and heritage, even though Latin Americans make up more than half of the Los Angeles Community, home to Hollywood and 39% of the population of the state of California, (USC Annenberg 2019). Roughly a quarter of the characters were represented as criminals and almost all characters were isolated from the Latinx community even within the film, (USC Annenberg). Furthermore, Latinx individuals are portrayed in stereotypically subordinate roles such as gardeners or agricultural workers, maids, and irregular laborers both on television and film, (Bisconte, 2025). This lends to negative stereotypes that latinx migrants are uneducated and diminishes their capacity and capabilities to be a part of large solutions and industries.
Similarly, Latinx characters were portrayed as the only ones in the film, typically surrounded by other white actors, and were presented to be white-passing or were positioned as a lower class when situated within their community. Cameron diaz for example was a main latinx actress in cinema, however she often was the sole representative in the movies and was casted along majority white counterparts, (USC Annenberg 2019). Therefore, they are disconnected cinematically from their ethnic and cultural identity, and this enforces the idea that assimilation is necessary, and immigrants must adapt completely to the US culture. It also contributes to a limited understanding of Latinx culture in the US and the homogenous nature that the media perpetuates, despite vast diversity within the community. Minimal representation in film production such as directing, production, casting direction screenplay roles can also be seen as a contributing factor to why there is a lack of depiction of the characters, (USC Annenberg 2019).
While cinema may seem less relevant to the scapegoating and persecution of migrants, there is a direct correlation between prejudice and film consumption. The National Hispanic Media Coalition (NHMC) conducted a survey and found that those exposed to entertainment pieces that portray Latinx migrants in a negative way directly contribute to individual narratives, (Bisconte, 2025). The study also found that even though narratives on Latinx migrants exist in all entertainment spaces, those who listen to and watch right-wing conservative news stations such as FOX will likely have less of a personal relationship with the Latinx community and therefore they can fall victim to false narratives and misinformation even easier (Bisconte 2025). This supports Mellema’s (2000) theory and emphasizes the lack of understanding of a community as a key element of in scapegoating structure to amplify prejudice.
Spoken language can be considered another isolating factor when looking at the media portrayal of Latino migrants. Individuals of nonlatin descent who consume media presented in the Spanish language demonstrated higher rates of anti-Latinx sentiments despite contributing to a greater sense of belonging within the community itself, (Darr et al., 2020). This can be easily connected to Glick’s scapegoating frameworks. When there is a difference between the majority community and minority community that is easily identifiable, such as the case with visual ethnic differences in Glick’s theory but can be extended to include language as well.
However, notwithstanding that many Americans prefer visual media, there are still many gaps in printed and written media that contribute to gaps in understanding and victimization of Latinx migrants. Research conducted on print media that referenced Latinx migrants analyzed 185,244 articles from mainstream newspapers such as the NY Times, and Washington Post and found that while there were positive themes mentioned, including agricultural and labor benefits of migrants, they also perpetuated narratives of criminality and overrepresented illegal immigration rates. On the contrary, the study found that “economic factors such as poverty, unemployment, and welfare use are not associated with as much negativity as is often assumed,” (Bliech, 2018). While this is a positive trend, it supports Mellema and Glick’s theories of scapegoating and enforces the idea that the less known about an individual or their demographic, the easier it becomes to force false narratives and make inaccurate or untrue statements.
The prejudice against Latinx Immigrants in the United States during Donald Trump’s first campaign was enabled by deeply rooted systematic discrimination, which had already existed prior to him entering office. Historical patterns of labor exploitation with the bracero program, repatriation such a operation wetback and cultural exclusion such as lack of linguistical and cultural inclusion in film and news laid the groundwork for citizens to become susceptible to untrue narratives and demonstrated that the treatment of latinx immigrants during the trump administration was not an isolated incident but historically and intrinsically linked to the United States social and political landscape. By understanding scapegoating theory, we can understand how the administration, as well as the media narratives exploited national insecurities surrounding crime, economic hardship and cultural change. Film, visual and written media reinforced and revived long-standing stereotypes that existed about the latinx community. Understanding patterns and mechanisms behind scapegoating as providing by Glick and Mellema are essential to challenging these harmful narratives and in creating a more accessible American society for everyone, regardless of their immigration status. This analysis shows how unfavorable social conditions, coupled with limited public knowledge and awareness lends easily to scapegoating and unjust blaming and persecution of minority groups, specifically when there are visual differences, whether it be racial, cultural or linguistic. The US media played a large role in portraying latinx migrants as criminals, outsides, “bad hombres” and threats to American society and values.
Bibliography:
Bisconte, S. (2025). NHMC Poll Finds that Negative Media Portrayals are Fueling Stereotypes about Immigrants and Latinos – NHMC. [online] Nhmc.org. Available at: https://www.nhmc.org/nhmc-poll-finds-that-negative-media-portrayals-are-fueling-stereotypes-about-immigrants-and-latinos/?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Accessed 12 May 2025].
Bleich, E. (2018). The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly: A Corpus Linguistics Analysis of US Newspaper Coverage of Latinx, 1996–2016. [online] The Journalist’s Resource. Available at: https://journalistsresource.org/race-and-gender/news-media-portray-latinos/.
Darr, J.P., Perry, B.N., Dunaway, J. and Sui, M. (2020). Seeing Spanish: The Effects of Language-Based Media Choices on Resentment and Belonging. Political Communication, 37(4), pp.488–511. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1713268.
Dovidio, J.F., Glick, P. and Rudman, L.A. (2005). On the nature of prejudice : fifty years after Allport. Malden, Ma: Blackwell, Oxford.
Faherty, R. (2019). Sacrifice | religion. In: Encyclopædia Britannica. [online] Available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/sacrifice-religion.
Farris, E. and Mohammad, H. (2018). Picturing Immigration: How the Media Criminalizes Immigrants. [online] Available at: https://journalistsresource.org/race-and-gender/news-media-portray-latinos/.
Federal Bureau of Investigation (2015). Table 1. [online] FBI: UCR. Available at: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/table-1.
Figueroa-Caballero, A. and Mastro, D. (2019). Does Watching This Make Me Feel Ashamed or Angry? an Examination of Latino Americans’ Responses to Immigration Coverage. [online] Journalist Resource. Available at: https://journalistsresource.org/race-and-gender/news-media-portray-latinos/.
Johnson, K.R., 2019. Trump’s Latinx Repatriation. SSRN Electronic Journal. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3321427 [Accessed 17 May 2025].
Gomez, V. and Perez Huber, L. (2019). Examining Racist Nativist Microagressions on DACAmented College Students in the Trump Era. California Journal of Politics and
Policy, 11(2). doi:https://doi.org/10.5070/p2cjpp11243089.
LeMay, M.C. (2013). Transforming America. Santa Barbara, Calif.: Praeger.
Library of Congress (2019). Research Guides: A Latinx Resource Guide: Civil Rights
Cases and Events in the United States: 1942: Bracero Program. [online] guides.loc.gov. Available at: https://guides.loc.gov/latinx-civil-rights/bracero-program.
Lopez, L.N.-B., Lauren Mora and Mark Hugo (2020). About One-in-Four U.S. Hispanics Have Heard of Latinx, but Just 3% Use It. [online] Pew Research Center. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/race-and-ethnicity/2020/08/11/about-one-in-four-u-s-hispanics-have-heard-of-latinx-but-just-3-use-it/.
Mellema, G. (2000). Scapegoats. Criminal Justice Ethics, 19(1), pp.3–9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/0731129x.2000.9992080.
Nava, G. (2019). Opinion: How the invisibility of Latinx people in media is enabling Trump’s bigotry. [online] Los Angeles Times. Available at: https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-09-26/latinx-representation-immigration-trump?utm_source=chatgpt.com [Accessed 23 May 2025].
Ordway, D.-M. (2020). How the news media portray Latinos in stories and images. [online] The Journalist’s Resource. Available at: https://journalistsresource.org/race-and-gender/news-media-portray-latinos.
PBS (2016). To some, Trump’s ‘bad hombres’ is much more than a botched Spanish word. [online] PBS NewsHour. Available at: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trumps-bad-hombres-draws-jeers-spanish-lessons.
Smith, D. (2017). Trump signs order to begin Mexico border wall in immigration crackdown. The Guardian. [online] 25 Jan. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/25/donald-trump-sign-mexico-border-executive-order [Accessed 2 Mar. 2020].
Terkel, A. and Lebowitz, M. (2024). Trump has long used degrading language toward immigrants. [online] NBC News. Available at: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-degrading-language-immigrants-rcna171120.
Tienda, M. and Sánchez, S.M. (2013). Latin American Immigration to the United States. Daedalus, [online] 142(3), pp.48–64. doi:https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_00218.
Tooley, K. (1975). THE CHOICE OF A SURVIVING SIBLING AS ‘SCAPEGOAT’ IN SOME CASES OF MATERNAL BEREAVEMENT?A CASE REPORT. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 16(4), pp.331–339. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1975.tb00367.x.
United States (2025). Explore Census Data. [online] Census.gov. Available at: https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDP1Y2018.DP02?q=immigrant+origin+country&hidePreview=false [Accessed 22 May 2025].
USC Annenburg (2019). Latinos lose out when it comes to Hollywood films. [online] https://annenberg.usc.edu/. Available at: https://annenberg.usc.edu/news/research-and-impact/latinos-lose-out-when-it-comes-hollywood-films.
Wikström, P.-O.H. and Sampson, R.J. (2009). The explanation of crime: context, mechanisms and development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
About the author:
Jenna Ellis is a Master’s Student at St. Mary’s University in Twickenham studying Anti-Trafficking, Organized Crime, Migration and Modern Slavery. Jenna is the London based information officer with the IFIMES institute since spring 2025. She has experience working with survivors of crime, anti-trafficking policy implementation, taskforce coordination and refugee resettlement.
