US immigration policy has shifted on its axis over the

P

last 10 days.

For years, former President Trump and his administration argued that people crossing the border without permission should not be able to easily seek asylum in the United States. That decades-old practice no longer works, Trump and his team stressed.

Last Tuesday, February 21,

President Biden proposed a plan that amounts to agreeing with his predecessor’s position.

International and US law has long allowed people crossing the border to seek protection from persecution. But if Biden’s proposal is implemented, it would make it very difficult for migrants who travel through another country on their way to the US and then cross the border without permission to get asylum here. The policy would reverse America’s long-standing commitments to people seeking asylum, placing strict limits on where and how those fleeing persecution can seek protection.

We are moving to a system where it will be much more difficult for anyone crossing the border without permission to get asylum, said Yael Schacher, director for the Americas and Europe at Refugees International.

We will never go back to what it was before Trump, she said. That’s how it feels.

Public outcry over the new policy has been quieted, even among Democrats. Most of the public opposition to the plan has come from immigrant advocates who have consistently criticized Biden’s moves at the border. Some Republicans have supported the proposal.

But the significance of the shift is not lost on Biden administration officials, some of whom privately acknowledge the demise of the pre-Trump asylum system.

Asylum at the border no longer exists as we previously thought, said a Biden administration official who, like others, spoke anonymously to discuss the matter freely. A second Biden official echoed the comment, explaining that the asylum state has been badly damaged. A third Biden official complained that Title 42, a Trump-era measure restricting access to asylum in the name of public health, made any return to the pre-Trump status quo appear additive at the border.

Once we did not accept asylum seekers, it was as if an affirmative decision had to be made to admit asylum seekers.

Prior to Before

that it was a given that asylum seekers would be admitted, the official said, citing international and U

.

S

.

law. When the status quo changed

,

it shifted the fundamental assumptions. Suddenly it was a choice. Status quo was to keep them out and the status quo is always easier.

Under Biden’s proposal, immigrants who cross the southern border without permission after passing through a third country and not being granted asylum in a country en route to the U.S. would not be eligible for asylum.

It is extremely difficult to fulfill such a requirement.

Homeland Security officials want migrants to schedule appointments with border officials at a port of entry or find another legal route, rather than crossing the border. The new policy will be in effect for two years when it is finalized.

The proposal essentially makes where migrants seek asylum more important than the merits of their claims, said Stephanie Leutert, the director of the Central America and Mexico Policy Initiative at the University of Texas Austin and a former Biden administration official who served in the state. Department.

To make that even clearer, you may have fled thousands of miles, but those final steps at a paved gateway, on desert dirt or on the muddy bottom of the Rio Grande now define your protection claim in the United States, she said. .

Government officials have defended the proposed rule, explaining that it is not a categorical ban. The officials also point to programs that admit migrants from Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua

,

and Haiti to seek entry into the US if they have a financial sponsor. Another process allows those who cross without permission to rebut the assumption that they are not eligible for asylum in certain circumstances, such as if they have 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 first preference. The asylum system has been in crisis for years: backlogs of applications have grown exponentially and Congress has no clear solutions. Biden has repeatedly called on Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform.

But some Biden administration officials privately acknowledge that the adoption of the new strategy was politically driven.

Electoral politics trumps values ​​when it comes to accessing asylum. The desire to keep the border quiet resulted in the compromise of what I previously thought were deeply held Democratic beliefs, the second Biden official said. The Democrats have lost the ability to put a straight face in criticizing Trump or the next Republican administration’s approach to immigration.

The Biden administration has long been under fire from Republicans for the large number of arrests on the southern border. In January, it launched an effort to reduce those numbers by using Title 42, the Trump-era public health measure, to reverse the nationalities of Venezuelans, Nicaraguans and Cubans

that who

were previously difficult to deport to their homeland to Mexico. At the same time, it created a program to allow migrants from those countries to enter the US with a financial sponsor.

Following that announcement in January, the number of unauthorized border crossings fell to its lowest level in nearly two years.

The government celebrated this downturn in statements and referenced it in the more than 100-page document outlining the new border policy last week. According to that document, officials were concerned that the expiry of pandemic-era border measures in May could lead to border detentions of up to 13,000 per day.

That number, the administration ruled, would be a disaster that would strain resources, lead to overcrowding in border facilities and pose security risks. To avoid this, the country’s asylum procedure had to be restructured.

Between Congress and an antiquated immigration system and unabated high numbers, [plus] the specter of much higher numbers, we were more or less painted into a corner, a fourth Biden official explained.

But the main problem, a fifth Biden official argued, was the media and government focus on border numbers rising around the world as migration increases everywhere, rather than how the US treats migrants.

The fundamental problem is that the whole focus and concept of controlling the border comes down to reducing numbers. If that’s what you think it means, it’s a losing battle, the official said. The public measurement [of success] is how to lower numbers so policies are written to lower numbers. That’s what everyone is looking for.

If the Biden proposal is finalized, the administration will likely face lawsuits from the ACLU and other nongovernmental groups that fought to block the Trump administration’s immigration policies. The public also has 30 days to offer

their

comments on the proposal before government officials finalize it.

With the new policy on the horizon, some asylum seekers are beginning to openly consider whether they should quit their jobs, said Michael Knowles, spokesman for AFGE Council 119, the union that represents them.

The fear meters are skyrocketing, said Knowles, a 30-year veteran of the Asylum Officer Corps. Will I have to make a choice between my calling, my livelihood as a refugee protector, he said, some officers have questioned whether the policy has been finalized, or leaving as a matter of conscience?

The last time Knowles witnessed so many asylum seekers considering quitting the job was years ago, during the Trump administration.