Democrats are taking a victory lap. Apprehensions along the southern border are at the lowest they’ve been in four years — lower than before the pandemic.
Vice President Kamala Harris went on the offensive during a recent visit to the border — simultaneously touting her “tough” border security bonafides.
“There are consequential issues at stake in this election and one is the security of our border,” Harris said. “The United States is a sovereign nation and I believe we have a duty to set rules at our border and to enforce them. And I take that responsibility very seriously.”
Campaign surrogates are following her lead. They’re crediting lower apprehension numbers on a series of asylum restrictions the Biden administration implemented in June.
“In the last couple of months things have gotten much better,” Rep. Mark Levin told a local TV news station. “Forty-eight percent reduction across the southern border since the beginning of the executive action.”
When President Joe Biden announced the asylum restrictions in June, he framed them as an emergency response to a surge in illegal border crossings. The actions stipulated that once illegal crossings went below 1,500 for a week, the restrictions would be lifted. But as of Monday, Biden is requiring that crossings stay below 1,500 for four weeks.
This all but ensures that the restrictions will stay in place indefinitely. And while Harris and others make political hay over the tough stance, advocates for migrants say something not being talked about in campaign speeches and TV appearances is the human cost behind the lower apprehension numbers.
Vulnerable migrants who would have had solid asylum claims just a few months ago are now being deported under the new rules, according to multiple immigration lawyers and advocates. They claim the new policies result in a rushed process that violates due process rights by restricting access to attorneys and doesn’t give migrants enough time to prepare for their cases.
“There are a lot of factors of why we’re seeing numbers go down and it’s not because people don’t need help, it’s because the people that need help are being literally blocked,” said Margaret Cargioli, directing attorney of policy and advocacy for the Immigrant Defenders Law Center.
Under the new rules, migrants who cross the border illegally are subject to a much more difficult process to access asylum in the United States. Their timeline is significantly faster, sometimes giving detained migrants just one day to find a lawyer willing to represent them. And the legal standard to prove eligibility for asylum is much higher than before.
The fact that migrants are being detained in remote facilities throughout the border adds another set of obstacles, Cargioli said.
“There have been (phone) connectivity issues,” she said. “I was on a call where the asylum officer repeatedly asked my client to speak up, they couldn’t hear quite a few times. And it’s just an interview over the phone, they’re not allowed to present evidence, to have witnesses, it really stacks up the process against their favor.”
Advocates believe that the rushed nature of Biden’s asylum restrictions result in questionable decisions — including family separations and inconsistent application of the law.
‘I still have nightmares’
They point to cases like that of Angie, an indigenous woman from Colombia who fled South America with her husband. KPBS is withholding her last name to protect her identity.
“In Colombia we were victims of violence and physically forced to relocate,” she said in Spanish.
Angie and her husband faced discrimination in Colombia because of their indigenous identity. She told KPBS the couple faced violent threats from guerrilla groups trying to take their land, and local police were unwilling to help.
Before fleeing Colombia, the couple tried to apply for a visa to enter the United States but were denied.
Feeling they had no other choice, they crossed the border illegally and surrendered to Border Patrol agents in San Diego. The two were separated in custody when U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) separated migrants into groups of men and women.
Even though they fled identical circumstances, Angie was able to pursue her asylum claim but her husband was deported. She said her husband is back in Colombia and his life is in danger.
“I still have nightmares,” Angie said. “I’m always tired, I’ve lost a lot of weight and don’t have an appetite.”
A hard right turn
U.S. law explicitly states anyone present in the country can apply for asylum, irrespective of their immigration status. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other advocacy groups have sued the Biden administration — claiming his new rules violate that principle.
Despite the legal challenge, Vice President Harris is doubling down on the policy.
“If someone does not make an asylum request at a legal port of entry and instead crosses our border unlawfully, they will be barred from receiving asylum,” she said at a campaign stop last week.
During the same speech, Harris supported other border policies like expanding pathways to citizenship, hiring more immigration judges, and installing inspection devices to detect fentanyl at legal border crossings.
This rhetoric is a far cry from Biden’s position during the 2020 campaign, when he said, “If I’m elected president, we’re going to immediately end Trump’s assault on the dignity of immigrant communities. We’re going to restore our moral standing in the world and our historic role as a safe haven for refugees and asylum seekers.”
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the agency that oversees CBP, declined to respond to criticisms raised by immigration lawyers. The agency shared a statement from DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
“This action has been taken in parallel with other Administration actions that have both increased enforcement and delivered to asylum seekers safe and lawful pathways to humanitarian relief that cut out the ruthless smuggling organizations that prey on the vulnerable,” the statement read.
DHS officials told KPBS that the expedited process is meant to make the asylum process more efficient by, “quickly identifying and removing those with claims that are unlikely to succeed at the merits stage.”
Advocates are dismayed by what they describe as a Democrat shift to the right on immigration.
“If the border policy is meant to have no one have asylum, irrespective of what they suffer, then that’s the result we’re getting,” said Emily Robinson, a Los Angeles-based immigration lawyer.
One of Robinson’s cases involved a Colombian woman who was kidnapped and sexually assaulted multiple times by multiple men — including some with connections to the paramilitary, she said.
Under the expedited process, her client had to retell her traumatic experience to complete strangers without the support of a lawyer or mental health professional.
“Less than a week after her last gang rape, she was given less than 48 hours until she was given her first credible fear interview,” Robinson said. “She didn’t even really know what was going on.”
The asylum officer and interpreter were both men, which Robinson said made her client feel uncomfortable.
“Usually, when you have clients with this kind of trauma, you want to create a safe space where they feel comfortable sharing this information,” she said.
Despite the difficult circumstances, Robinson said the asylum officer found her client credible — but denied her request to pursue asylum because they did not believe she belonged to a persecuted group.
Robinson is appealing the decision. But as things stand, her client will be deported.
“I’ve had many clients who have suffered significantly less than this who would be allowed to pursue their case,” she said.
