A simple shift in policy made a huge difference at the Mexican border. Only a tiny fraction of "asylum seekers" were being granted asylum; the rest were being allowed to cross the border, fade into the landscape, and never appear at another hearing. President Trump negotiated deals with Mexico and Guatemala to hold the asylum seekers until the U.S. could process their claims. This amounts to a virtual wall that's even more effective in some ways that a physical one: a psychological barrier to crashing the gate and hoping for the best, with the odds overwhelmingly in your favor.
From the beginning, the unstoppable pressure at the border was from people who'd learned that the important thing was not following asylum procedures, but simply getting through physically in any way possible, including putting children at risk. Once they were through, they knew they were highly unlikely ever to have to worry about the asylum rules--or any immigration procedures--again. Not only did that encourage illegal border crossings, it encouraged them in overwhelming floods, for the strategic power of numbers.
Now, arrests at the border are so low that the detention facilities are under capacity, and nearly a thousand border patrol agents who'd been pulled off the border to administer the detention cells have been returned to the border.
Should we grant asylum to more people? Very possibly, but Congress should do it. Kicking down the gate and helplessly watching the incoming flood wasn't working.
Who will grant congress asylum when the crimes against humanity gets released.
ReplyDelete