SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
asylum ban
President Trump Must Reverse Course on Border Policy to Uphold Human Rights
Elected officials, civil society, and our communities must band together to resist the current assaults on asylum, and push for humane and welcoming border policies.
Feb 12, 2025
On January 20, the fate of asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border was abruptly changed as U.S. President Donald Trump announced new executive orders further dismantling the right to asylum.
That morning, the patients I saw in our pop-up clinic at a migrant shelter were full of apprehension about the threatened Trump policies, but a sense of hope remained. One young man told me he was so excited he could barely sleep because his CBP One appointment, which would allow him and his family to request parole to enter the U.S. while they applied for asylum, was scheduled for the following day.
By noon, the tone had changed. People tried desperately to log in to the CBP One app but were given error messages. Cancelation notices arrived in the email inboxes of those who had already been granted appointments. One patient who had left his country fleeing political violence and had been waiting for eight months at the border for the appointment, frantically held his phone up to show me the email. “Now what are we supposed to do?” he lamented, “We have nowhere safe to go.”
There is much work to be done now to uphold human rights in the U.S. But we must not forget the people who are desperate for relief at our borders.
Indeed, the end of the CBP One appointment program has effectively closed the door on asylum seekers at the U.S.’ southern border. With the ongoing restrictions of the asylum ban and border closure rules put in place during the Biden administration, there are now no viable legal pathways to entry for the hundreds of thousands of migrants seeking safety at the border.
The effect on our patients waiting in Mexico has been devastating, and it’s only going to get worse. Patients came into the clinic reporting depression, panic attacks, and despair. Some had just narrowly survived being kidnapped, beaten, or raped, and were petrified about being targeted again by the organized crime groups that prey on migrants in Mexican border cities.
Over the years in our clinics, we have seen that increased restrictions in border policies—such as Trump’s Remain in Mexico—increase danger, injuries, mental health problems, childhood developmental problems, and untimely death for asylum seekers trying to make it to the U.S. Most recently, these issues had still been occurring given the long waiting periods of the CBP One system, but now they will undoubtedly worsen.
Being stranded leads people to make impossible choices. Some families will risk (and some lose) their lives trying to cross the swift currents of the Rio Grande or the harsh landscape of the desert. Some families choose to send their children over the border unaccompanied, taking on the trauma of family separation because they see no other way for their child to escape from danger and have a better life.
President Trump says we shouldn’t care about the plight of immigrants and should instead focus on American citizens’ needs—of which, undoubtedly, there are many. But such perspectives miss the bigger picture, and are, in fact, woefully inaccurate. Not only are we able to support immigrants, we desperately need to, for the sake of all of us. Without immigrants, we’d be facing a home care crisis, an agricultural crisis, and our economy would suffer. What’s more, the plight of migrants in transit impacts our communities in the U.S. I have patients at my primary care clinic in Massachusetts who have fallen into a deep depression or whose blood pressure has skyrocketed when a loved one of theirs is lost along the migrant route or is assaulted on the journey. Let alone our international and domestic legal obligations that require us to recognize and honor the right to seek asylum.
As our patients at the migrant shelter reeled from the news of the cancelation of CBP One, one man was still smiling. “I believe the new president will have compassion for us,” he said, standing outside his tent and nodding toward his wife and small children inside. “He has a family too. I pray that he will be able to understand that we need safety for our kids.”
It would be nice. But in the absence of that change of heart, our communities need to take action. Elected officials, civil society, and our communities must band together to resist the current assaults on asylum, and push for humane and welcoming border policies. There is much work to be done now to uphold human rights in the U.S. But we must not forget the people who are desperate for relief at our borders—it’s our obligation, and it’s a matter of life and death.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In Victory for Migrant Rights, US Court Blocks 'Cruel' Biden Asylum Restrictions
"The administration now faces a choice: Follow the law, or try to block the ruling from taking effect in 14 days, leaving people seeking safety in grave danger," said the ACLU.
Jul 25, 2023
Immigrant rights advocates on Tuesday applauded a ruling handed down by a U.S. district judge blocking the Biden administration's anti-asylum rule, which places restrictions on migrants who aim to exercise their internationally recognized right to seek asylum at the southern U.S. border.
Judge Jon S. Tigar, an Obama appointee who serves in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, ruled that the new policy is unlawful, as he did when former Republican President Donald Trump imposed similar restrictions.
The measure, which was introduced in May and immediately prompted the ACLU and other legal groups to file a lawsuit on behalf of several rights organizations, requires migrants to prove that they previously sought protections in a third country before applying for asylum in the United States. The Biden administration has said migrants who want to seek asylum should schedule an appointment using an app that connects them to Customs and Border Protection instead of attempting to cross the border.
"To justify limiting eligibility for asylum based on the expansion of other means of entry or protection is to consider factors Congress did not intend to affect such eligibility," wrote Tigar in his ruling.
Melissa Crow, director of litigation at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, which joined the ACLU in representing the plaintiffs, said the policy "violates our laws and makes a mockery of our asylum system."
"The court got it right," Crow said. "We urge the administration to stop defending this illegal policy, and instead take immediate steps to establish a fair and humane process that upholds the rights of all people seeking refuge at our nation's doorstep."
Crow noted that the Biden administration recently admitted that "under the ban, people with meritorious legal claims can be barred from asylum and deported to countries where they face grave harm."
"To them, that is an acceptable price to pay for the illusion of border management," she said. "But they are breaking the law, sowing chaos, and putting vulnerable people in harm's way."
Tigar granted the Biden administration's request for a 14-day stay of the ruling, giving officials time to appeal the decision. The White House is expected to appeal to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and, if the appeals court also strikes down the policy, to the U.S. Supreme Court.
"The ruling is a victory, but each day the Biden administration prolongs the fight over its illegal ban, many people fleeing persecution and seeking safe harbor for their families are instead left in grave danger," said Katrina Eiland, deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project. "The promise of America is to serve as a beacon of freedom and hope, and the administration can and should do better to fulfill this promise, rather than perpetuate cruel and ineffective policies that betray it."
In the lawsuit, the ACLU and other groups representing the plaintiffs wrote that President Joe Biden "doubled down on [his] predecessor's cruel asylum restrictions" despite having campaigned on "a promise to restore our asylum system."
"The agencies claim the rule merely provides consequences for asylum-seekers circumventing lawful pathways," reads the lawsuit. "But seeking asylum is a lawful pathway protected by our laws regardless of how one enters the country."
Vanessa Cárdenas, executive director of America's Voice, welcomed the ruling and its "strong message to the Biden administration that it must adhere to the law."
But she emphasized that even if Tigar's decision is upheld on appeal, "it does not fix the broken asylum system."
"Only Congress can fully fix the broken asylum and immigration system, giving people the option of coming with visas for family or work and legalizing those who already work here," said Cárdenas. "Congress must deliver the modernization we need."
"In the meantime," she added, "we call on the administration to use the tools it has, including dedicating more resources to the border to address asylum backlogs, while using parole programs, [Temporary Protected Status], and the refugee admissions process to stabilize the system and provide additional pathways for those in need of protection."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden’s New Border Plan Is Already Putting Asylum Seekers at Risk
The restrictions undermine President Biden’s promise to end inhumane Trump-era border policies and make a shambles of the right to seek asylum.
Jun 29, 2023
The Biden administration recently announced that its border plan is “working as intended.” It was referring to President Joe Biden’s restrictive new policies that took effect with the ending of Title 42, the Covid-19 emergency health regulation that allowed the U.S. to turn away adult asylum seekers at the southern border.
What the administration failed to acknowledge is that these restrictions undermine President Biden’s promise to end inhumane Trump-era border policies. Instead he is making a shambles of the right to seek asylum.
Seeking asylum is a legal act under U.S. and international law, whether or not the asylum seeker enters at an official border crossing. Yet the new restrictions block asylum seekers from entering the U.S. and deny asylum eligibility to many who have credible fear of persecution but are unable to surmount the barriers the rule creates.
In the encampment we visited, approximately 2,500 people sheltered in shabby tents without running water, cooking, or bathing facilities, awaiting entry to the U.S.
I recently traveled with a group of attorneys to the Rio Grande Valley, where attorneys from the South Texas Pro Bono Asylum Representation Project (ProBAR) led us to a border encampment in Matamoros, Mexico, and to the Port Isabel Detention Center (PIDC) near Brownsville. What we saw and heard was reminiscent of the suffering under Trump administration policies that prevented migrants fleeing persecution from entering and seeking asylum in the U.S.
With the rescission of Title 42, individuals should again be permitted, under current law, to seek asylum in the U.S. Those who enter the U.S. and express fear of persecution have the right to an interview with an asylum officer. If they demonstrate credible fear of persecution on account of their race, religion, political opinion, or other protected ground, they should be permitted to apply for asylum. Those granted asylum are eligible for a green card and may petition to bring family to the U.S.
The Biden administration, however, severely limited these rights when it implemented the post-Title 42 Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Final Rule. Asylum-seekers crossing the southern border without authorization must now apply for and be denied asylum in a country through which they traveled or make an appointment to present themselves at a port of entry using the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) app known as CBP One. But it is nearly impossible to satisfy these requirements, as most transit countries do not have functioning asylum systems, and the CBP One app is riddled with malfunctions and delays.
Humanitarian organizations in Matamoros confirmed that only noncitizens with CBP One app appointments or a documented, grave medical condition are permitted to cross and present themselves at the Brownsville Port of Entry. This leaves migrants with valid asylum claims languishing in Matamoros in squalid and dangerous conditions. In the encampment we visited, approximately 2,500 people sheltered in shabby tents without running water, cooking, or bathing facilities, awaiting entry to the U.S.
Those who cross between official ports of entry without meeting one of the new conditions are presumed ineligible for asylum. Instead, they must meet a higher standard of proving reasonable fear of return and are only eligible for limited protection in the U.S. Those exempted from this presumed ineligibility include unaccompanied minors, trafficking victims, and people facing medical emergencies or imminent threat of death.
Most of the detained migrants we interviewed at PIDC had tried unsuccessfully to use the CBP One app. They had spotty access to internet, could not upload photos, were booted from the app, or were repeatedly advised that appointments were unavailable.
CBP processing centers are not designed for long-term detention, yet several migrants we interviewed were held in overcrowded, unhealthy CBP facilities for up to 12 days.
Several received transit passes as they entered countries along their journeys but had no realistic opportunities to apply for asylum. Others were kidnapped while waiting to cross. Captors tortured them while family members listened by cellphone and held them hostage until their families paid a ransom. After their release, fearing further violence, they crossed the Rio Grande, legally sought asylum, and were taken into CBP custody.
CBP processing centers are not designed for long-term detention, yet several migrants we interviewed were held in overcrowded, unhealthy CBP facilities for up to 12 days. They were then transferred to detention centers where some waited weeks for credible fear decisions. Few, if any, had lawyers to help them maneuver the complicated new asylum restrictions.
The American Immigration Council recently issued a report offering humane alternatives for border processing. They recommend, for example, expanding CBP’s capacity at ports of entry and establishing regional processing centers where “federal agencies are co-located with nongovernmental organizations to carry out processing, coordinate release, and provide effective case management for newly arrived migrants.”
The Department of Homeland Security said it will “make adjustments” to the new procedures if needed. However, small adjustments will not repair the damage done to the asylum process.
The Biden administration should rescind its rule and keep its promise to create humane border policies. The American Immigration Council has provided a roadmap—the Biden administration just needs to follow it.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular