[It is unacceptable to sacrifice the basic human rights of
vulnerable migrants in exchange for a one-time, limited pot of defense
aid that many in Congress already support on the merits.]
[[link removed]]

CONGRESS AND PRESIDENT BIDEN SHOULD NOT TRADE AWAY HUMAN RIGHTS AND
ASYLUM PROTECTIONS FOR TEMPORARY DEFENSE FUNDING  
[[link removed]]


 

Daniel Costa and Samantha Sanders
December 15, 2023
Economic Policy Institute
[[link removed]]


*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ It is unacceptable to sacrifice the basic human rights of
vulnerable migrants in exchange for a one-time, limited pot of defense
aid that many in Congress already support on the merits. _

Advocates ride bicycle billboards around the U.S. Capitol and Senate
buildings in D.C. on Dec. 6., Leigh Vogel/Getty Images for Resist
Trumpism

 

The Senate, House, and White House are embroiled in down-to-the-wire
negotiations to trade harmful changes to the asylum system and
draconian immigration enforcement measures in exchange for approving a
one-time defense supplemental funding package. We urge members of
Congress and the White House to reject any such deal. 

If Congress passes the one-time defense supplemental, the money will
likely run out in just a few months. But the major anti-immigrant
policy changes that Congress and the White House are reportedly
considering will be permanent. These policies include an updated
version of Trump’s Title 42 policy, mandatory detention of migrants
and asylum seekers while they adjudicate their claims (likely
including children), increased power to deport people encountered
beyond the border areas of the United States with little to no due
process (known as “expedited removal”), and changing the legal
standard for asylum to make it more difficult to prove an initial
claim.

If passed, the measures under consideration would go even further
than some of the Trump administration’s harsh and brutal
actions—and because they will carry statutory weight, it’s
unlikely that immigrant rights advocates will have a path to challenge
them in court. Further, it should be apparent to any reasonable
legislator or administration official that these policy changes will
not improve the situation at the southern border and will have harmful
impacts on migrant and U.S. workers alike.

For example, Senate negotiators are considering a similar version of
the Trump administration’s Title 42 policy—which allowed border
officials to quickly expel migrants without processing their asylum
claims. While Title 42 was technically a public health measure invoked
ostensibly because of the pandemic, it was widely decried as inhumane
and unlawful by immigrant rights advocates and most Democrats,
including Joe Biden when he campaigned for the presidency. But
President Biden has now reportedly
[[link removed]]
signaled a willingness to accept a new iteration of Title 42 as part
of a deal.

A new Title 42-like policy, however, will have numerous disastrous
impacts. For one, it will incentivize
[[link removed]]
family separation because parents will send their children to the
border unaccompanied, in order to increase the chance that their
asylum claims will be heard. This will further increase the risk of
migrant children being subject to labor exploitation, debt bondage,
and even human trafficking.

In addition, when access to asylum is restricted, we know that more
people fleeing persecution will try to enter the United States without
authorization instead of turning themselves in to border officials in
an orderly manner, as asylum-seekers have exercised their legal right
to do before and after Title 42 was in place. This will increase
[[link removed]] the number of
encounters by Border Patrol officers, not decrease them. The policy
also hinges on acquiescence and cooperation by the Mexican government,
which is by no means assured.

If these concessions are made, some people who still manage to enter
the country outside of the legal process will not have access to work
authorization, making them part of the permanently exploitable
underclass of undocumented workers who lack real access to any labor
standards protections because they fear deportation. This risks
pushing down wages and working conditions for both immigrant and
U.S.-born workers across the country, particularly those in low-wage
jobs. Others will be detained and subjected to harsher, more inhumane
conditions—whether in detention or after being deported quickly and
without due process to the dangerous conditions they were fleeing in
their countries of origin.

The main challenge at the southern border is a failed allocation of
resources and the wrong priorities: Congress has appropriated eight
times more
[[link removed]]
funds for immigration enforcement than for adjudications in
immigration courts and for asylum and refugee operations. The
Department of Homeland Security’s request for additional funds for
border security rightfully includes an increase in resources for
immigration judges and processing asylum claims, but in our view, the
concessions to worsen asylum, enforcement, and detention policies
would cause the security situation to deteriorate and quickly render
that increase moot.

Humanitarian crises, political instability, wars, and other disasters
led to the highest number of forcibly displaced persons
[[link removed]]
on record as of the end of 2022. The United States, the richest
country in the world, can and should do its part to address the
displacement crisis through a welcoming and generous policy for
receiving and integrating humanitarian migrants into society and the
workforce. We should not double down on a return to policies that we
know only cause more suffering.

It is unacceptable to sacrifice the basic human rights of vulnerable
migrants in exchange for a one-time, limited pot of defense aid that
many in Congress already support on the merits. It’s particularly
notable that the major changes being considered have never been on the
table as part of a package that could realistically become law, not
even as part of a negotiation to try to finally force movement on the
most important immigration reform that’s needed; namely, a path to
citizenship for 11 million unauthorized immigrants. 

Despite the complexity and magnitude of the changes being considered,
we are deeply troubled that the deal is reportedly being negotiated
without many of the members of Congress who have the deepest knowledge
of immigration law, including members of the Congressional Hispanic
Caucus
[[link removed]],
and even without
[[link removed]] Sen. Dick
Durbin (D-Ill.), the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which
has jurisdiction over immigration. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), one of
the chief negotiators for Senate Democrats, is a relative newcomer to
the topic of immigration, and recently admitted
[[link removed]] that
drafting legislative language for the deal is “more fraught and more
complicated” than for other topics, which will undoubtedly lead to
unintended—and possibly disastrous—consequences
[[link removed]].

If conservative legislators are allowed to demand draconian
immigration reforms for military funding that a majority of them
_already_ support independently, they will be enabled and incentivized
to ask for even more concessions every time Democratic legislators
come to the bargaining table. It would mark yet another example of
the far-right fringe in Congress hijacking the political process to
force through their deeply unpopular, harmful policy aims in funding
deals and must-pass vehicles on unrelated topics.

===

 

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]

Manage subscription
[[link removed]]

Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]