President Biden acknowledged that relying solely on executive power is not enough to secure the border. He emphasized the need for negotiations with a bipartisan group of senators to effectively address the border crisis.
The negotiations produced the Senate Border Act of 2024 (Border Act), which, according to him, would be “the most stringent and equitable set of reforms to safeguard our country’s border that we have ever seen.” One of its key provisions includes the creation of a new emergency authority to close the border in case of overwhelming circumstances. He emphasized his intention to exercise this authority immediately upon signing the bill into law.
Related posts
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) argues that Biden has made little effort to secure the border. According to Johnson, the Biden administration has actively worked to undermine America’s border security since the very beginning of his presidency.
I agree with Johnson’s doubts regarding Biden’s intentions. It was Biden’s immigration policies that led to the border crisis, and unfortunately, the Border Act negotiated by his team does not address or rectify those policies.
According to immigration expert Steven Camarota, the border crisis can be attributed to Biden. Ever since he assumed office, there has been a significant surge in illegal border crossings. This sudden spike can largely be attributed to Biden’s campaign promises, which included plans to relax asylum standards, reduce enforcement, and implement amnesty. As a result, undocumented migrants have developed a reasonable belief that they can enter the southern border without a visa.
In addition, Biden has successfully fulfilled a majority of his promises, including the implementation of programs that provide opportunities for undocumented migrants to enter the country without visas, bypassing the traditional visa system.
During the first three years of the Biden presidency, his administration has allowed over 2.3 million migrants to enter the country without visas using the “catch and release” policy. It is worth noting that this number would have been even higher if the administration did not have to expel 2.5 million migrants due to the pandemic-era Title 42 order.
Biden has the power to put an end to catch and release without relying on the Border Act. In fact, it is his own policy. By simply issuing an executive order instructing the relevant agency heads to cease this practice, he can effectively bring it to a halt.
The Border Act grants him the authority to release as many as 5,000 individuals who have illegally crossed the border each day.
The provision grants Biden the power to close the border, but it does not make it mandatory unless the daily average of illegal crossings exceeds 5,000, which equates to nearly 2 million per year.
The Border Act, unfortunately, does not offer a means to prevent him from disregarding the shutdown requirement, just as he has ignored the immigration enforcement provisions mandated by law. Furthermore, it does not put an end to the “legal pathways” that his administration has established to allow migrants entry into the country without visas. These pathways encompass various special processes, such as parole for up to 30,000 migrants monthly from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, as well as the Family Reunification Parole Process for individuals from other nations.
The administration’s CBP One mobile application program will not be terminated by the Border Act. This program enables visa-less migrants to book inspections at a southwest border port of entry. As of August 2023, approximately 250,000 migrants have undergone inspections through this program, with 99.7 percent of them being allowed entry into the country. Moreover, the CBP One program has been utilized by the administration to transport 320,000 inadmissible immigrants from foreign nations to American airports.
The Border Act, in its final form, does not impose any obligations on the administration to enforce immigration laws against undocumented migrants who have made their way into the country’s interior. According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law, enforcement actions should focus on deportable migrants who pose a threat to national security, public safety, and border security, thereby endangering the well-being of the United States. Consequently, if individuals who illegally crossed the border are solely in violation of our laws, they are protected from enforcement proceedings and can be released into the interior of the country.
In any case, it is highly unlikely that they will be deported. In the fiscal year 2023, there were a total of 1,292,830 migrants who were subject to final deportation orders. However, only 142,580 of them were actually removed by ICE.
According to the Migration Policy Institute, our broken asylum system is characterized by lengthy backlogs and low chances of successful returns. This combination of factors is considered to be the main cause behind the current migration crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border. As a result, the integrity of the asylum and immigration adjudicative systems, as well as immigration enforcement overall, is compromised.
To address the backlogs in the immigration court system, there may be a need to temporarily halt the admission of asylum seekers. President Biden has the authority, granted by Congress in INA Section 212(f), to make this decision.
According to the Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. Hawaii, it was established that section 212(f) gives significant authority to the President in various aspects. The President is entrusted with the power to determine whether and when to suspend entry, which individuals to restrict, the duration of the suspension, and the conditions for entry. The only requirement is that the President must find that the entry of the covered aliens would harm the interests of the United States.
Furthermore, deviating from the clear text of section 212(f) is not justified by either the legislative history or historical practice.
Immigration reform legislation is necessary, but the negotiations led by Biden’s team may not result in the legislation needed to secure the border. This situation is akin to putting the fox in charge of guarding the hen house.
