Many of our leaders claim the US immigration system is broken. But after working in the immigration courts during the last two years of my active practice of law, I can report the system governing immigration is not broken. Instead, the laws are deliberately ignored by an administration seemingly oblivious to the harm caused by uncontrolled open borders.
Under current law, immigrants can enter the US lawfully under one of several programs, including family requests, employment status, refugees and asylum, and a diversity visa program to encourage immigration from countries with low rates of immigration. Each of these programs have criteria and national limits, and the waiting lists are long. Generally speaking, an immigrant who wishes to live in the US must either wait to fill the home country’s national quota and fit in one of the programs or come to a port of entry at the border and ask for asylum.
US and international law require the receiving country to grant asylum to persons who are a victim of oppression in their home countries and have a well-founded fear of being persecuted in the future “on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” Neither US nor international law require us to grant asylum to those who do not suffer persecution and simply want a better life.
Under federal law, once a person at the border states a credible and well-founded fear of persecution, they are to be detained until their claim can be heard by an immigration judge. The law says the person “shall be detained pending a final determination of the credible fear of persecution,” not released into the country. To prove the claim of persecution at the hearing, the applicant must show who they are, where they came from, and how they were oppressed in their home country. Those who cross the border illegally must be immediately deported, and that is one reason why President Obama was known as the deporter in chief. He enforced the law.
I worked in the immigration court in Tacoma, Washington, which is one of several detention facilities around the country. When I signed up for this pro bono work I thought I might be helping people from Mexico or Central America, but not so. Two cases show how the system works.
A gypsy man, whose people are known as Roma, flew to Cancun, Mexico and made his way to the port of entry at San Ysidro, California where he presented himself and asked for asylum. He did not possess any documentation showing his identity or citizenship and he gave somewhat conflicting accounts of what happened to his documents. But he said enough to be allowed into the country and was sent to Tacoma for a hearing.
The Roma are among the most persecuted people in Eastern Europe and their persecution is well established in US State Department Country Reports, which we submitted. It would have proven a well-founded fear of persecution. But we had no documentation of who he was or where he came from, and the judge ruled the conflicting accounts of what happened to his documents meant his claim was not credible. His application for asylum was denied and he was deported.
The second case involved a web site designer from Cameroon. He lived in the English-speaking region of Cameroon, which is engaged in a civil war with the French speaking region over control of oil resources and elections. He flew to Ecuador, which does not require a visa to enter the country and made his way to San Ysidro, where he applied for asylum.
By the time of his hearing, his family had sent me a thick package of documents with his identity card, newspaper reports of the conflict, school diplomas and transcripts, and affidavits attesting to the circumstances of his arrest after he was seen at a protest march. He testified about torture inflicted by the police who wanted to know who his accomplices were. And I found and submitted a report from Amnesty International with satellite photos showing the destruction of his home village.
At his hearing, the judge advised me the less I said the better off my client would be, and I’ve spent long enough in court over 40 years to know when to shut up and sit down. The government’s lawyer said very little, and the judge quickly granted the petition for asylum. While it took several months to get the case to hearing, the system worked as it was designed.
Today, the Biden Administration completely ignores the federal laws requiring the applicant to identify himself, state a credible claim of persecution, and be detained until a judge hears the case. Instead, unidentified people are flooding across the border, they are not detained and, instead, are flown or bussed throughout the country. In just one example of the resulting catastrophe, the Democrat Mayor of New York City justifiably says the uncontrolled arrival of undocumented immigrants is destroying his city.
The failure to enforce the immigration law is simply not sustainable. The public services in Chicago, Denver, San Diego, the Texas border towns and many other cities and towns across the country are at a breaking point with public services being cut in order to feed and house these immigrants, and reports of horrible crimes committed by those who entered illegally, beat up the cops and then flip us the bird don’t help.
We don’t need more laws; we need the President to enforce the laws on the books. Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution says the President “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed” and that is clearly not happening.
Is it asking too much of the President, instead of recasting them as “newcomers”, to explain to the American people why he has allowed the mass entry of immigrants in violation of federal law?
Well and most wisely said.