Possible implications of significant US immigration policy changes

President Joe Biden is becoming more involved in Senate negotiations concerning changes to the immigration system that Republicans are demanding in exchange for providing money to Ukraine in its fight against Russia and Israel for the war with Hamas. The president has stated that he is willing to make compromises on border issues as Republicans block wartime aid in Congress. The White House is expected to increase its involvement in talks this week as the impasse over border policy changes deepens and funds for Ukraine dwindle.

Republicans argue that the large numbers of migrants crossing the southern border pose a security threat and strain the country's resources. They also believe it is unjustifiable to send billions of dollars to other countries while neglecting the border at home. Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma, who is leading the negotiations, cited the surge of people entering the US from Mexico and stated that it is "spiraling out of control."

However, many immigration advocates, including some Democrats, argue that the proposed changes would weaken protections for vulnerable individuals and not effectively address the chaos at the border. Democratic Senator Chris Murphy confirmed that the White House would play a more active role in the negotiations but criticized the Republican policy demands as "unreasonable."

The negotiations are primarily taking place behind closed doors, but some of the discussed issues include asylum standards, humanitarian parole, and fast-track deportation authority. Humanitarian parole allows the US government to admit people into the country on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit. This power has been used by both Democratic and Republican administrations to admit people from various parts of the world.

Asylum, on the other hand, allows migrants to stay in the US and pursue a path to citizenship if they can demonstrate fear of persecution in their home countries based on specific criteria. Critics argue that most asylum-seekers do not ultimately receive asylum when their cases reach immigration court. Lawmakers are considering raising the standards for the initial credible fear interview, which determines if someone has a chance of receiving asylum.

The discussions also involve expedited removal, which allows low-level immigration officers to quickly deport certain immigrants. Supporters argue that it relieves the burden on immigration courts, while opponents argue that it lacks sufficient protections for migrants.

The proposed changes are contentious, and opinions on deterrence vary. Some believe that stricter standards and limitations on humanitarian parole would deter migrants from coming, while others argue that desperate individuals will still attempt dangerous journeys to evade Border Patrol.


More from Press Rundown