The move, expected on Tuesday, would allow the president to temporarily seal the border and suspend longtime protections for asylum seekers in the United States.
“The order, which Biden plans to sign alongside several mayors from southern-border communities, will restrict the flow of migrants over the border by making it illegal to claim asylum if someone crosses into the U.S. illegally. The move is expected to be met with legal challenges, and in any event could prove tough to implement without significant additional funding from Congress.”
I understand the political impetus around this, but I suspect the courts will overturn at least the asylum restriction part. The right to claim asylum is an integral part of both US and international law.
Of course the real answer is not to ban asylum claims after crossing illegally - it is to modernize our system of dealing with such claims so they are adjudicated quickly and fairly, as well as to improve the options for applying from outside of the US.
But that would require a significant investment in improving the system that Republicans in Congress will never agree to. They don’t actually want to “fix the border” - they want a campaign issue in vilifying brown-skinned people.
Yes it’s using a shaky interpretation of an older law from the 50s to derive its authority, good chance a court challenge would be successful against the order, if the order is able to even change much on its own at all with the lack of funding as you pointed out.
Importantly one of the Republican arguments against attempts at any immigration reform has been, “Biden could just do what we want right now with existing laws, so we refuse to compromise with the democrats on anything or pass a new immigration law, Biden can just shut everything down right now with no action on congress’s part.” So if a court strikes this order down would undercut that argument at least. Would also make me happy, since I don’t support this order.
Improving access to legal immigration and improving thoroughput of asylum claims processing are what’s necessary.
I understand the political impetus around this, but I suspect the courts will overturn at least the asylum restriction part. The right to claim asylum is an integral part of both US and international law.
Of course the real answer is not to ban asylum claims after crossing illegally - it is to modernize our system of dealing with such claims so they are adjudicated quickly and fairly, as well as to improve the options for applying from outside of the US.
But that would require a significant investment in improving the system that Republicans in Congress will never agree to. They don’t actually want to “fix the border” - they want a campaign issue in vilifying brown-skinned people.
Yes it’s using a shaky interpretation of an older law from the 50s to derive its authority, good chance a court challenge would be successful against the order, if the order is able to even change much on its own at all with the lack of funding as you pointed out.
Importantly one of the Republican arguments against attempts at any immigration reform has been, “Biden could just do what we want right now with existing laws, so we refuse to compromise with the democrats on anything or pass a new immigration law, Biden can just shut everything down right now with no action on congress’s part.” So if a court strikes this order down would undercut that argument at least. Would also make me happy, since I don’t support this order.
Improving access to legal immigration and improving thoroughput of asylum claims processing are what’s necessary.