Submit your comment here: https://immigrationjustice.quorum.us/campaign/44910/
TLDR: The Biden administration’s proposed asylum transit ban and contemplation of the use of family detention again is simply recycling the previous administration’s cruel tactics to erode asylum laws. Put your faith into action and submit a unique comment to tell the administration, the proposed asylum ban is unacceptable, and to instead fully restore asylum law at the border with the humane processing of asylum seekers.
Imagine you and your family are in grave danger and you know that staying in your home country is no longer an option. With a heavy heart you realize you have no choice, you must leave everything you love and know behind without much time for planning your escape. The treacherous journey to the United States begins with no guarantee that you and all of your family will make it safely or together, but you know this is the only way your family will have a shot at living a safe life. Through so much hardship, by the grace of god, several weeks later you make it to the United States southern border with your family –only to be turned away.
Erosion of the Right to Seek Asylum –A Timeline
The year is 2019, when you arrived at the southern border you were forced to wait for your immigration court proceedings in Mexico, were given a number, and told you were on a wait list with no way of knowing when your hearing will take place. You remain in Mexico at an encampment near the river with no infrastructure or resources to await your turn as promised. This is the result of the Trump administration implementing the Migration Protection Protocols (MPP) which forced asylum seekers to await their court proceedings in Mexico and oftentimes when presented at their hearings many had no access to counsel. MPP is the beginning of the erosion of asylum access to those seeking asylum at the southern border.
The year is 2020, when you arrived at the southern border, you were denied the opportunity to state an asylum claim and were expelled back to Mexico faster than you could even understand what occurred. You remain in Mexico because returning home is not an option and you hope that soon the law changes so you can seek asylum. This is the result of the Trump administration using Title 42, a public health law to expel asylum seekers back to Mexico without providing them an opportunity to claim asylum. As such, the erosion of asylum law continued despite a ruling from a federal Judge who ruled that using this health law to deny asylum seekers their rights was “arbitrary and capricious.” Title 42 remains in place today, because in December 2022 SCOTUS ruled to keep it in place, it is expected to end on May 11, 2023 when the Covid-19 public health emergency is set to end.
The year is 2023, when you arrived at the southern border, you were told that you must first obtain an appointment through a phone app so that you can then request asylum. You remain in Mexico at an asylum encampment with no infrastructure or resources while you figure out how to use this phone app and obtain access to the internet. The Biden administration announced a new parole program for asylum seekers from Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Haiti. However, to request processing at a port of entry asylum seekers must do so using CBP One app, among other stringent requirements.
Throughout all these years since 2019 with the start of MPP, asylum seekers were forced to wait in Mexico exposed to real danger from criminal organizations and with no resources from any government entity. Today, four years after the start of MPP, the erosion of asylum law continues alive and well. Indeed, with the end of Title 42 looming in near sight, the Biden administration’s response has been a proposed implementation of a new asylum transit ban, and the possible reinstatement of family detention despite his own administration discontinuing this cruel practice in 2021.
PUT YOUR FAITH INTO ACTION – Submit a comment to the Federal Registry Opposing Biden’s Proposed Asylum Transit Ban
Proposed Asylum Transit Ban Explained
In light of the Covid-19 Public Health order set to end in May, and along with it, the end of using Title 42 as a means to expel asylum seekers, the Biden Administration proposed a rule in “anticipation of a potential surge of migration at the southwest border”.
Rebuttable Presumption
The proposed rule would impose a “rebuttable presumption of asylum ineligibility for certain noncitizens who neither . . . seek asylum or other protection in a country through which they travel.” Essentially, this means that all asylum seekers (except those from Mexico) who travel through a third country while making their way to the southern border would be denied asylum if they did not first request asylum in a third country. (Proposed rule mirrors a Trump era asylum ban that was struck down in federal court) However, under current immigration law we cannot send asylum seekers to an unsafe country unless there is a ““safe third country agreement” in place with that third country; the United States’ only such agreement is with Canada, or if the migrant was “firmly settled” in the third country.”
Exceptions to the Rebuttable Presumption
The only way to overcome this proposed rebuttable presumption would be if asylum seekers fall into the following exceptions: “acute medical emergency,” “imminent and extreme threat” of violent crimes such as murder, rape or kidnapping, being a victim of human trafficking or “other extremely compelling circumstances.” Children traveling alone will also be exempted.” These exceptions do not have clearly defined standards and as such are broad and open to interpretation at the whim of border agents. Border agents will get to decide whether an asylum seeker meets an exception based on that agent’s own discretion which will largely go unchecked. This means asylum seekers will be at the mercy of the discretion of border agents whose job is not to determine legal standards.
CBP One
This rebuttable presumption in conjunction with restricting asylum seekers to booking an appointment on CBP One app to request asylum would further force asylum seekers to living in unsafe conditions in Mexico, and is essentially metering with technology. Asylum seekers face technical difficulties and access issues with the CBP One app. Some of the more precarious examples of issues with the app include, not enough slots for families to get appointments together causing de facto family separation, or the app is unable to capture photos of those with darker complexions. Some worrisome access issues include, having to understand one of the few languages used in the app, assumes all asylum seekers are literate and know how to use technology, access to resources to obtain a phone and mobile data, and even falling prey to bad actors who extort with false promises to get them an appointment on the app. The CBP One app may be adjusted to fix the technology glitches but the access issues are in fact preventing asylum seekers from requesting asylum.
In essence this proposed rule is essentially further eroding the ability to seek asylum and contradicts all current asylum laws both internationally and domestically. Despite the various tools used to prevent access to asylum, it is crucial to highlight that seeking asylum at ports of entry is legal and in fact, under current asylum law, the Immigration and Nationality Act 8 U.S.C. §1158(a)(1) states anyone regardless of how they entered the United States may seek asylum. First, ask yourself why our so-called “law and order” country is set on not applying its own asylum laws and then start taking action to demand that this country restore asylum as is deemed by the law.
Take Action: Submit Your Comment Today
Submit your comment here: https://immigrationjustice.quorum.us/campaign/44910/
Make sure you edit the template to write your own unique comment before submitting. You only have until March 27, 2023 to submit a comment so do not delay.
The most immediate way to put your faith into action today, or as soon as possible is to submit a comment to the Federal Registry opposing the proposed transit ban. The urgency is that you only have until March 27, 2023 to submit your comment.
Before it can implement the proposed rule as it is currently written, the administration must review and respond to all unique comments that are submitted, and may even edit the proposed rule based on the submitted comments. The key word is that your comment must be “unique” otherwise the administration will ignore duplicative comments. As such, it is not necessarily the quantity of comments but rather the quality of comments submitted that will make the greatest impact.
Take the time to reflect on your own experiences with asylum seekers so that you can be prepared to include those unique perspectives and stories into your own comment. For example, think through if you have been on a Courts & Ports trip, worked or volunteered with asylum seekers in any capacity with congregations or other entities, and include in your comment these experiences to supplement your comment. If you have not had such personal experiences you can still submit a unique comment by focusing and expanding on the effects that this proposed rule would have on asylum seekers and how it is contrary to our asylum law in place.
Importance of Submitting a Comment
Submitting your unique comment will really make a difference for various reasons:
- Submit a comment because the administration must review and respond to all unique comments before it can implement the proposed rule as is written. The administration may even edit the proposed rule based on the comments submitted.
- Remind the administration that seeking asylum at ports of entry is legal and in fact, under current asylum law, the Immigration and Nationality Act 8 U.S.C. §1158(a)(1) states anyone regardless of how they entered the United States may seek asylum.
- Remind the administration that under current immigration law we cannot send asylum seekers to an unsafe country unless there is a ““safe third country agreement” in place with that third country; the United States’ only such agreement is with Canada, or if the migrant was “firmly settled” in the third country.”
- Finally, there is likely to be legal action against this proposed rule and the comments submitted are part of the record which may help supplement the record for that legal action.
- You are making a difference and we need you to take action with submitting your comment and telling this administration to restore asylum.