Thread by @dhaaruni

With all due respect, one major issue with this thread is that “asylum” is a very specific definition, and the majority of people “seeking asylum” at the US-Mexico border don’t fall under its jurisdiction so have to be processed as economic migrants.

https://twitter.com/csilverandgold/status/1657243234005917696

The solution to high #s of illegitimate asylum claims would be to improve our processing speed so that asylum claims can be handled swiftly and without releasing people into the country, but immigration advocate groups have blocked that option through lawsuits and politically.

By forcing through economic migrants as asylum seekers, immigration advocates aren’t actually increasing the quotas of asylum seekers, since that has to be done through Congress and as a result, now basically nobody’s getting asylum, which is simply unjust.

https://twitter.com/dilanesper/status/1656282305797976064

That said, United States’ immigration platform can’t be based around asylum seekers, who are only a fraction of total immigrants, and that’s completely aside from the fact “be kind to our fellow citizens of the world” is not how public policy is determined.

The issue really boils down to the fact that “Let everybody in” and “keep everybody out” are both inactionable, but are what both parties’ extremists want. The median voter is also arguably closer to the latter than the former, so we’re at an impasse wherein nothing can get done.