Fareed Zakaria: "The US faces a real crisis with its asylum system. My take" (1 Viewer)

[parasaurolophus]

Now you’re conflating the issue of undocumented immigration with the issue of asylum seekers. 

No I am not Tim. The family units are mostly turning themselves in. 

 

[BroadwayG]

Ok. Here's where I really don't know what I'm talking about.

Isn't claiming asylum what happens when you show up at the border, claim asylum and then you're processed and detained and assigned a court date and such?

I always thought "immigration" was way more what worked you out before you got to the border. In other words, do people show up at the board and say "I'd like to immigrate?" If so, what happens to them?

Sorry as I'm sure that's a dumb question. 

Asylum = on US territory, claims can be either affirmative (let me in!) or defensive (don't kick me out!)

Immigrants definitely should have a visa before showing up.

 

[Jackstraw]

Thanks. What do you think has caused the skyrocket number in people claiming asylum?

The President is threatening to “close the spigot” so bum rush to the door? 

 

[Jackstraw]

There should be more legitimate immigration for labor. Not just scientists and rich folks. 

 

[Sheriff Bart]

Thanks. I could see how someone might think that.

Supply and demand predicts it.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

My understanding is that the migrants who reach are border are the ones seeking political asylum. If you want to immigrate to this country through normal means you need to apply before coming here. I don’t think anybody just comes to the border and says “I want to immigrate.” 

Thanks. That's sort of what I thought.

So for the purpose of identifying the people being detained at the border, is it safe to say most all of them are:

1. People claiming they are seeking asylum

2. People who were apprehended after trying to cross the border illegally?

 

[sho nuff]

there's a difference between a humanitarian crisis existing, which i think almost everyone agrees, and a "thousands of criminals pouring over the border" crisis, which no one believed, and where DJT started with all this.

Thats what I keep coming back to.

 

[timschochet]

Thanks. That's sort of what I thought.

So for the purpose of identifying the people being detained at the border, is it safe to say most all of them are:

1. People claiming they are seeking asylum

2. People who were apprehended after trying to cross the border illegally?

I have no idea what happens to #2 or how many of them are detained. 

 

[sho nuff]

I don't think he's wrong by any stretch of the imagination

Democrats need to start talking about doing immigration and asylum right if they are to win  

What is right though?

 

[Joe Bryant]

I have no idea what happens to #2 or how many of them are detained. 

Ok. But for the sake of talking about people being detained at the border, is it fair to say most of them are people seeking asylum? (And I'm not leading anywhere. I truly don't know)

 

[timschochet]

Ok. But for the sake of talking about people being detained at the border, is it fair to say most of them are people seeking asylum? (And I'm not leading anywhere. I truly don't know)

That’s my understanding yes. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

That’s my understanding yes. 

Thanks. Mine too. Although I fully admit I understand little on this.

BUT, if we're right, that means the people claiming / seeking asylum make up the vast majority of the people being detained in conditions that are widely seen as bad. 

So to me, THAT's why the asylum number is so important. 

In other words, as I understand it, what happens to the person seeking immigration is they are denied the application or denied the credentials they needed where they currently are. They're not being detained anywhere. 

 

[timschochet]

Thanks. Mine too. Although I fully admit I understand little on this.

BUT, if we're right, that means the people claiming / seeking asylum make up the vast majority of the people being detained in conditions that are widely seen as bad. 

So to me, THAT's why the asylum number is so important. 

In other words, as I understand it, basically the worst thing that happens to the person seeking immigration is they are denied the application or denied the credentials they needed. They're not being detained anywhere. 

If their application is denied they’re still in their own country. If they are caught trying to cross our borders they are deported (or at least deposited south of our border. 

 

[Henry Ford]

https://twitter.com/FareedZakaria/status/1146102131696422912

Thoughts on this? 

Added transcript found on from RealClearPolitics:  Do not know if accurate.

2014, you say? You mean the year after Republicans in the House refused to hold a vote on the most comprehensive security and immigration reform bill of our lifetimes that had already passed the Senate? 

Pass the 2013 bill. It fixes a lot of things we’re having trouble with right now. 

 

[unckeyherb]

If their application is denied they’re still in their own country. If they are caught trying to cross our borders they are deported (or at least deposited south of our border. 

If they apply for asylum at the border, are they given a court date and are let in to wait it out?  Or are they given the court date and turned around?  I believe, though I admit I don't know for sure, that they are let in temporarily to wait until their hearing, which according to the OP can be quite a long wait.  

 

[timschochet]

If they apply for asylum at the border, are they given a court date and are let in to wait it out?  Or are they given the court date and turned around?  I believe, though I admit I don't know for sure, that they are let in temporarily to wait until their hearing, which according to the OP can be quite a long wait.  

I can't answer you with assurance on this, because I keep getting conflicting information.

 

[unckeyherb]

I can't answer you with assurance on this, because I keep getting conflicting information.

Right.  It is an important piece of the equation, IMO.

 

[Henry Ford]

Ok. But for the sake of talking about people being detained at the border, is it fair to say most of them are people seeking asylum? (And I'm not leading anywhere. I truly don't know)

That’s my understanding yes. 

The last numbers I saw were 40%.  But they may have risen since late 2018/early 2019

 

[Joe Bryant]

The last numbers I saw were 40%.  But they may have risen since late 2018/early 2019

Thanks. What makes up the balance?

 

[Henry Ford]

If they apply for asylum at the border, are they given a court date and are let in to wait it out?  Or are they given the court date and turned around?  I believe, though I admit I don't know for sure, that they are let in temporarily to wait until their hearing, which according to the OP can be quite a long wait.  

That used to be the case.  The fact that it no longer is, in general, is one reason people call this a manufactured crisis.  We used to let them in, let them get work permits if the case wasn't fully resolved within 6 months, and let them take care of themselves until the case was decided.

 

[Joe Bryant]

If their application is denied they’re still in their own country. If they are caught trying to cross our borders they are deported (or at least deposited south of our border. 

That's my understanding.

Unless I'm missing another group that is being detained, it seems like the majority of the group being detained are those claiming / seeking asylum. But that's me not knowing anything. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

That used to be the case.  The fact that it no longer is, in general, is one reason people call this a manufactured crisis.  We used to let them in, let them get work permits if the case wasn't fully resolved within 6 months, and let them take care of themselves until the case was decided.

Thanks. Do you have a non partisan link for how it is done now?

 

[Henry Ford]

Thanks. What makes up the balance?

People who crossed the border other than at a designated entry point for some other reason, people who were detained within 100 miles of a border and discovered to be here in violation of the law, that sort of thing.

 

[unckeyherb]

That used to be the case.  The fact that it no longer is, in general, is one reason people call this a manufactured crisis.  We used to let them in, let them get work permits if the case wasn't fully resolved within 6 months, and let them take care of themselves until the case was decided.

So, if I am understanding correctly, all the people in these processing areas that are seeking asylum, will be given a court date and then dropped off back on the other side of the border? 

 

[Henry Ford]

Thanks. Do you have a non partisan link for how it is done now?

I can link you to a story about a federal court ruling today, holding that the administration is trying to hold people indefinitely until their cases are resolved, and ruling that they aren't allowed to.

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/03/738385096/federal-judge-blocks-trump-policy-ordering-indefinite-detention-for-asylum-seeke

 

[Joe Bryant]

People who crossed the border other than at a designated entry point for some other reason, people who were detained within 100 miles of a border and discovered to be here in violation of the law, that sort of thing.

So would you guess it's something like 40% people seeking asylum and 60% people apprehended for trying to cross illegally?

 

[Henry Ford]

So, if I am understanding correctly, all the people in these processing areas that are seeking asylum, will be given a court date and then dropped off back on the other side of the border? 

There's a lot of confusion and no solid "one size fits all" answer to this question.  Some people that will happen to, some will be (or would be until today) held indefinitely until their hearings, some are held for a shorter period of time and then released into the population.  It's all a huge cluster.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I can link you to a story about a federal court ruling today, holding that the administration is trying to hold people indefinitely until their cases are resolved, and ruling that they aren't allowed to.

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/03/738385096/federal-judge-blocks-trump-policy-ordering-indefinite-detention-for-asylum-seeke

Thanks. I'd love to see if someone has a more broad policy there on how this is being handled currently. 

 

[Henry Ford]

So would you guess it's something like 40% people seeking asylum and 60% people apprehended for trying to cross illegally?

Being held?  I have no idea.  It's 40% of apprehensions, but I don't know what deportation processing time vs. asylum processing/holding time are.  I don't think anyone can answer that right now, while they still can't even find hundreds or thousands of kids to reunite them with their parents.

 

[Henry Ford]

Thanks. I'd love to see if someone has a more broad policy there on how this is being handled currently. 

So would the immigration lawyers I know.

 

[unckeyherb]

There's a lot of confusion and no solid "one size fits all" answer to this question.  Some people that will happen to, some will be (or would be until today) held indefinitely until their hearings, some are held for a shorter period of time and then released into the population.  It's all a huge cluster.

Got it.  So is there no policy in place?  Or are the administrators simply not following policy?  

 

[Henry Ford]

@Joe Bryant, one of the "manufactured" parts of all of this is that the administration has just kind of started doing all kinds of different things at once without properly documenting what's happening or expressing what the policies will be.  Imagine you're designing and building boats, and a new owner comes in and just starts telling each worker individually what he wants that person to do.  Then the supervisor comes in tomorrow, that owner isn't there, and he has to figure out what everyone's doing.  Then a new guy starts work the next day and everyone has to figure out what to have him do.  Etc.  Etc.  

 

[Henry Ford]

Got it.  So is there no policy in place?  Or are the administrators simply not following policy?  

Well, the administration isn't even following the law, much less the various policies.  I don't think anyone knows for sure what's happening that's official policy and what's just being created by DHS/CBP/individual agents on the fly.

 

[BroadwayG]

https://immigrationforum.org/article/fact-sheet-u-s-asylum-process/

Gives a reasonable overview.

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Refugees_Asylees_2017.pdf

has some stats from 2015-2017

 

[Sheriff Bart]

@Joe Bryant, one of the "manufactured" parts of all of this is that the administration has just kind of started doing all kinds of different things at once without properly documenting what's happening or expressing what the policies will be.  Imagine you're designing and building boats, and a new owner comes in and just starts telling each worker individually what he wants that person to do.  Then the supervisor comes in tomorrow, that owner isn't there, and he has to figure out what everyone's doing.  Then a new guy starts work the next day and everyone has to figure out what to have him do.  Etc.  Etc.  

"There's no sails on this speed boat. Add the sails!" 

"But sir...." 

"MORE SAILS!  THE BEST SAILS!!!" 

 

[timschochet]

"There's no sails on this speed boat. Add the sails!" 

"But sir...." 

"MORE SAILS!  THE BEST SAILS!!!" 

With all the complains I hear about busing, maybe speed boats would be good alternative to get kids to school!

 

[parasaurolophus]

With all the complains I hear about busing, maybe speed boats would be good alternative to get kids to school!

That little buoy was me!

 

[ren hoek]

Quoting Zakaria, not Joe here: 

And now includes threats of gang warfare and domestic violence. These looser criteria coupled with the reality that this is a safe way to enter the U.S. have made the asylum system easy to abuse. Applications from Hondurans, Guatemalans and Salvadorans have surged even though the murder rate in their countries has been cut in half. 

Fareed Zakaria fails to mention that the US has supported military coups/dictatorships in all of these countries.  The CIA orchestrated a coup in Guatemala in 1954.  The US lent international support to the military dictatorship in Honduras that took over in 2009.  The US backed death squads in El Salvador in the 80’s, who would toss children in the air and catch them with bayonets.  And we’ve supported those regimes ever since.

No one fix will do it, but we need the kind of sensible bipartisan legislation that has resolved past immigration crises. Democrats have spent most of their efforts on this topic, assailing the Trump administration for its heartlessness.

It seems to me that a better use of money, instead of letting the detainees’ tormentors skate away with $4.6 billion dollars as Nancy Pelosi just did, would be to spend it on programs that could distribute refugees/asylees and ease them in to willing cities/states. I don’t know the perfect answer here but obviously there’s a number of solutions better than funding a network of prison camps.  It should really be viewed as an extension of the carceral state- not a reasonable immigration system.  

Fine. But that does not address the roots of this genuine crisis. If things continue to spiral downward and America's southern border seems out of control, Trump's tough rhetoric and hard line stance will become increasingly attractive to the public. 

Fareed’s entire post doesn’t address the roots of this genuine crisis.  Because to do so means not having a job in corporate media.  

Until we understand the root cause of mass immigration- that these are human beings fleeing destabilized, wartorn countries, that we actively assist the creation of the conditions that cause them to flee- the immigration never stops.  Day in and day out, war is unmaking us.  But we still remain so indifferent to the consequences of our own actions.