🚨 New! A.G. Barr takes ANOTHER whack at the asylum process, issuing a new precedential decision in Matter of A-C-A-A-, 28 I&N Dec. 84 (A.G. 2020) and giving both immigration judges and the BIA more leeway to deny asylum claims.
Before I go through this latest attack on the asylum process, please enjoy a picture of Petra, who is a Very Good Cat. I hope this softens the blow a tiny bit.
A.G. Barr begins his decision (issued under authority to set precedent in immigration court) by basically saying that the Board of Immigration Appeals hasn't been digging deeply enough in every single case to find ways to deny people asylum. It's hard to read it otherwise.
In the underlying decision, the respondent was found to be credible and to have suffered past persecution on the basis of membership in a particular social group. Because of changed circumstances, the judge found no well-founded fear, but granted humanitarian asylum.
Notably, DHS did NOT appeal the grant of humanitarian asylum. Instead, they only appealed the IJ's finding that the respondent was credible and that the IJ shouldn't have found past persecution.
The BIA affirmed the IJ's decision in a very brief order.
Despite the fact that DHS did NOT appeal the grant of humanitarian asylum, A.G. Barr believes that the BIA should have evaluated whether or not the IJ should have granted humanitarian asylum anyway.
A.G. Barr lays out here the role he sees the BIA as playing in asylum cases under what he articulate as "de novo review."
Basically, question everything, dig through the record, and find ways to deny applicants.
In the decision, Barr basically tells the BIA to utterly ignore all normal rules of appellate procedure. Who cares if the government didn't raise an issue—or even stipulated to an issue! The BIA should ignore all of that and go digging through the record.
This decision makes even more clear that the immigration courts are fully broken. They have been politicized to death and are now fundamentally incompatible with due process.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If they actually put Title 42 into effect, expect border crossings to spike dramatically soon after he takes office. The policy was a huge winner for smugglers.
Here's what happened with border crossings when Stephen Miller got the CDC to implement Title 42: after the April 2020 lockdown, border crossings rose every single month for a year.
By November 2020, smugglers were telling Reuters they loved the policy.
As @David_J_Bier has documented, Title 42 led to an almost immediate spike in so-called "got-aways." With the asylum system shut down for nearly 2 years (with even ports of entry closed to those seeking protection), migrants began crossing over and over.
There are serious factual errors with what @mattyglesias writes here. For example, the deals had nothing to do with "seeking refuge closer to home." That was a lie pushed by the Trump admin. In fact, there deal with Honduras would have let them send Mexicans and Brazilians there.
Another thing missed by @mattyglesias is that the 2024 asylum ban crackdown couldn't have been done in early 2021! It required the end of Title 42, diplomatic deals with Mexico, Congressional funding of asylum officers, and more physical infrastructure.
@mattyglesias Anyway, @mattyglesias, you know my colleague @DLind well and I'd be happy to walk you through the facts you're missing; how the border situation Biden inherited in 2021 was unprecedented and there were a lot of very difficult policy choices which were not as easy as you think.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but anyone who claims that Mexico and Canada can "easily solve" migration and drug smuggling issues is either lying to themselves, lying to you, or just a complete moron.
Sorry, but no, this is simply not true. Mexico has been ramping up anti-migrant enforcement at U.S. request for more than a decade and is currently engaged in the largest crackdown on migrants yet, which has had a very significant impact on reducing border crossings into the US.
Yeah buddy, massive inflation worse than anything in the last few years, combined with a a huge blow to the U.S. economy causing thousands of firms to go under, is really better than the status quo. Uh huh. Sure.
Not sure exactly what @whstancil is suggesting but a couple thoughts:
1. Migration is rising globally. The United States is not unique in dealing with this trend, despite many US-centric media takes. 2. A key part of the current problem is Congress's decade-long refusal to act.
People are frustrated with migration not only because of the media's myopic and overdramatic views of the issue (remember the morning show filmed at the border wall in March 2021?), but also because policymakers keep suggesting this is an easy problem with an easy solution.
We have a 2,000 mile land border that people have been crossing in the millions for 50+ years. We have an economy built on the labor of people who are more likely to be exploited and less likely to have a recourse. And we don't let even those here for decades "fix their papers."
This is wrong. ICE’s non-detained docket includes many people whose cases ended years ago and who can’t be deported due to legal, diplomatic or humanitarian issues.
The number of people on the docket with convictions rose just 15% in 9 years — while the docket itself rose 225%.
Here is Tom Homan's testimony to Congress in support of Trump's FY 2018 budget request, noting that in June 2017, there were 177,000 people on ICE's non-detained docket with prior convictions AND final orders.
As I said—many have been here for decades. This isn't some new thing.
Here is some further context on *why* someone might be on ICE's non-detained docket with a serious conviction but not deported.
I explained some scenarios where this might happen yesterday in the below thread.
This report by @BillMelugin_ gets facts wrong and omits essential context: that millions of people on ICE's non-detained dockets have been here for decades.
By FY 2015, already 368,574 people on the docket had convictions. Many can't be deported, often for diplomatic reasons.
In the report, Bill repeatedly refers to people on ICE's non-detained docket as "illegal immigrants."
In fact, the non-detained docket contains many people who came here with green cards and then lost their status due to a criminal conviction. Some have been here for decades.
Many of those on ICE's non-detained docket who have a final order of removal but haven't been deported yet come from countries which refuses deportations.
As of 2022, there were 40,000 post-order Cubans living in the US. Many got out of jail decades ago. miamiherald.com/news/nation-wo…