Biden’s New Asylum Rules: Border Closures and Immediate Removals Spark Controversy

Recent Changes in U.S. Asylum Rules: A Closer Look

On June 4, 2024, President Biden issued an executive order that fundamentally alters the landscape for asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border. This new directive includes conditions such as blocking asylum for individuals crossing between ports of entry or those arriving without a CBP One appointment. This significant policy shift marks a departure from previous approaches and has far-reaching consequences for those seeking protection in the United States.

Border Closure and Immediate Removals

The executive order introduces a mechanism allowing border officials to close the border to asylum seekers when daily encounters surpass an average of 2,500 over a seven-day period. This measure is designed to manage peaks in border crossings, but it has already triggered considerable concern. The border will remain shut to asylum seekers until the average drops to below 1,500 encounters, making the policy dynamic and responsive to fluctuations in border activities. Critics argue this creates unpredictable hardships for vulnerable people seeking refuge.

A cornerstone of this policy is the provision for immediate removals. Border officials now have the authority to expel individuals rapidly without a hearing during peak periods, impeding many from even presenting their asylum claims. This expedited removal process raises critical questions about due process and the fundamental rights of asylum seekers under international law.

Legal Concerns and Criticism

Various human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch, have denounced the policy as unlawful and contrary to international refugee law. They argue that it subjects thousands of individuals to potential danger by denying them a fair assessment of their claims. The executive order, they contend, not only leaves asylum seekers in legal limbo but also disrupts their long-term aspirations for family reunification and permanent residence.

The Biden administration’s policy stands in contrast to the previous administration’s measures, although there are similarities. While the Asylum Ban and Circumvention of Lawful Pathways rule reflect ongoing efforts to control border activities, the administration has also rolled back restrictive Trump-era policies such as the Remain in Mexico program and Title 42, suggesting a complex and oscillating approach to immigration and asylum.

In May 2023, the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways rule was introduced, penalizing those who cross between ports of entry, fail to use the CBP One application, or do not seek asylum in a transit country first. This rule, alongside enhanced security measures proposed by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), further tightens the asylum process and emphasizes national security by expediting the removal of perceived threats.

Nevertheless, the DHS’s prioritization of public safety and national security through earlier application of statutory bars has generated substantial pushbacks from advocacy groups. The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) and the International Rescue Committee (IRC) argue that the new policies undermine the due process and protections enshrined in U.S. law, posing ethical and legal dilemmas.

As the debate continues, these recent changes highlight the complexities of crafting an asylum policy that balances security concerns with the humanitarian obligation to offer refuge to those fleeing persecution. The long-term impact of these measures on immigration law, national security, and international human rights remains to be seen, making it a pivotal issue for policymakers, legal experts, and advocacy groups alike.