Analysis: Biden’s sanctuary plan could permanently affect the border

US immigration policy has shifted on its axis over the past 10 days.

Former President Trump and his administration argued for years that people who cross the border without permission should not be able to easily apply for asylum in the United States. This decades-old practice no longer works, Trump and his team insisted.

Feb. On December 21, President Biden proposed a plan that was tantamount to endorsing his predecessor’s position.

International and US laws have long allowed people crossing borders to seek protection from harassment at home. But Biden’s proposal would make it very difficult for migrants to get asylum here if they are traveling through a third country and crossing the border into the US without permission. This policy will undo America’s longstanding commitment to asylum seekers by placing strict limits on where and how those fleeing persecution can seek protection.

“We are moving towards a system where it will be much more difficult for anyone who crosses the border without a permit to obtain asylum,” said Yael Shaher, director of the Americas and Europe at Refugees International.

“We will never go back to what it was before Trump,” she said. “That’s what it’s like.”

Public outcry over the new policy was muted, even among Democrats. Much of the public opposition to the plan came from immigrant advocates, who have consistently criticized Biden’s actions on the border. Some Republicans supported the proposal.

But the significance of the change has not escaped the attention of Biden administration officials, some of whom privately acknowledge the decline of the pre-Trump asylum system.

“Shelter at the border no longer exists as we used to think about it,” said one of the Biden administration officials, who, like others, spoke anonymously to discuss the matter freely.

A second Biden official echoed the comment, explaining that “the sanctuary state is badly damaged.” A third lamented that Section 42, a Trump-era measure that restricted asylum access in the name of public health, made any return to the pre-Trump status quo at the border “optional.”

“Since we did not accept asylum seekers, it seemed that a positive decision should be made on the admission of asylum seekers. Prior to this, it was assumed that asylum seekers would be admitted,” the official said, referring to international and US law. “When the status quo changed, it changed the underlying assumptions. Suddenly there was a choice. The status quo was to keep them out, and the status quo is always easier.”

Under Biden’s proposal, migrants crossing the southern border without permission would be considered ineligible for asylum unless they are denied asylum in another country they passed through on their way to the US.

It is extremely difficult to overcome such a presumption.

Homeland Security officials want migrants to make appointments with border guards at the port of entry or seek another legal route, rather than being the first to cross the border. If revised, the new policy will be in effect for two years.

The proposal essentially makes the place where the migrants seek asylum more important than the substance of their claim, said Stephanie Leuthert, director of the University of Texas at Austin’s Central America and Mexico Policy Initiative and a former Biden administration official who worked for the State Department.

“To make it even clearer, you may have run thousands of miles, but those last steps—in a cobbled port of entry, across desert mud, or across the muddy bottom of the Rio Grande—now define your claim of protection in the United States. States,” she said.

Government officials defended the proposed rule, explaining that it was not a blanket ban. Officials also point to programs that allow migrants from Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Haiti to seek entry into the US if they have a financial sponsor. Another process allows those who cross the border without permission to challenge the presumption that they are not eligible for asylum in certain cases, such as a medical emergency.

Administration officials who spoke to media last week said they would not allow disorder or chaos at the border and that the policy was not their priority.

The asylum system has been in crisis for years, with backlogs growing exponentially and Congress lacking clear cut solutions. Biden has repeatedly called on Congress to enact comprehensive immigration reform.

But some Biden administration officials privately admit that the new strategy was dictated by politics.

“Electoral politics are more important than values ​​when it comes to access to asylum. The desire to keep calm on the border has led to the compromise of what I previously considered deeply rooted democratic beliefs, ”said a second Biden official. “Democrats have lost the ability to straighten their face to criticize Trump or the next Republican administration’s approach to immigration.”

The Biden administration has long been criticized by Republicans because of the high number of arrests on the southern border. In January, the administration moved to lower those numbers by using Section 42, a Trump-era public health measure, to return to Mexico all Venezuelans, Nicaraguans and Cubans whose citizenship had previously made it difficult to deport them back to their homeland. countries. At the same time, Biden officials created a program to allow migrants from those countries to seek entry into the US with the help of a financial sponsor.

Following this January announcement, unauthorized border crossings dropped to their lowest level in almost two years.

The administration has noted the downturn in public statements and referred to it last week in a 100+ page document outlining a new border policy proposal. According to the document, officials were concerned that the expiration of pandemic border measures in May could result in up to 13,000 people being detained at the border a day.

The administration felt that this number would be a catastrophe that would drain resources, overwhelm border facilities, and create security problems. To avoid this, they decided that the asylum process should be restructured.

“Between Congress and the antiquated immigration system and the incessant [plus] the specter of much higher numbers, we were sort of cornered,” a fourth Biden official explained.

But the biggest problem, Biden’s fifth official argued, was that the media and government have focused on the number of border crossings, which are on the rise worldwide as migration is on the rise everywhere, rather than how the U.S. treats migrants.

“The fundamental problem is that the whole focus and the whole concept of border control comes down to downsizing. If you think that means it is a losing battle,” the official said. “Public Dimension [of success] is how to reduce the numbers so that policies are written to smaller numbers. This is what everyone is looking for.”

If Biden’s proposal is finalized, the administration is likely to face lawsuits from the American Civil Liberties Union and other non-governmental groups that have fought to block the Trump administration’s immigration policies. The public also has 30 days to comment on the proposal before officials finalize it.

According to Michael Knowles, spokesman for Council 119 of the American Federation of Public Employees, the union that represents them, some asylum officers are openly considering leaving their jobs with the new policy.

“The anxiety counters are going through the roof,” said Knowles, a 30-year veteran of the asylum officer corps, who says some are wondering: “Will I have to choose between my calling, my livelihood and being a refugee advocate, or leave on my own conscience. ?”

He said the last time he saw many asylum officers consider leaving their jobs was many years ago during the Trump administration.