Nearly every day since September, hundreds of migrants from China, Colombia and other countries have wiggled through openings in the border wall with Mexico and walked dirt trails to surrender to U.S. agents and seek asylum. Some days, more than 1,000 arrive in the boulder-strewn mountains near San Diego, alone. While they wait to be processed and given a court date, they live in tents and makeshift structures of tree branches in scattered campsites. These encampments would likely vanish under a Senate bill that would make sweeping changes to immigration laws, including allowing a border emergency authority that would restrict asylum when arrests for illegal crossings hit certain thresholds.
Quick Read
Senate Border Security and Ukraine Aid Bill Faces Opposition and Misinterpretation
- Senate leaders are moving forward with a $118 billion proposal addressing border security and providing aid to Ukraine, despite facing strong criticism from Republicans, including former President Donald Trump.
- Trump and other conservatives have attacked the proposal, particularly its border policy provisions, with Trump calling it a “gift to the Democrats” and suggesting it would lead to increased border crossings.
- The bill aims to make significant changes to immigration laws, including an emergency authority to restrict asylum when illegal crossings reach certain thresholds, and plans to speed up the asylum process by having officers screen applicants within 90 days.
- Despite the opposition, the bill’s negotiators, including Senators James Lankford, Kyrsten Sinema, and Chris Murphy, have defended the legislation, emphasizing its potential to reduce illegal crossings and expedite asylum decisions.
- House Speaker Mike Johnson and other House Republicans have expressed strong opposition, critiquing provisions they believe would incentivize illegal immigration and undermine the asylum process.
- The bill also proposes spending $4 billion to hire over 4,300 asylum officers to handle cases currently reserved for immigration judges, aiming to decide asylum cases within six months rather than years.
- The proposed “border emergency authority” would allow for the suspension of asylum for those crossing illegally under certain conditions, a measure that has drawn both support and criticism.
- President Biden has expressed support for the bill, stating it would give him the authority to “shut down” the border to regain control, though he expressed disappointment over the lack of provisions for immigrants who entered the U.S. without authorization as children.
- The bill’s future remains uncertain due to political divisions and differing perspectives on immigration policy, with some lawmakers acknowledging the challenge of overcoming the issue’s divisive politics, especially in an election year.
The Associated Press has the story:
Senate border bill would upend US asylum at border with emergency limits
Newslooks- JACUMBA HOT SPRINGS, Calif. (AP) —
Nearly every day since September, hundreds of migrants from China, Colombia and other countries have wiggled through openings in the border wall with Mexico and walked dirt trails to surrender to U.S. agents and seek asylum. Some days, more than 1,000 arrive in the boulder-strewn mountains near San Diego, alone.
While they wait to be processed and given a court date, they live in tents and makeshift structures of tree branches in scattered campsites. These encampments would likely vanish under a Senate bill that would make sweeping changes to immigration laws, including allowing a border emergency authority that would restrict asylum when arrests for illegal crossings hit certain thresholds.
In addition to the emergency authority, the bill released Sunday aims to have asylum officers screen applicants within 90 days of their arrival in the country using a tougher standard and, for those who pass, decide cases within another 90 days. Cases would ideally be decided in six months instead of six years, as is common in a court system backlogged with more than 3 million cases. It would do so largely by spending $4 billion to hire more than 4,300 asylum officers who would take on the work now reserved for immigration judges.
The $118 billion bill, which combines border security with aid for Ukraine and Israel, faces opposition from Donald Trump and his allies, who consider it weak, and from some Democrats and progressives who think it would gut the asylum process at grave human cost. If it overcomes long odds, the legislation would radically upend how asylum is handled at the border. Asylum, once a policy afterthought, is now the border’s dominant challenge.
Overwhelmed border agents have been unable to quickly process surrendering migrants in Jacumba Hot Springs and elsewhere along the border, forcing them to wait outside for hours or days. In fierce winds on Friday, they rubbed their hands over small campfires and sat closely together in tents to generate body heat. Paramedics aided a young crying girl with a high fever.
“I am happy to have arrived here because I want to achieve my biggest dreams, be a better person and provide for my family,” said Juan Andres Valverde of Colombia, who reported getting robbed by authorities in Mexico.
His advice to other migrants: “If you’re able to do it, then do it. The truth is that it isn’t easy to get here.”
Mbala Glodi, 42, arrived in Jacumba Hot Springs, a tiny border town east of San Diego, after crossing the border illegally in September. Like the vast majority of those arriving, he was quickly released with a court date. After spending time in New York City’s shelters, a church found a family to take him in Vermont.
“Things were difficult (in the United States) in the beginning,” Glodi, a former student protester who says he faced government repression in his native Angola, said by phone Monday from Vermont. “After getting accustomed, all will turn out well with God’s help.”
He’s due in court May 5.
Samuel Schultz, a volunteer who distributes food and other supplies to migrants in Jacumba Hot Springs, said he is perplexed as to why U.S. authorities don’t allow people in at official land crossings, free of the risks of hypothermia, because they are eventually released. “They let them in anyway,” he said.
But under the Senate legislation, asylum would be suspended for those who cross illegally when arrests for illegal crossings average 5,000 per day over seven days along the Mexican border, or 4,000 at the Homeland Security Department’s discretion. The last month that daily arrests were below 5,000 was February 2021. Asylum would also be suspended if arrests top 8,500 in a single day.
The “border emergency authority” could be in effect no more than 270 days in its first year, 225 days in its second year and 180 days in its third and final year. Unaccompanied children would be exempt.
Biden administration officials acknowledge that Mexico’s help would be critical for the new emergency powers, as it was during a public health emergency from March 2021 to May 2023. U.S. authorities expelled people who crossed the border from Mexico more than 2.7 million times during that time, denying rights to seek asylum on grounds of preventing the spread of COVID-19.
The legislation would allow Homeland Security to continue using humanitarian parole, including the Biden administration’s policy to allow up to 30,000 people a month from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela if they apply online with a financial sponsor and arrive at an airport.
It would also allow 1,400 people to seek asylum daily at official land crossings with Mexico in a “safe and orderly manner,” even when a border emergency is in effect. That would effectively preserve an online appointment system introduced in January 2023 that allows up to 1,450 people to enter the United States each day at land crossings.
U.S. authorities currently dole out about 400 appointments a day at a border crossing in San Diego under CBP One, as the online system is named. Families line up in Tijuana, Mexico, with suitcases and paperwork showing appointments at 5 a.m., 1 p.m. and 8 p.m. Many try for weeks or even months to land a time in the oversubscribed system.
Maria del Rosario Lanza, 42, crossed the border in San Diego with a CBP One appointment in January 2023, beginning an asylum case that will likely take years to decide. She came with her sister and her sister’s 8-year-old grandnephew, who was riding on the back of his father’s motorcycle in the Honduran capital of Tegucigalpa in 2019 when an assailant fatally shot his father. They fled after flooding destroyed their home.
The Honduran woman lived in Chicago and Washington before settling in Fort Worth, Texas. Her next court date is Jan. 5.
“God is with me,” she said Monday.
Border bill supporters combat misinformation that it would actually let in more migrants
Newslooks- WASHINGTON (AP) —
It’s one of the most hard-fought provisions in the bipartisan border security package, and one that Democrats had to be persuaded to include: a new authority for the U.S. government to block migrants from entering the country.
Now it’s the central line of attack from many Republicans who are opposing the legislation, with some now claiming it would incentivize even more border crossings.
At issue is a provision in the bipartisan package that would grant the Homeland Security secretary emergency authority to prohibit entry for most individuals if an average of more than 4,000 people per day try to enter the country unlawfully over the course of a week. If the number reaches 5,000 or if 8,500 try to enter unlawfully in a single day, use of the authority would be mandatory.
The bill, released by senators on Sunday, would also make it harder to claim asylum at the border and expand detention facilities, among other efforts to reduce the number of migrants.
If the proposal were passed into law, the new authority could be triggered almost immediately, given that border encounters topped 10,000 on some days during December, which was the highest month on record for illegal crossings. President Joe Biden has said he would use the authority to “shut down” the border.
Still, many Republicans say the number should be zero. And some have even created the impression that the bill actually would allow 5,000 additional migrants in a day, or loosen current standards.
The legislation would “further incentivize thousands of illegals to pour in across our borders daily,” posted New York Rep. Elise Stefanik, the No. 4 Republican in the House, on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Even before the text was released, former President Donald Trump called the idea of a 5,000 threshold “record-setting stuff” and said supporting the package — which also includes $60 billion in wartime aid for Ukraine — is a “death wish” for Republicans.
The swift and loud opposition from GOP lawmakers who have long called for stricter border measures has frustrated some members of their own party. The backlash suggests the bipartisan bill has little chance of passage, especially in an election year. House Speaker Mike Johnson called it “dead on arrival,” and a new hashtag has appeared on the official X account for House Republicans: #killthebill.
A look at what the bill would do, and how some Republicans are trying to stop it:
NEGOTIATORS PUSH BACK
The three main negotiators on the Senate bill — Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, Independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut — have all pushed back on criticism of the bill. They emphasize that it would keep more people out instead of allowing more people to come in — and that migrants would not be able to apply for asylum at all if illegal border crossings reach certain numbers.
The policy is similar to one first used by Trump. Known as Title 42, it justified the quick expulsion of migrants from the country in the name of stopping the spread of COVID-19.
Lankford said that some opponents are listening to “internet rumors.” He said the emergency authority has been “the most misunderstood or maybe just misrepresented” part of the bill.
“The emergency authority is not designed to let 5,000 people in, it is designed to close the border and turn 5,000 people around,” Lankford said.
Sinema, likewise, noted that many of those people are now released into the country under current law. “We are giving tools to this administration and future administrations to actually gain control of the border,” she said.
Murphy posted on X: “This line of attack (the bill “accepts 5,000 illegal immigrants a day”) is just made up bad faith nonsense.”
But some Republican critics of the bill said that they wouldn’t accept any border security measures unless it shut down the border completely.
Idaho Sen. Jim Risch, who has been a strong supporter of the Ukraine aid, posted on X: “One illegal immigrant. That’s one too many. 5,000? Absolutely not.”
MOVING THE GOAL POSTS
As Biden’s handling of the border became a top political issue for Trump and his party, House Republicans last fall first pushed the idea of pairing the Ukraine aid with border security. Some Republicans who were opposed to the Ukraine money privately speculated that Democrats would never support tougher border enforcement.
But as Democrats reluctantly embraced the idea as a way to pass the Ukraine aid and began serious bipartisan negotiations in the Senate, House Republicans made clear that they were not in the mood for compromise.
Johnson, newly elected after the ouster of former Speaker Kevin McCarthy in October, signaled on a trip to the border that he would only accept a stricter House-passed version of border security legislation, which was a nonstarter with Democrats.
“If it looks like H.R. 2, we’ll talk about it,” Johnson said of any border legislation that emerges from the Senate.
After the Senate’s bill text was released on Sunday, House Republicans and some Senate Republicans immediately said they would oppose it. Many now say legislation isn’t needed at all because Biden has the authority to make changes needed — while at the same time pushing their own version of the bill.
“Make no mistake, President Biden’s policies are entirely responsible for the crisis at the border — there is no legislative fix for his gross recklessness,” said Carlos Gimenez, R-Fla.
SHUT DOWN THE BORDER?
Biden has said that if the bill passes, it would “give me as president the emergency authority to shut down the border until it could get back under control. If that bill were the law today, I’d shut down the border right now and fix it quickly.”
If the authority were used, trade would continue, people who are citizens and legal residents could continue to go back and forth. Migrants could still apply at ports of entry, and once the average of illegal crossings dropped by 75%, the administration would have two weeks to end the use of the emergency authority.
ALL ABOUT THE POLITICS
Regardless of the details, some Republicans have acknowledged that the divisive politics of the issue might be too much to overcome, especially in an election year. And Trump, the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination, has denounced it, making it tougher for many Republicans to support.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, who has backed the compromise, acknowledged the challenge in a meeting with GOP senators two weeks ago. The border issue used to unite us, he said, but now it divides us. He acknowledged it may not have the votes to pass, even though he said he personally supports it.
Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin, a Republican and former House member, said last week that the perception the bill wasn’t strong enough was “already out there” even before the text was released.
“You have a lot of people up for reelection,” Mullin said. “And the perception of the American people is that is bad. So it’s really hard to get ahead of that.”
Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, wrote in a post on X Sunday evening that “immigration law is complex and confusing.”
“Most members of Congress have not actually studied the problem, even though they voice strong opinions,” he said. “So it’s easy to spin narratives because people don’t know any better.”
