In 2018, President Donald Trump sought to find a solution to put a stop to the influx of migrants crossing the southern border. He discovered a 73-word provision in the asylum law that he believed granted him “magical authorities” to prevent migrants from entering the country.
On Tuesday, President Joe Biden utilized the same provision to issue executive action that would temporarily shut down the border for asylum-seekers. This move suspends the longstanding guarantee that allows anyone who sets foot on U.S. soil to request protection in the country.
During his speech at the White House, Biden acknowledged the global migrant crisis and emphasized the crucial need for securing the US border. He stated that failure to do so could result in an overwhelming influx of individuals attempting to enter the country.
It is quite surprising to see President Biden and his party make a U-turn on their stance regarding immigrants, given that they had previously emphasized that America is a nation built on immigrants. Back in 2012, President Barack Obama took a bold step to boost his chances of winning reelection by enacting a comprehensive executive order on immigration that enabled millions of immigrants to reside legally in the country.
In the span of twelve years, the count of individuals crossing the border without legal permission hit a new peak. And yet, with the arrival of the next Democratic leader, the approach taken was entirely different. Detractors argue that Biden is now relying on the same strategies employed by Trump and Stephen Miller, the former’s immigration advisor, to put an end to asylum. What’s more, he’s even making use of the same clause in the Immigration and Nationality Act that Trump used to defend his travel ban on Muslim nations.
According to Heidi Altman, the policy director at the National Immigrant Justice Center, the Biden White House has chosen to adopt a fear-based approach on immigration, which is similar to what Stephen Miller and Donald Trump used to do. Altman has voiced her concerns, calling it a perilous shift that will contradict the country’s fundamental values and commitments.
Throughout Trump’s presidency, Democrats led by Biden and his supporters criticized his fixation on shutting down the border. Back in 2017, Kamala Harris spoke out against this approach, emphasizing that “we can’t turn our backs on the millions of refugees.” The following year, Democratic politicians accused Trump of igniting “the fires of bigotry” by aiming to terminate asylum. Even in 2020, Hakeem Jeffries, who is now the highest-ranking Democrat in the House, referred to Trump as the “Xenophobe. In. Chief.” Despite the change in administration, the issue of immigration remains contentious and divisive in American politics.
As an unprecedented number of migrants have crossed into border communities and spread to cities across the country, the politics of immigration have undergone a significant shift. President Biden has taken note of this shift and adjusted his approach accordingly. Recognizing that Americans are in favor of more stringent policies, he supported restrictive measures in a recent piece of bipartisan legislation. However, after former President Trump urged Republicans to oppose that measure, Biden and his team felt the need to explore other options.
As he left for a five-day visit to Paris for D-Day celebrations, the president announced a new approach to overhaul the immigration system. Many Democrats have rallied behind this approach, with Biden blaming the Republicans for obstructing broader efforts. The surge of migration into their cities has prompted mayors and governors in his party to call for action to address the issue.
On Tuesday, Biden signed a proclamation stating that the suspension of asylum rights should be implemented once the number of migrants exceeded a certain limit. The threshold was set quite low, at an average of 2,500 migrants per day, ensuring that the suspension would be triggered immediately, starting from 12:01 a.m. on Wednesday.
For almost a year now, the threshold for global migration has been exceeding almost every day. This is largely due to the effects of climate change, economic instability, and political violence happening around the world. While it’s true that the number of migrants crossing the border has decreased from its peak of 10,000 in December, it’s still much higher than the average of around 1,000 migrants per day a decade ago. Officials have clarified that restrictions won’t apply to minors who cross the border alone or a small number of individuals who genuinely fear persecution or torture in their home country.
The Biden administration and his campaign aides are taking a calculated risk by ramping up efforts to curb illegal immigration into the United States. Their strategy is to gain the favor of voters who may appreciate the president’s proactive stance on the issue. The administration also hopes that this move will ease the burden on cities led by Democrats, such as New York and Denver, that are grappling with the challenges of providing food and housing for migrants.
They are of the opinion that these actions will provide Biden with a strong response to the accusations of Trump and Republicans, who have been consistently criticizing Democrats for their lack of action on the border.
Some of Biden’s supporters, particularly those on the left, may become even more frustrated with the president due to this decision. The move has the potential to incite further opposition from those who are already dissatisfied with Biden’s handling of other issues such as student loans and climate change.
The assertion that they are emulating Trump’s actions is met with resistance by Biden and his team.
As per the president, he has wisely dismissed some of his predecessor’s radical decisions, including the cruel separation of families at the border as a deterrent for immigrants seeking refuge in the United States. From day one, Biden has proposed a comprehensive immigration reform that aimed to offer citizenship to millions of undocumented immigrants. Unfortunately, the Republican party disapproved of the proposal and did not give it a chance to be considered.
During his speech at the White House on Tuesday, Biden made a firm declaration that he will not vilify immigrants, refer to them as a threat to a country, or separate children from their families at the border. He also emphasized that he will not impose a ban on individuals based on their religious beliefs. Biden’s stance on immigration reveals a compassionate and inclusive approach towards people from all walks of life.
These measures represent a significant crackdown.
In the president’s proclamation on Tuesday, a measure was introduced that prevents migrants from entering the United States for five years, even through legal pathways, if they have been caught attempting to enter illegally during the president’s asylum ban. This move has been long opposed by liberals who have been fighting against such extended bans for decades.
Like his predecessors, Trump and Miller, Biden has come to the same realization regarding the origin of their legal power to execute actions against migration.
According to the Immigration and Nationality Act, Section 212(f) states that if the President determines that allowing the entry of certain aliens or classes of aliens into the United States would not be in the best interests of the country, he can proclaim a suspension of the entry of all aliens or a particular class of aliens as non-immigrants or immigrants. The President may also impose any restrictions on the entry of aliens that he deems appropriate for a necessary period.
For years, legal experts have been discussing the interpretation of these words. Chief Justice John Roberts, in his decision to uphold Trump’s travel ban, stated that the provision “exhibits deference to the president in every clause.” However, the American Civil Liberties Union disagrees, arguing that the court’s ruling in the case was a grave mistake and “reminiscent of its decisions allowing the discriminatory incarceration of Japanese Americans.”
During February, Miller suggested that Trump should utilize the provision in a strong and assertive manner in his second term. He also recommended that it should be incorporated into a strategy to create a strong border position and proclaim that no one is allowed to cross it.
