The conflict between federal and state authorities in Texas has intensified, centering on the deployment of barbed wire along a 29-mile stretch of the Eagle Pass River bank. Despite federal opposition and a Supreme Court ruling allowing the cable’s removal, Texas persists in installing it, claiming it as a deterrent against illegal crossings.
Governor Greg Abbott of Texas remains firm in its approach, supported by the support of Republican governors, notably that of Florida. Ron DeSantiswho promised help from the National Guard. This collective state effort aims to fortify the border against what they perceive as invasion, defying federal directives and asserting a state’s right to manage its border security.
The discord between Texas and the U.S. Border Patrol highlights a broader conflict over immigration enforcement and jurisdiction between state and federal jurisdiction. The closure of Shelby Park to the public and federal agents, ordered by Abbott, illustrates this tension, disrupting long-standing cooperative efforts between state law enforcement and the Border Patrol.
Meanwhile, US President Joe Bidenwhose position now reflects that of former President Donald Asset, urges Congress to implement asylum constraints previously considered inconceivable at the start of his term. The change is driven not only by pressure from the Republican Party, but also by concerns from Democratic leaders in remote towns, who are grappling with an influx of asylum seekers reaching unprecedented numbers in the United States.
As the 2024 presidential race looms, potentially pitting Biden against Trump once again, immigration has become a crucial issue, posing a significant challenge for the current president. In an effort to alleviate this vulnerability, Biden approved a comprehensive bipartisan proposal under discussion in the Senate to significantly strengthen border controls.
Biden expressed his resolve last weekend, saying, “If this bill were the law today, I would close the border now and fix it quickly.” »
Could Biden “close” the border?
In Washington, a fervent debate is taking place over the extent of President Biden’s legal powers to address the escalating humanitarian crisis at the U.S. southern border.
The rhetoric intensified after President Biden promised to “shut down” the U.S.-Mexico border if Congress ratifies an immigration deal currently being negotiated with a select bipartisan group of senators. Although details of the agreement remain secret, sources close to the negotiations told CBS News that it would give the executive branch the power to reduce the processing of asylum applications to some extent when illegal border crossings exceed predefined thresholds.
The phrase “shut down the border” used by Biden likely refers to a strict crackdown on illegal crossings and asylum requests. A complete closure of the international border, which would disrupt legal travel and commerce, is an extreme measure that would have significant economic repercussions for both the United States and Mexico.
Here’s a look at President Biden’s current legal capabilities at the border and the limitations he faces without Congressional intervention:
Legal authority of President Biden
According to a CBS report, President Biden has the legal right to reinstate Trump-era border policies that he previously ended. These policies, based on proclamations, regulations, and international treaties, include agreements allowing the United States to redirect asylum seekers to third countries and the “Remain in Mexico” initiative, which required migrants to wait outside the United States for their asylum procedure. Although U.S. law allows authorities to return asylum seekers to Mexico, the Supreme Court clarified in 2022 that this is not a mandatory practice.
Additionally, U.S. law authorizes the president, through the attorney general and the secretary of homeland security, to impose asylum restrictions. The Biden administration has already exercised this power. Following the end of Title 42 pandemic-related border measures, the administration introduced a rule presuming that migrants are not eligible for asylum if they circumvent legal immigration channels established by the United States. United or fail to request asylum by crossing a third country. However, the administration has struggled to implement these asylum constraints due to a lack of necessary resources, including asylum officers, detention centers, and funding.
Still, the president does not have the unilateral authority to suspend U.S. asylum law, which guarantees the right of migrants on U.S. soil to seek humanitarian refuge, even if they enter the country illegally. Only Congress has the power to change U.S. asylum law.
(With contribution from agencies)
Governor Greg Abbott of Texas remains firm in its approach, supported by the support of Republican governors, notably that of Florida. Ron DeSantiswho promised help from the National Guard. This collective state effort aims to fortify the border against what they perceive as invasion, defying federal directives and asserting a state’s right to manage its border security.
The discord between Texas and the U.S. Border Patrol highlights a broader conflict over immigration enforcement and jurisdiction between state and federal jurisdiction. The closure of Shelby Park to the public and federal agents, ordered by Abbott, illustrates this tension, disrupting long-standing cooperative efforts between state law enforcement and the Border Patrol.
Meanwhile, US President Joe Bidenwhose position now reflects that of former President Donald Asset, urges Congress to implement asylum constraints previously considered inconceivable at the start of his term. The change is driven not only by pressure from the Republican Party, but also by concerns from Democratic leaders in remote towns, who are grappling with an influx of asylum seekers reaching unprecedented numbers in the United States.
As the 2024 presidential race looms, potentially pitting Biden against Trump once again, immigration has become a crucial issue, posing a significant challenge for the current president. In an effort to alleviate this vulnerability, Biden approved a comprehensive bipartisan proposal under discussion in the Senate to significantly strengthen border controls.
Biden expressed his resolve last weekend, saying, “If this bill were the law today, I would close the border now and fix it quickly.” »
Could Biden “close” the border?
In Washington, a fervent debate is taking place over the extent of President Biden’s legal powers to address the escalating humanitarian crisis at the U.S. southern border.
The rhetoric intensified after President Biden promised to “shut down” the U.S.-Mexico border if Congress ratifies an immigration deal currently being negotiated with a select bipartisan group of senators. Although details of the agreement remain secret, sources close to the negotiations told CBS News that it would give the executive branch the power to reduce the processing of asylum applications to some extent when illegal border crossings exceed predefined thresholds.
The phrase “shut down the border” used by Biden likely refers to a strict crackdown on illegal crossings and asylum requests. A complete closure of the international border, which would disrupt legal travel and commerce, is an extreme measure that would have significant economic repercussions for both the United States and Mexico.
Here’s a look at President Biden’s current legal capabilities at the border and the limitations he faces without Congressional intervention:
Legal authority of President Biden
According to a CBS report, President Biden has the legal right to reinstate Trump-era border policies that he previously ended. These policies, based on proclamations, regulations, and international treaties, include agreements allowing the United States to redirect asylum seekers to third countries and the “Remain in Mexico” initiative, which required migrants to wait outside the United States for their asylum procedure. Although U.S. law allows authorities to return asylum seekers to Mexico, the Supreme Court clarified in 2022 that this is not a mandatory practice.
Additionally, U.S. law authorizes the president, through the attorney general and the secretary of homeland security, to impose asylum restrictions. The Biden administration has already exercised this power. Following the end of Title 42 pandemic-related border measures, the administration introduced a rule presuming that migrants are not eligible for asylum if they circumvent legal immigration channels established by the United States. United or fail to request asylum by crossing a third country. However, the administration has struggled to implement these asylum constraints due to a lack of necessary resources, including asylum officers, detention centers, and funding.
Still, the president does not have the unilateral authority to suspend U.S. asylum law, which guarantees the right of migrants on U.S. soil to seek humanitarian refuge, even if they enter the country illegally. Only Congress has the power to change U.S. asylum law.
(With contribution from agencies)
