US immigration

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Situation at US-Mexico border ahead of end of asylum limits ‘very challenging’

      by

      The US homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, said on Friday that immigration authorities faced “extremely challenging” circumstances along the border with Mexico days before the end of asylum restrictions implemented during the Covid-19 pandemic.A surge of Venezuelan migrants through south Texas, particularly in and around the border community of Brownsville, has occurred over the last two weeks for reasons that Mayorkas said were unclear. On Thursday, 4,000 of about 6,000 migrants in border patrol custody in Texas’s Rio Grande Valley were Venezuelan.Mayorkas noted that Mexico agreed this week to continue taking back Venezuelans who enter the US illegally after asylum restrictions end on 11 May, along with Cubans, Haitians and Nicaraguans. Migrants have been expelled from the US more than 2.8m times since March 2020 under the authority of what is known as Title 42.The secretary reaffirmed plans to finalize a new policy by Thursday that will make it extremely difficult for migrants to seek asylum if they pass through another country, like Mexico, on their way to the US border.“The situation at the border is a very serious one, a very challenging one and a very difficult one,” Mayorkas said.Illegal crossings tumbled after the Joe Biden White House announced asylum restrictions in January, but they have risen since mid-April. The president of the National Border Patrol Council, Brandon Judd, said this week they have been hovering at about 7,200 daily, up from about 5,200 in March.Border patrol chief Raul Ortiz said 1,500 active-duty troops are planning to be dispatched to El Paso, Texas, adding to 2,500 national guard troops already positioned across the border. Ortiz said El Paso was chosen because it has been a busy corridor for illegal crossings over the last six months. The troop deployment was announced this week but not the location.Mayorkas, on his second day of a visit to the Rio Grande Valley, said smugglers were deceiving migrants and luring them on a dangerous journey. “The border is not open, it has not been open, and it will not be open” after 11 May, he said.The Mexican foreign affairs secretary, Marcelo Ebrard, echoed Mayorkas’s sentiment about smugglers spreading misinformation.“We’re seeing a very significant flow (of migrants) in recent days on the basis of a hoax,” Ebrard said at a news conference. He said smugglers are saying: “Hurry up to get to the United States by crossing Mexico because … they’re going to end Title 42” on 11 May.“It’s a trick and they’re at risk,” Ebrard said.The Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador urged those who want to migrate to follow legal pathways, such as applying in US processing centers scheduled to open in Guatemala and Colombia. He said Mexico was not making special preparations for the end of Title 42 because he did not expect a surge.“A lot of people won’t let themselves be tricked,” the president said.Mayorkas touted new legal pathways, which include parole for up to 30,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans a month who apply online with a financial sponsor. But he said the Biden administration could only do so much without Congress.“We have a plan – we are executing on that plan,” Mayorkas said. “Fundamentally, however, we are working within a broken immigration system that for decades has been in dire need of reform.”US customs and border protection said on Friday that it is raising the number of people admitted to the country at land crossings with Mexico to 1,000 a day from 740 using a mobile app called CBP One that was extended in January to asylum-seekers. Demand has far outweighed available slots.The administration faced a setback, at least a temporary one, when Colombia said on Thursday it suspended deportation flights from the US due to “cruel and degrading” treatment of migrants. Colombia’s immigration agency said it canceled returns of 1,200 Colombians after complaints about conditions in US detention centers and on the flights. More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      US sends 1,500 troops to Mexico border as Covid-era asylum rule is set to expire

      by

      Joe Biden will send 1,500 troops to the US-Mexico border, the Pentagon said on Tuesday, in preparation for a possible rise in immigration when Covid-19 border restrictions lift later this month.The 90-day deployment of active-duty troops will supplement the work of the US border patrol but will not carry out law enforcement duties, said Brig Gen Pat Ryder, a Pentagon spokesperson, in a statement.The force will be in addition to an ongoing deployment of about 2,500 national guard troops.The deployment comes as the Title 42 restrictions, which allow US authorities to rapidly expel non-Mexican migrants to Mexico without the chance to seek asylum, are set to to end on 11 May. Donald Trump activated the policies during the pandemic and Biden had expanded the controversial public health measure, despite criticism from immigration advocates.Now officials are bracing for the Biden administration’s ending of Title 42 next week. El Paso, the Texas border city, has declared a state of emergency in preparation for a potential influx of more than 35,000 asylum seekers who are currently stuck in the Mexican sister city of Juárez.Biden has grappled with record numbers of migrants caught illegally crossing the US-Mexico border since he took office in 2021.Republicans have criticized Biden for rolling back the hardline policies of Donald Trump while some Democrats and immigration activists also have lambasted Biden for gradually toughening his approach to border security.Senator Bob Menendez, a Democrat and chair of the Senate foreign relations committee, said Biden’s decision to send troops was unacceptable.“Trying to score political points or intimidate migrants by sending the military to the border caters to the Republican party’s xenophobic attacks on our asylum system,” Menendez said in a statement.The 1,500 troops could arrive at the US-Mexico border by 10 May, Ryder said during a briefing. They will conduct ground-based monitoring, data entry and warehouse support to free up border agents and “fill critical capability gaps”, he said.The Pentagon is looking at ways to replace the active-duty personnel with those from the reserve force, he said.When asked about the troop deployment in a news conference, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, the Mexican president, said the US is a sovereign nation and that Mexico respects its decisions.The US has used military troops at the border during previous presidential administrations, including Republican George W Bush, Democrat Barack Obama and Trump, who deployed thousands of active-duty and national guard troops.The White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, called such deployments “a common practice”.Pentagon leaders have long been frustrated about military deployments to the border, privately arguing that the mundane tasks are better suited for law enforcement agencies and can affect military readiness.Immigration advocates have criticized previous efforts to send troops to the border.“People seeking asylum should be met with humanitarian professionals, welcoming volunteers, and medical and mental health professionals. Not soldiers,” Bilal Askaryar, the interim campaign manager of the #WelcomeWithDignity Campaign, said on Twitter. More

    • 113 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden administration seeks to expand health coverage to Dreamers

      by

      The Biden administration is seeking to allow immigrants known as Dreamers, who were brought to the US as children by undocumented parents, greater access to health insurance through federal programs, the White House said on Thursday.The proposal would allow participants in the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or Daca, to access to health insurance under Medicaid and Affordable Care Act (ACA) exchanges, it said.“Healthcare should be a right. I’ve worked hard to get more Americans health insurance than ever before,” Joe Biden said on Twitter, adding the move would give “Dreamers the same opportunities.”The proposed rule comes as efforts to further protect Dreamers stalls in Congress and faces legal challenges. About 580,000 people were enrolled as of last year in the Obama-era 2012 Daca program, which grants protection from deportation and work permits.An expansion would allow Daca recipients to enroll in coverage under the joint federal-state Medicaid program or through private insurers participating in the exchanges established by the 2010 ACA law also passed under Democratic then President Barack Obama and Biden, his vice-president.Eight US states have already expanded state insurance access to health coverage regardless of immigration status, according to data from the healthcare policy organization Kaiser Family Foundation.Biden promised during his 2020 presidential campaign to protect “Dreamers” and their families after Republican then President Donald Trump tried to end Daca. Biden this week said he plans to seek a second four-year term but has not formally announced his re-election bid.The president, in a video, reiterated his call for Congress to establish a pathway to citizenship for Daca recipients, adding: “While we work toward that goal … we need to give Dreamers the opportunities and the support they deserve.”One source familiar with the plan said it could take months or longer to finalize through the federal regulatory process.Democratic representative Pramila Jayapal, chair of the congressional progressive caucus, which last month urged the administration to expand access, called the move “a long overdue step toward immigrant justice”.Republicans, however, have cast doubt on Daca and other immigration reforms.Texas and other US states with Republican attorneys general are challenging the program in court. More

    • 100 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Defeating the Dictators review: prescriptions for democratic health

      by

      Charles Dunst’s “aspirational” book about how democracies can do a better job of competing with autocracies is bursting with statistics and lots of common sense.The statistics are there to convince us that many autocracies spend much more sensibly than the world’s richest democracies do. A few examples:
      China has increased spending on education as a percentage of its gross domestic product by 75% since 1975.
      In 2018, 15-year-old Chinese students had the highest average scores in the world on tests for math, science and reading, followed by Singapore, Macao and Hong Kong – “none of which is a democracy”.
      Citizens of Singapore have an average life expectancy of around 84 and an infant mortality rate of two per 1,000 – “better than almost every democracy”.
      Singapore achieves that good health by spending just 4% of its GDP on healthcare – versus 17% of GDP spent in the US, which gets much less impressive results.
      Dunst’s commonsense observations include ideas like these: weak safety nets damage citizens’ confidence in their governments (and therefore should be strengthened); bad healthcare systems cost more money in the long run than good ones; and investments in infrastructure repay themselves many times over.Dunst is deputy director of research and analytics at The Asia Group and an adjunct fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Looking at his own country, he is heartened that Joe Biden managed to push through a $1tn infrastructure bill, but then points out that’s only 1.25% of GDP, compared with the 8.5% of GDP China spent on infrastructure every year from 1992 to 2011.“China today spends more on infrastructure than the United States and Europe do combined,” Dunst writes.By spending more on things that actually matter, countries that oppress their citizens in other ways can engender remarkable levels of confidence in government.“In 2019,” Dunst writes, “nearly 90% of Chinese reported trust in their government … as did almost 70% of Singaporeans.”Practically the only good news for democracies in this story is the fact that almost every major economy faces similar declining birth rates. Most dramatically, China has gone from 2.25 children per woman in 1990 to just 1.3 today. No major economy is producing enough children to maintain its current population.At the same time, since 2017, China’s net migration rate – the number of immigrants minus the number of emigrants – “has worsened every year”.China lost about 335,000 people in 2022 alone.Democracies like the US, Germany and the UK all posted positive net migration rates of at least 2.7%. These numbers support one of Dunst’s more optimistic notions. While “China and others may promise economic stability”, democracies remain attractive because they offer “more freedom, equality and opportunities to pursue happiness”.Dunst argues that one of the biggest challenges for democracies is to convince their populations of the benefits of immigration, instead of listening to politicians like Donald Trump in the US and Marine Le Pen in France, who have been so successful in reviving ancient xenophobia.Dunst also thinks education systems in places like the US and Britain need to become much more democratic. At Harvard, the acceptance rate for the children of alumni is 30%, versus 6% for the general population. In 2021, “nearly a third of legacy freshmen hailed from households making more than half a million dollars”.When non-connected parents “see the underperforming children of top financiers and politicians vaunted into top schools and jobs because of connections, these parents will rebel against the system that allowed this to happen … They will vote for the would-be dictator.”Dunst thinks we must offer more scholarships “for people studying science and technology … more funding for vocational schools” and “constant skill training” for the workforce.He wisely suggests that a “key reform would be to make non-regular [American] workers eligible for high-quality health insurance that travels with them from job to job”. But he is also bizarrely opposed to universal healthcare – the kind that is the norm all over Europe. Suddenly, he sounds like a flack for a greedy pharmaceutical company, writing that such a system “could undermine the competitive attitude that makes the United States one of the world’s leaders in medical innovation”.America’s continuing failure to provide decent health insurance to its most needy citizens is hardly a spur to innovation. And the fact we are the only major democracy with a healthcare system dominated by the profit motive isn’t mentioned here at all.Dunst is almost entirely silent about the explosion of fake facts on the internet, which makes it so much more difficult to sell the commonsense ideas he pushes for. Another problem is his failure to acknowledge that America now has only one major political party that is genuinely interested in solving any of these fundamental problems, while the other prefers to cater to its base with attacks on wokeness or any prosecutor who thinks it makes sense to prosecute a former president for any of his dozens of alleged crimes.This is the fundamental problem facing American democracy now. As long as the Republicans control the House of Representatives or any other part of the government, the chances of enacting any of the proposals Dunst thinks necessary to help defeat the dictators – serious educational reform, immigration reform and additional infrastructure projects – are exactly zero. More

    • 225 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Dining across the divide US special: ‘She said there are no leaders in the Republican party, just idiots’

      by

      Dining across the divide US special: ‘She said there are no leaders in the Republican party, just idiots’Neither of them likes Donald Trump, but would they agree on the economy, healthcare or immigration?Lali, 62, Chicago, IllinoisOccupation Now retired, Lali worked in international accounting and mergers and acquisitionsVoting record Always DemocratAmuse bouche Lali lives in Chicago, but has an organic farm and an off-grid house in Wisconsin. She’s also lived on four different continentsJozsef, 68, Waterloo, IowaOccupation Business consultant, now semi-retiredVoting record Jozsef is registered as an independent, but considers himself conservative and mainly votes Republican. He “held his nose” and voted for Trump in 2016, but now hates him “with a passion”. In 2020 he voted for BidenAmuse bouche Jozsef moved to the US from Hungary as a toddler and is a foodie. He makes a mean goulash – the secret is homegrown Hungarian paprikaFor startersJozsef I had grilled grouper – of all the things to eat in Iowa! They had a nice Reuben sandwich on the menu, but I’m diabetic and have a heart stent. The rule from my doctors is that if your food has flavour, you’re not allowed it.Lali I had sweet-potato soup, a Reuben sandwich with a salad, a craft beer and tiramisu. He ate the fish that goes in the fish tacos. I had a huge dish of food and he had a teeny thing on a teeny plate.Jozsef Lali was outgoing and friendly. We started off talking about the weather – that’s the typical greeting in the midwest. Then we started denigrating Trump for about 10 minutes. And it went on from there.The big beefJozsef We didn’t have a large disagreement about a major issue. We were loud, but polite. Especially as she was a woman. If it was a guy, it might have been different. That’s being sexist, but that’s because I’m old. Men are afraid to argue with women, let’s face it.Lali We agreed on a lot of the symptoms and many of the causes, but had very different solutions. He thinks capitalism is the answer to everything, but it has been messed up in this country. We agreed there should be more education funding. I think it has been deemphasized by Republicans because there have been so many studies that show the better educated you are, the more likely you are to vote Democrat.Jozsef She’s very black and white about Republicans. I would describe her as a typical Democrat – she spouts a lot of talking points from that side of the aisle: “All Republicans do this. All Republicans are jerks.” She claimed they are out to dumb down America, because that’s their voting block: dumb people. I totally disagree. I said: “It would take really smart people to come up with that complex a plan.” I don’t think the Republicans are smart enough to come up with something like that.Lali He kept trying to say Democrats and Republicans are both messed up. I said: “No, there’s a degree of difference in how messed up they are.” Republicans have a lot more whack-jobs than we do.Jozsef She said there are no leaders in the Republican party. Just idiots. And I said: “Show me a good leader in your party. For the last eight years you have not been able to produce one.” Biden’s a nice guy, but he’s a doddering old man.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSharing plateJozsef We agreed that something has to happen with healthcare in America. It’s a disgrace that the richest country in the world can’t keep people healthy. She said the government should control healthcare. I said I’d be afraid for our government, as it stands, to run it.Lali In my view, healthcare should not be a for-profit enterprise. His view was that it shouldn’t be for profit, but it could be in the private sector. I didn’t fully understand what that meant.For aftersJozsef We talked about immigration as we’re both immigrants. She wants an open policy: “Let’s get ’em all in here.” I said: “I want to build a 1,000-mile wall on the southern border with a five-mile gate and put Transport Security Administration machines in the gate.” Whoever wants to come over and work can come in, but let’s make them go through the security turnstile like at the airport. Let’s have stronger security.Lali We overlapped on the need for immigrants. Where we disagreed was on his views about immigrants being forced to work. He said his father had been forced to work in a coalmine in Belgium. I pointed out that all immigrants need sponsors to make sure they’re not a public charge. And he was like: “You’re probably right about that. But they should be made to work.”TakeawaysJozsef When we were leaving, she accused me of being a closet liberal. And honestly, I am getting to be a pinko as I want a woman to be president next. It’s time somebody used their brain instead of their testosterone.Lali I really enjoyed the lunch, but was a little frustrated that he didn’t have more fact-based rejoinders to what I was saying. I was working with a set of facts; he was working with a set of views.Additional reporting: Kitty Drake Lali and Jozsef ate at La Rana Bistro in Decorah, Iowa.Want to meet someone from across the divide? Find out how to take partTopicsLife and styleDining across the divide US specialUS politicsSocial trendsUS healthcareUS immigrationfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 288 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Dining across the divide US special: ‘I got the impression he felt all Democrats were horrible. He made us sound like Bond villains’

      by

      Dining across the divide US special: ‘I got the impression he felt all Democrats were horrible. He made us sound like Bond villains’One votes Democrat and the other wants Donald Trump to win in 2024. Where does that leave them on immigration, abortion or Ukraine?Jason, 51, Crestview, FloridaOccupation Middle-school principalVoting record Normally votes Democrat and considers himself a centristAmuse bouche As a “military brat”, Jason lived in lots of exciting places around the world growing up, including Ipswich. He also lived in Idaho for a time, which was a culture shock after Europe. “You should absolutely never go there”Paul, 70, Destin, FloridaOccupation Pathologist, partially retiredVoting record Has always voted Republican. Wants Trump to win in 2024Amuse bouche Paul was drafted into the South African army in his early 20s. One of his hobbies is wineFor startersJason I had a tuna salad. Normally I’d have gone crazy with the food, but I had open-heart surgery in September and I’m trying not to die. I had a glass of wine, and he had a pinot. He was classy and knew exactly what wine he wanted. I said: “Gimme the house wine.”Paul I had a tuna salad as an appetizer. Then a “wine bar salad”, which was excellent. Jason was a lot more like me than I had expected. In his general outlook, there’s a lot of similarities.Jason Paul was really nice. Very educated. Very opinionated. He said that at Thanksgiving last year there were people who had different views from him and they got up from the table and left. He has very strong opinions, but that doesn’t mean his opinions don’t have value.The big beefJason I feel very strongly that we should be involved in Ukraine; he does not. I think America can’t be isolationist. We have to look after our allies because they look after us. He said the money being spent on Ukraine should be spent in America. I said that’s a different pot. Just because we’re spending money on Ukraine doesn’t mean we can’t spend on other things.Paul The only agreement we came to on Ukraine was that there’s currently no endgame. Without a solution, I believe we are drifting towards world war three.Jason We also disagreed on the southern border. I don’t have answers, but I don’t think walls and more security will fix it.Paul He said it is impossible to secure a border; I believe it’s totally possible. There should be a wall. Throughout history, going back to the Great Wall of China, walls have proved effective. We also talked about why immigrants don’t stay in their own country and fix it. We never got any agreement on that.Jason He said that illegal immigrants get better healthcare benefits than poor Americans. And I said: “I’m not sure that’s true.” That upset him. He said: “Well, you gotta trust that I know what I’m talking about.” That was when he said that Obama has a social security number from a state he never lived in. I said: “Is that true? I’ve never read that.” He said it’s public knowledge.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSharing plateJason We found some common ground on abortion. My argument was that it shouldn’t be legislated; it’s a woman’s right, and I can’t tell a woman what she can or can’t do with her body. His response was that it’s not just her body; there’s another being in there. But he did believe in early term abortion.Paul We agreed there has to be a cut-off time. You can’t kill the baby at birth. The question that wasn’t resolved was what that cut-off should be. I’d draw a very firm line in the sand at 12 weeks. Jason wasn’t sure where he’d draw that line.For aftersPaul We talked about Trump. I went to the same church as him before he was president. Some people implied he only went to church after he was running for president, which was not true. I think Trump created a world of stability. I don’t think we got an agreement there.Jason His view was that Trump kept us safer and that foreign powers didn’t act out when Trump was president because of his effectiveness. I don’t think we were better off with Trump.TakeawaysJason We talked about critical race theory, and he thinks children are being taught to be ashamed about being American. That’s not the case. We have flags in every classroom. We start each day with the pledge of allegiance.Paul We realised we had a lot more in common when we really talked than we first thought. The only thing he changed my mind about was that some people on his side of the fence are probably open to discussion. The country is so polarised that I’m pessimistic about the ability of the union to stay together. But if more people talk to each other as human beings there may be more common ground.Jason I don’t think either of us changed the other person’s opinion. Except maybe when it comes to the fact that not all Democrats and Republicans are horrible. I don’t think all Republicans are horrible, but I got the impression he felt that all Democrats were. He made us sound like Bond villains. Additional reporting: Kitty Drake Jason and Paul ate at The Wine Bar in Destin, Florida.Want to meet someone from across the divide? Find out how to take partTopicsLife and styleDining across the divide US specialUS politicsSocial trendsUS immigrationDonald TrumpfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 263 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Dining across the divide US special: ‘I read an article he wrote about being attacked at a Black Lives Matter protest’

      by

      Dining across the divide US special: ‘I read an article he wrote about being attacked at a Black Lives Matter protest’One is centre-right, the other 100% Democrat. Where do they stand on immigration, defunding the police, and closing Guantánamo?Atam, 74, San Francisco, CaliforniaOccupation Retired nuclear engineerVoting record 100% Democrat for the past 40 yearsAmuse bouche Atam is a lifetime member of both the Sierra Club (a conservation organization) and the American Nuclear SocietyDon, 38, the Bay Area, California, and Reno, NevadaOccupation Freelance journalist and urban studies studentVoting record Mostly centre-right. Was Republican, but now identifies as independentAmuse bouche Voted for Trump in 2020 because he didn’t want him to win – “I have a tendency to vote for the loser, so I hoped that would help”For startersAtam My first impression was that he was 30 minutes late and didn’t say sorry. But I was happy waiting at the restaurant; my daughter-in-law had been the pastry chef there.Don By default, I like to listen to what people have to say. He talked about his family and how he liked to travel. We talked about Reno, where I’m from, and how he used to go there to ski.Atam I had two starters: a crab salad and some trout. Most of the food on the menu I try to avoid for health reasons.Don I had crab salad and fried chicken.The big beefAtam We talked about Guantánamo Bay. He thinks it should remain open and that the detainees shouldn’t be put on trial. He believes that if one of them gets released, they’ll go back and start another war against us.Don These people are enemy combatants. I don’t believe they are due a trial because of their special criminal status. Atam said everyone should be allowed a trial regardless of status.Atam Don’t we have a system where we presume innocence until proven guilty? I said we’re causing more harm in the world than good by holding people without trial. There were 750 detainees and there are 30 or 40 left and we’re spending half a billion a year to hold them.Don He was very knowledgable on the numbers, but I stuck to my position. These are wartime combatants and it’s not a normal situation.Atam There didn’t appear to be any facts behind his position; it seemed to be all based on feeling.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionSharing plateAtam A country needs immigrants from all different backgrounds – that’s what’s given the US its strength.Don Immigration is a good thing when it’s done correctly. But our southern border is porous and broken; we need to stop the influx of people from South and Central America. We need more immigration judges and personnel to track those who come across. People from other countries must wait in line.Atam It’s partly our policies in Central America that have given us the drug lords and dictatorships that people are fleeing from. We should be more open to those leaving. There’s also a huge shortage of workers in our country.For aftersAtam I looked Don up before we met, and read an article he wrote about being attacked at a Black Lives Matter protest. I wanted to know more about it and understand how it had affected him. I went to three protests myself. One was in my neighbourhood, which I will say is the whitest neighbourhood in San Francisco, and there was not a single Black person in the protest. The message from that was that all of society had woken up and realised something was wrong.Don I was covering a BLM protest for a local news outlet and it turned violent. A pair of hooligans who were ransacking Reno city hall beat me up for filming them. I understood why they were protesting, but I didn’t think it was necessary for them to turn to violence. The incident softened me to both the protesters and the police. It also made me aware of the fact that I’m Black in America. Atam understood why I didn’t support the Defund the Police movement.Atam To me, Defund the Police means we need to spend more money on the root causes of crime rather than putting more people with guns on the street. San Francisco has more than 20 police for every 10,000 people and crime is still high.Don The intentions behind Defund the Police are good, but the follow-through is not. I get what they are trying to do – fund services that help minority communities – but I’m not in favour. It won’t work, it’s too extreme.TakeawaysAtam It was a very civil conversation, but I don’t think we clicked. He suggested we share contact details, but I don’t think we’ll be meeting up.Don We got on very well. We didn’t find common ground, but I got an understanding of where he was coming from on a few issues.Additional reporting: Kitty Drake Atam and Don ate at Nopa in San Francisco.Want to meet someone from across the divide? Find out how to take partTopicsLife and styleDining across the divide US specialSocial trendsUS politicsUS policingBlack Lives Matter movementUS immigrationfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden’s proposal denying asylum at border would cause ‘unnecessary suffering’, say critics

      by

      Biden’s proposal denying asylum at border would cause ‘unnecessary suffering’, say criticsProposal prompted comparisons to Trump’s policies to limit asylum for migrants, which Biden had pledged to reverseDemocrats and immigration advocates harshly criticized Joe Biden over a new proposal that could stop migrants claiming asylum when they arrive at the US-Mexico border. One advocate said the move would cause “unnecessary human suffering”.Biden unveils Trump-style plan to deter asylum seekers at Mexico borderRead moreThe pushback came after the Biden administration unveiled a proposal that would deny asylum to migrants who arrive without first seeking it in one of the countries they passed through.There are exceptions for children, people with medical emergencies and those facing imminent threats but if enacted the new proposal could stop tens of thousands of people claiming asylum in the US.The move prompted comparisons to Donald Trump’s attempts to limit asylum for migrants traveling through other countries, attempts repeatedly struck down by federal courts. As a presidential candidate, Biden pledged to reverse those policies.The proposal “represents a blatant embrace of hateful and illegal anti-asylum policies, which will lead to unnecessary human suffering”, said Marisa Limón Garza, executive director of Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center.“Time after time, President Biden has broken his campaign promises to end restrictions on asylum seekers traveling through other countries,” Limón Garza said in a statement.“These are mothers, fathers, aunts, uncles and thousands of children who are simply looking for a fair chance for their case to be heard. We urge the Biden administration to abandon policy initiatives that further the inhumane and ineffective agenda of the Trump administration.”The proposed rule was posted in the Federal Register this week, with 30 days for public comment.Mary Meg McCarthy, executive director of the National Justice Immigration Center, said the brief comment period “suggests that the president already knows that this policy is a betrayal of his campaign promises”.“The Biden administration’s proposed rule violates US obligations under international and US human rights law which ensures access to protection for people fleeing persecution,” she said.“United States federal law specifically states that the right to seek asylum is not contingent on a person’s status or the way they come to the United States. Yet with this rule, the Biden administration is creating new requirements that will result in harm and death to people who need protection and must flee their homes quickly.’”Sergio Gonzales, executive director of Immigration Hub, said the proposal “flies in the face of America’s moral leadership on the protection of refugees and President Biden’s campaign promise to rebuild a fair, humane and orderly immigration system. Instead, the proposal brings back a Trump-era ban that was declared unlawful by federal courts.”The Biden administration faces the loss of a pandemic-era rule that has been used to expel migrants. That rule, Title 42, will likely go away in May when the national Covid-19 emergency is set to end.Officials from the justice department have warned that unauthorized border crossing could increase to somewhere between 11,000 and 13,000 per day, up from 8,600 daily in mid-December, if no action is taken.Republicans have hammered Biden over his handling of the border and some have pushed for impeaching Alejandro Mayorkas, the secretary of homeland security.Biden has also drawn criticism from fellow Democrats on Capitol Hill, who urged him to abandon the idea.In a joint statement, the Democratic senators Robert Menendez, Cory Booker, Ben Ray Luján and Alex Padilla said: “Last month, when the Biden administration announced it would soon be issuing a proposed rule, which in effect would function as a ‘transit ban’ on asylum seekers who don’t first apply for asylum in a transit country, we urged the administration to abandon this idea.“We are deeply disappointed that the administration has chosen to move forward with publishing this proposed rule, which only perpetuates the harmful myth that asylum seekers are a threat to this nation. In reality, they are pursuing a legal pathway in the United States.”Jerry Nadler, the ranking Democrat on the House judiciary committee, also criticized the proposal.“We are deeply disappointed in the Biden administration’s proposal to limit access to asylum,” he said in a joint statement with Pramila Jayapal, a Washington state Democrat and leading congressional progressive.“The ability to seek asylum is a bedrock principle protected by federal law and should never be violated. We should not be restricting legal pathways to enter the United States, we should be expanding them.”Lee Gelernt, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney who challenged similar asylum restrictions under the Trump administration, said his organization would sue the Biden administration if the rule was adopted.“We successfully sued to block the Trump transit ban and will sue again if the Biden administration goes through with its plan,” he said.TopicsUS immigrationJoe BidenMexicoUS-Mexico borderUS politicsnewsReuse this content More