Can Biden’s New Asylum Policy Help Solve the Migrant Crisis?

In Brief

Can Biden’s New Asylum Policy Help Solve the Migrant Crisis?

The Biden administration’s proposed immigration policy aims to curb migrant flows to the United States amid record border crossings. What will it do, and how does it compare to the Trump years?

In February 2023, President Joe Biden unveiled a new asylum policy that aims to discourage unauthorized border crossings into the United States. His administration says the measure is necessary to handle a growing number of border crossings, but critics say it could have deadly consequences for migrants who have a legal right to seek protection.

What is the Biden administration’s new asylum policy?

More From Our Experts

Under the new rule, border authorities will deny asylum to most migrants who arrive at an official port of entry along the U.S.-Mexico border without having first applied for asylum in a third country traversed along the way. Migrants who do not schedule an appointment at a point of entry or use other available humanitarian programs will be deported to their home countries. 

More on:

United States

Immigration and Migration

Joe Biden

Homeland Security

The policy will include exemptions for people with medical emergencies, children traveling alone, and Mexican nationals. (About 11 percent of all pending asylum cases in 2022 were for Mexican citizens.) The measure is expected to take effect in May when Title 42, a policy that denies asylum on pandemic-related grounds, is set to end. Immigration experts say the proposal is likely to be challenged in court.

President Joe Biden speaks with officials at the U.S.-Mexico border in El Paso, Texas.
President Joe Biden speaks with officials at the U.S.-Mexico border in El Paso, Texas. Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

What problem does it aim to address?

Biden took office pledging to reform the U.S. immigration system and restore asylum access that had been curtailed under his predecessor, President Donald Trump. However, a growing influx of migrants crossing the border has upended those plans. Illegal border crossings surpassed 2.3 million in fiscal year 2022, an all-time high, while the backlog of asylum cases pending in U.S. immigration courts currently sits at more than 820,000, the most on record. The Biden administration hopes that redirecting that flow to official ports of entry will overcome the public perception of chaos at the border.

U.S. officials say that, absent any policy changes, migration at the border is likely to surge after Title 42 is lifted in May, with illegal border crossings reaching as much as thirteen thousand per day. More than 2.6 million migrants have been deported under Title 42, and efforts to terminate it have been repeatedly delayed by multiple ongoing lawsuits from Republican-led states.

More From Our Experts

How does it compare to Trump’s approach to asylum policy?

Trump took several steps to significantly reshape asylum and border policy. These included deferring asylum applications [PDF], a tactic known as “metering”; enforcing the so-called transit ban [PDF] that denied asylum to most migrants at the southern border (though it was later struck down in court); and launching the Migrant Protection Protocols, also known as the “Remain in Mexico” program, which required migrants to wait in Mexico while their immigration cases were processed in U.S. courts. Additionally, Trump and several Central American nations negotiated “safe third country” agreements, which sought to force asylum seekers who traveled through those countries to return to them. However, only the agreement with Guatemala was implemented, though it was later terminated in 2021.

While Biden’s proposal similarly restricts the number of asylum seekers who can seek protection in the United States, officials have rejected comparisons to the Trump administration’s attempts at a near-total asylum ban. They insist that the new policy allows for various exemptions on humanitarian grounds and that the administration has made alternative legal pathways available, including humanitarian parole for citizens of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. They also characterize the two-year order as an emergency measure that is designed to be temporary.

More on:

United States

Immigration and Migration

Joe Biden

Homeland Security

What are the criticisms?

Critics, including civil and human rights groups and some high-ranking Democrat lawmakers, argue that the policy endangers the lives of migrants who cannot wait for their asylum applications to be processed due to unsafe conditions in their home country. They say it undermines U.S. immigration law, which guarantees migrants the right to seek asylum in the United States if they fear persecution at home. “This policy will effectively prohibit most asylum seekers from exercising their right to seek safety in the U.S., and will force many vulnerable people to remain in situations that could endanger their lives,” Mark Hetfield, president and CEO of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS), said in a statement.

Many opponents also argue that the exceptions are too narrow and that the alternative pathways are likely to be insufficient, including the untested mobile app made for this purpose. This could lead many applicants to be presumed ineligible unless they can prove they were refused refuge in another country, potentially a tall order. Some Democrats in Congress have instead called for expanding asylum availability.

Republican lawmakers, meanwhile, have criticized Biden’s handling of the border and threatened to impeach Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas. However, the newly Republican-controlled House of Representatives is facing its own internal divisions over asylum restrictions proposed by Republicans

Creative Commons
Creative Commons: Some rights reserved.
Close
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License.
View License Detail
Close

Top Stories on CFR

Daily News Brief

Welcome to the Daily News Brief, CFR’s flagship morning newsletter summarizing the top global news and analysis of the day.  Subscribe to the Daily News Brief to receive it every weekday morning. Top of the Agenda U.S. and Iranian negotiators are meeting in Rome today for their fifth round of nuclear talks. The two sides have clashed in public comments about uranium enrichment in recent days, but a U.S. State Department spokesperson said yesterday that the meeting “would not be happening if we didn’t think that there was potential for it.” The U.S. is being represented by Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and the State Department’s Policy Planning Director Michael Anton, and Iran by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. What the parties are saying. The most recent friction was triggered by Witkoff describing a U.S. “red line” last Sunday that Iran should not be able to have “even 1 percent of an enrichment capability.” In prior weeks, some U.S. officials had suggested they might be able to accept a low level of enrichment.  Multiple Iranian officials publicly rejected the zero-enrichment position. The strict anti-enrichment comments from U.S. officials intensified after more than two hundred Republican lawmakers wrote a letter on May 14 calling for such a stance. Araghchi posted on social media yesterday that “zero nuclear weapons” meant there was a deal, while “zero enrichment” meant no deal. U.S. President Donald Trump “wants to see a deal with Iran struck, if one can be struck,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said yesterday. The regional backdrop. Israel is considering striking Iran militarily, multiple news outlets have reported. Trump discussed Iran with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on a call yesterday, Leavitt said, adding that Trump asserted Washington seeks a deal with Iran. Araghchi wrote in a letter publicized by Iran’s mission to the United Nations yesterday that if Israel strikes Iran’s nuclear facilities, Iran would consider the United States responsible. If Israel continues to threaten Iran, he wrote, Iran would take unspecified steps to protect its nuclear materials. Trump has also threatened U.S. military strikes on Iran if talks fail.  “On a macro level, the two important Iranian objectives in these talks are they want to avert another military attack on their nuclear facilities, [and] they want to avert another maximum pressure economic campaign…I think an interim deal or a smaller deal is going to be a much easier political lift in both Washington and in Tehran.” The Carnegie Endowment’s Karim Sadjadpour tells The President’s Inbox Across the Globe Ban on Harvard international students. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) revoked Harvard’s permission to enroll international students, saying the school did not provide the government requested records of student conduct. DHS said the school had created a “hostile” environment for Jewish students. Harvard called the action “unlawful.” Foreign students make up around 27 percent of the student body; the university’s director of media relations say they “enrich the university—and this nation—immeasurably.” Charges in DC shooting. The U.S. Justice Department filed federal murder charges against the suspect in Wednesday’s killings of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington, D.C. Elias Rodriguez confessed to the killings, police said. Investigators are also considering hate crime and terrorism charges. Representatives of Jewish organizations called for more government funding for their safety in the wake of the attack, which comes amid a rise of antisemitic incidents in the United States and around the world following the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war in 2023.  Tracking the great tech race. A new study by European research center Bruegel examined patents to measure the relative progress of China, the European Union (EU), and the United States on the research frontier of three critical technologies: quantum computing, semiconductors, and artificial intelligence (AI). It concluded that U.S. actors dominate innovation in quantum computing and, to a lesser extent, AI, while Chinese actors are ahead in semiconductors, and the EU lags in all three. U.S. weighs troops in South Korea. The Trump administration is consideringpulling thousands of troops out of South Korea, unnamed sources told the Wall Street Journal. In one reported scenario, roughly 4,500 troops would depart for other parts of the Indo-Pacific, including Guam. A Pentagon spokesperson said there were no policy announcements to make, South Korea’s defense ministry declined to comment, and South Korea’s military said it had not discussed a troop reduction with Washington. U.S. sanctions on Sudan. The United States determined the Sudanese army used chemical weapons in the country’s civil war last year and will impose new sanctions on Sudan beginning on or around June 6, the State Department said yesterday. Sudan’s government responded that the measure “lacks any moral or legal basis.” The announcement did not specify which weapons were used or where; unnamed U.S. officials told the New York Times in January that Sudan’s army appeared to have used chlorine gas in remote parts of the country.   North Korea warship damaged. In an unusual acknowledgement of a military malfunction, North Korean state media reported yesterday that the country’s second naval destroyer was damaged during its launch event. Seawater flowed into the ship, state media said today. Satellites showed that North Korea placed a cover over the partially submerged ship, which Pyongyang had reportedly rushed to complete. Aid distributed in Gaza. Humanitarian aid reached warehouses inside Gaza for the first time in eleven weeks, UN agencies said yesterday. The aid included flour and baby food. Twenty-nine children and elderly people in the territory died from “starvation-related” causes in the last few days, the Palestinian Authority health minister stated yesterday. Israel said 107 aid trucks crossed the border into Gaza yesterday, while UN agencies say an estimated 600 per day are needed to address the territory’s humanitarian crisis.  UK deal on Chagos Islands base. The United Kingdom (UK) reached a deal with Mauritius—its former colony—to give up its claim over the disputed Chagos Islands and pay Mauritius some $136 million per year to lease the area that houses a U.S.-UK military base. The UK separated the Chagos Islands from Mauritius in 1965, shortly before Mauritius gained independence. What’s Next Today, India’s foreign minister is visiting Germany. On Sunday, French President Emmanuel Macron begins a visit to Vietnam, Indonesia, and Singapore. On Sunday, Suriname holds a general election and Venezuela holds legislative and regional elections. On Monday, an Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) leaders summit begins in Malaysia. On Monday, the African Development Bank begins its annual meetings in Ivory Coast.

South Africa

Senior Fellow for Africa Policy Studies and former ambassador Michelle Gavin breaks down the tense U.S.-South Africa meeting at the White House. 

Ukraine

President Trump suggested after the call that the United States could “back away” if Russia and Ukraine peace talks don’t advance. That could leave it to Europe to keep Ukraine in the fight.