Claims of an open border are false, even harmful

Border and asylum policies are some of the harshest ever, and it is about to get worse.

With likely White House sign-off, Congress is poised to further limit asylum and allow for more rapid deportations in exchange for aid to Ukraine and Israel. Texas has adopted a law that creates a state-level deportation scheme. So high numbers of arrivals at the southern border are not a result of generous immigration policies as some politicians claim.

Rather than doubling down on failed border enforcement and deterrence strategies, we need a new approach.

Immigrants journey to the border because of dangers in their home countries, such as Cuba, Venezuela and Afghanistan, that include horrific human rights situations that the United States condemns. According to the U.N. refugee agency, forced displacement worldwide has risen dramatically, comparable only to the period immediately after World War II. The lack of legal U.S. immigration pathways for family reunification or work also push immigrants to make the trek to the border.

But rather than recognizing the humanitarian situation, we’ve seen a decades-long rampup of barriers to asylum. Currently, asylum-seekers who are unable to secure limited appointments through the glitchy CBP One app are physically prevented from reaching or crossing through border checkpoints. Those who manage to enter the United States outside of official entry points, despite razor wire and floating buoys, generally turn themselves in or are apprehended and often promptly deported. The federal government and the state of Texas also criminally prosecute many immigrants crossing at the border.

Some succeed in communicating a fear of returning home and are labeled as asylum-seekers, but they are generally detained or placed on GPS monitors. Asylum-seekers then must undergo a high-stakes “credible fear” screening interview to prevent rapid deportation and secure the chance to present their claims in court.

New Biden administration rules make this screening much stricter by imposing Trump-era requirements unrelated to a person’s fear of harm. Less than half of asylum-seekers now fail, whereas about 85% passed before the pandemic. And those who pass must prove their cases again in court in a trial setting. Asylum grants in immigration court are rare — usually fewer than 25,000 each year — regardless of the level of need for protection.

These harsh policies don’t stop arrivals at the border, but they do have serious negative consequences, since asylumseekers are returned to their home countries. Also, the policies don’t make the United States safer. Instead, they force asylum-seekers into the hands of smuggling rings that make both sides of the U.s.-mexico border more violent.

The U.S. must change course with policy that emphasizes humanity and efficiency.

To begin, we should drop resource-wasting credible-fear screening interviews and detention for immigrants from situations that regularly produce viable claims, automatically referring those cases for full asylum adjudication. A streamlined approach would free up resources for faster and more robust asylum decisions and real law enforcement priorities.

The federal government should also provide an infusion of funding for processing and reception at the border and within the United States. Quicker processing into the United States would reduce the chaos at the border.

Additional measures are needed, but these would provide immediate relief.

The United States should be known for leadership rather than cruelty at the border. We all would be better off.