Executive order

Trump's Illegal Anti-Asylum Presidential Proclamation

He has manufactured a fake border crisis to justify an illicit power grab.

|

Trump
DonkeyHoter via Foter.com

President Donald Trump issued a proclamation on Friday that effectively scrapped the asylum laws passed by a duly elected Congress. He claims that the approaching migrant caravan justifies a ban on granting asylum to anyone entering between ports of entry on an emergency basis. This means that both the Immigration and Nationality Act and the international treaties that America has signed requiring it to offer an asylum hearing to those fleeing oppression and persecution would now be null and void.

As I note in my new column for The Week, this is a sweeping power grab that should distress everyone—especially rule-of-law conservatives who earn their living berating immigrants for minor transgressions. But what is even more disturbing about Trump's order is that it is based on a fake crisis. There is no stampede at the southwestern border justifying an emergency proclamation, without going through proper rule-making procedures. As this chart provided by National Immigration Forum's Zuzana Cepla shows, the number of apprehensions are literally at a 22-year low. Yet no presdient ever felt the need to engage in such extraordinary usurpation of exisitng laws:

National Immigration Forum

Furthermore, the only reason that Central American asylum seekers are even trying to enter between ports of entry is because border agents have taken to illicitly shooing them away from authorized ports, a practice—called "metering"—that is under legal challenge.

In short, Trump first manufactured a fake border crisis and then used it to justify overruling existing laws. This is pretty much unprecedented, and the ACLU is suing the administration over it.

Go here to read my column.

Advertisement

NEXT: Navy Veteran Rep.-Elect Dan Crenshaw: 'Stop Looking for Reasons to Be Offended'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You gotta go back.

    1. I would trade ten indigent Mexican illegals just to get rid of her.

      1. with drug-resistant TB

    2. As they say, I don’t read Reason for the articles – I read it for the user comments…

  2. President Donald Trump issued a proclamation on Friday that effectively scrapped the asylum laws passed by a duly elected Congress. He claims that the approaching migrant caravan justifies a ban on granting asylum to anyone entering between ports of entry on an emergency basis. This means that both the Immigration and Nationality Act and the international treaties that America has signed requiring it to offer an asylum hearing to those fleeing oppression and persecution would now be null and void.

    International law is already moot as they passed thru a signatory — Mexico — to reach the US border. Since you are obligated to request it at the first safe signatory, which would be Mexico, we have zero obligations.

    And the President has wide powers in an emergency to control the borders. One of his more clear cut powers.

    1. Don’t bother Shika or any of the open borders fanatics on here with facts or law. The same people who are so concerned about “lawless Trump” cheered on Obama ignoring the entire INA with DACA. They have absolutely no integrity or shame.

    2. “Since you are obligated to request it at the first safe signatory, which would be Mexico, we have zero obligations.”

      This is not in fact correct. I’ve looked up the relevant information (don’t feel like tracking the link back down right now), and this is not an obligation on the refugees/asylum seekers in the sense you think. It is in the treaty as a valid/acceptable reason for a nation to reject refugees, but rejection on this basis is optional, not mandatory for the signatories.

      Therefore, unless you can point to where US asylum law implements the first safe signatory principle, it’s completely irrelevant.

      1. Does US asylum law require us to accept applicants who are asylum shopping?

        No. It does not.

        Thus, his order is quite legal. No international legal obligations require us to do so nor does our own law.

        1. That US asylum law doesn’t require us to accept them doesn’t prove that said law allows them to be categorically rejected.

          The legality of Trumps order will be dependent entirely on the US asylum statute. I don’t know if it is or isn’t, but the treaty mentioned isn’t relevant.

          1. “That US asylum law doesn’t require us to accept them doesn’t prove that said law allows them to be categorically rejected.”

            It doesn’t?

      2. You’re likely confused on this issue. I’ve heard too much analysis from actual practicing immigration attorneys that say otherwise, and others that have likely spent far more time researching this subject to take your word for it.

        1. I’m sure there are actual practicing immigration attorneys providing analysis to prove the exact opposite of what you heard. That’s what lawyers do.

          1. Yes, liars.

          2. So find some and link to them.

      3. So if Mexico offered them asylum and they said “No thank you, we’re headed to America.”, in the eyes of the treaty we’d be well within our rights to say “Fuck off”?

        1. They have no right to demand entry here, period. They’re foreigners. We have authority to reject ay applicant.

        2. Asylum is mainly limited to political asylum.

          They have to be persecuted for their political beliefs. They are poor and/or they allowed Socialists tyrants to ravage their country.

          Not a single goddam immigrant is coming to the USA and saying, “I am a libertarian and my country is socialist, so they are persecuting me for political reasons”. Not a single one.

  3. “Go here to read my column.”

    No.

    If I’d want to read The Week, I’d read The Week. But I come to read Reason. Not be told to go elsewhere.

    Plus I’m lazy when my orphans aren’t around to click for me with their nubs.

  4. No borders! No nations! F*** deportations!

    #AbolishICE
    #NoBanNoWall
    #OpenBorders

    1. US Out Of North America!

      1. lol!

  5. “[Trump] claims that the approaching migrant caravan justifies a ban on granting asylum to anyone entering between ports of entry on an emergency basis.”

    Remember the other week, when Trump was claiming that there might be terrorists among the other people in the caravan?

    Instead of crying about how stupid that was to say, maybe the media should have focused on why he would make such a claim.

    I remember when some lower courts ruled that his travel ban EO was unconstitutional because of his campaign rhetoric. This may be where that kind of stupidity in the courts eventually leads.

    1. P.S. Can we sunset the AUMF already?

      1. Only in Congress built a sunset clause into it in the first place. Otherwise Congress will need to affirmatively repeal it.

        1. Why can’t they amend it to include a sunset clause?

          1. Because that would be fucking stupid. If the political will / congressional votes exist to add a sunset clause now, the political will / votes likely exist for an immediate repeal.

            1. That isn’t so.

              They could give it a time limit to deal with whatever immediate crisis and then require a reauthorization.

              Much of our antiterror apparatus was predicated on that filthy AUMF, and it will take a while to unwind that knot.

              Regardless, because you want to get rid of something immediately is no reason to oppose getting rid of it eventually.

    2. Instead of crying about how stupid that was to say, maybe the media should have focused on why he would make such a claim.

      Because he’s pandering to a bunch of gullible, bigoted, ignorant, easily frightened yahoos?

      1. No, probably because he was planning on invoking emergency powers, you dolt.

      2. a bunch of gullible, bigoted, ignorant, easily frightened yahoos?

        But enough about AntiPro-Fa

        1. It’s funny how the Rev. thinks.

          Everything we write is pro-Trump in the TDS mindset.

          He doesn’t even get it when we’re criticizing Trump. No, we’re filed under pro-Trump, so everything we write must be pro-Trump.

          Having TDS is like having the mind of a five year-old.

          1. Having TDS is like having the mind of a five year-old.

            NPC’s are NPC’s in part because they are incapable of nuance. The world is black and white to people like that, where they think they are the one’s with good intentions so their ideas are automatically good and everyone who disagrees on any particular thing is evil.

            1. Arty can’t help how the software developers scripted him. And it’s a bad script.

  6. Oh, and for those of you who might have missed it, I’ll repost the story about all the homophobic bullies harassing LGBT in the caravan here:

    “LGBT Migrants Face Bullying at Home and in Caravan”

    http://mobile.reuters.com/vide…..oChannel=1

    Part of the reason I brought this up is to rib the social justice warriors among us, but, on the other hand, part of it is dead serious about how complicated the question of immigration can be. I have no use for laws that require the government to discriminate against people because of their beliefs, but inflicting an unpopular immigration or asylum policy on the American people isn’t a simple and perfect solution either.

    The reason far-right anti-immigration parties have done so well in Europe, destabilizing governments from London to Paris and Berlin is in no small part that those governments were inflicting unpopular asylum policies on their people over their objections and against their will. There is nothing libertarian about the motives of those who would use the coercive power of government to inflict unpopular asylum policies on the American people, and the consequences of doing so don’t appear to be libertarian either.

  7. The order doesn’t stop asylum seekers, only those caught trying to enter illegally. It will get its day in court, but, I doubt the president wrote this without a gaggle of lawyers ensuring its legality. ACLU has already sued, probably so the 9th will hear it and ban the action. Then it will end up in SCOTUS and be allowed as this is not outside the president’s authority.

    Lather, rinse, repeat.

  8. What precisely are Trump’s (and for that matter what were Obama’s) policies toward asylum seekers at the legal points of entry and at the illegal crossings; and what exactly do the treaty and precedent say about their legality?

    1. You expect to get the relevant details from Dalmia?

  9. >>>the approaching migrant caravan

    is it still?

  10. There is no stampede at the southwestern border

    Actually, there is in a way. There is a large group of people who’s stated intention is to violate US laws/border. For some reason that stopped being news right about the time of the ///BlueWaveRipple.

    1. Forgot to add that Mexico already offered asylum and most of the caravan denied it.

      1. You probably meant “declined it”.

        1. Of course.

          1. It certainly speaks to the question of necessity. Whatever these people are fleeing, they would have left it behind if they’d accepted asylum in Mexico. Whatever it is they want from the U.S., they’ve already declined an offer of safety in Mexico from whatever they were fleeing in Honduras.

            I lived in Merida for a long time. Loved it! I’ll go back someday. Might even retire there.

    2. Oh, the midterm election changed everything. It’s an even bigger story than Stormy Daniels, and I didn’t think anything could be bigger than that!

      Before the midterms, I used to work hard all week, and then spend the weekends eating out, spending time with the girlfriend, watching football, hanging out at the beach, and enjoying myself.

      Now that the Democrats are back in control of the House, . . . well, it’s pretty much the same thing–except last week the Redskins were 5-3 and now they’re 6-3!

  11. Shikha is living proof that all immigrants do not contribute to making the USA better.

    1. She feeds the intersectionality/ victim culture progressives can’t get enough of

    2. Re: loveconst….. ptff, yeah, right.

      Shikha is living proof that all immigrants do not contribute to making the USA better.

      There are instead those, like you, are living proof that they’re contributing immensely to Marking America Grating Again.

      1. Go back to Mexico where you belong. Although I feel bad for the Mexicans, inflicting you on them.

    3. MAGA by deporting Shikha.

  12. Trump’s Illegal Anti-Asylum Presidential Proclamation

    It’s not illegal to defend the borders from brown people running away from a failed war on drugs “scary invaders”.

    1. Race baiting is how they admit they have no arguments.

  13. Boy, do I feel dumb. I thought the “War on Drugs”, “War on Smoking”, “War on Homeless” and all the other ethereal Wars taught us we can’t stop people from doing what that really want to do. Obviously, I was wrong.

    Who knew immigration is completely different from all the others? I have no doubt we will get it right this time.

    1. I mean, you can actually physically stop people from crossing the border so it’s not really the same thing.

      1. Some will find a way in, therefore we shouldn’t have borders. Because the policy will be imperfect.

        Seriously, this is what I find to be the most pathetic argument, both RE: WoD and Immigration. “Oh, some people will still do it, so there’s no point.”

        Some people still commit murder, but that doesn’t speak to whether or not the law should exist. It completely dodges the real question.

        1. Some people still commit murder, but that doesn’t speak to whether or not the law should exist. It completely dodges the real question.

          The question is how much blood and money do you want to spend to stop people? Short of armed watchtowers and landmines, people will still try and succeed at getting in. Hell, people still got by Checkpoint Charlie, and they were willing to shoot on site.

          So, bring this down to a cost-benefit analysis. What is the cost and benefit to society to “them” living here? “They” are illegal only by mandate. What if “they” would work anywhere, or just get a green card with a reasonably attainable screening? Then how many of the “costs” go away?

          Is arming the border the best way to keep “them” out? How many can “we” pay to stay out with $25B?

          Yes, this is very much like WOD, etc. Just because you are in the favor of the goals doesn’t change that.

    2. A border wall or fence doesn’t have to stop 100% of border crossers to be effective. Israel implemented an effective border fence that has diminished its suicide bomber infiltration to almost zero. Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I…..ectiveness

      It is difficult to smuggle human beings compared to drugs, guns or contraband. They require food, water, air to breathe, have to relieve themselves periodically, can’t be kept in hidden compartments for days on end, weigh 130 lbs or more and take up a lot of space.

      There are many ways in which illegals get taxpayer support. As just one example, every illegal alien’s child is entitled to a public school education (even if the child is also illegal) and the average cost of this education is $11,000 per year (2014 figures). An illegal alien’s child enrolled in first grade will cost the taxpayer $132,000 to graduate from high school. This $132,000 of course becomes unavailable to educate the children of citizens and legal immigrants.

      So a $25 billion wall will pay for itself if it deters just 190,000 illegal aliens of child-bearing age from crossing the border illegally.

      If we can reduce the 500,00 illegal border crossers by 95% to (say) 25,000 per year, then the illegal immigration problem is greatly reduced. At that point, the public will be willing to be more generous with the illegals already in the country, especially if criminal aliens are deported.

  14. Every single article by Shikha Dalmia can be shortened and summarized into “Orange Man bad! Repeat! Repeat!”.

    I think he is an example of the new Robot journalists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_journalism

    1. “Orange Man Racist! And you are too if you agree with him!”

  15. This has been a spirited meeting of Libertarians For Authoritarian, Bigoted Immigration Policies And Practices (‘your papers, please’) chapter.

    1. It’s bigoted to enforce immigration laws that have been on the books since the 90s and that are way more ‘lax than those of our neighbors to the north?

      1. In Rev’s mind, anyone not on the Democrat plantation is a bigoted hillbilly moron.

        Never realizing the irony of being bigoted towards others in his denunciation of them.

        1. It’s a parody account, and not a particularly subtle one.

          1. You think so?

            It was my understanding that he’s been a shitposter that has followed VC around from home to home. If he’s just a parody, he needs to take some lessons from OBL.

            1. I do. Besides the ridiculousness of the content itself, I struggle to believe anyone who is that relentlessly monotonous could be anything other than a parody account. Most of his posts are little more than a slight rearranging of previous ones, almost like he’s a random generator of himself.

              Then again, I guess you could say the same about Shikha and she’s supposedly real.

          2. I can’t tell anymore since TheOnion has become real life.

    2. How about us libertarians for sanity at the border and a workable free market without the uncontrolled influx of unlimited low wage labor?

      1. If you’re a member of Libertarians For Statist Womb Management, Libertarians For Authoritarian Immigration Policies, Libertarians For Government Gay-Bashing, Libertarians For Torture, Libertarians For Government Micromanagement Of Ladyparts Clinics, Libertarians For Building That Wall, Libertarians For Subsidizing Foreign Right-Wing Military Belligerence, Libertarians For A Right-Wing Supreme Court, Libertarians For Massive Military Spending, or Libertarians For Race-Targeting Voter Suppression, you are not a libertarian . . . you’re just another sheepish right-winger masquerading in convincing libertarian drag.

        1. He said Sanity not Lunacy… So he wasn’t talking to you

          Could you try adding a point to the discussion? Maybe talk about how these caravans are filled with doctors and accountants and definitely not low wage workers that you insist won’t have a job in 5 years anyway?

      2. Low skilled? Haven’t you heard? these asylum seekers are accountants and doctors ready to shine! And if you ask for a citation you’re a racist

  16. …the only reason that Central American asylum seekers are even trying to enter between ports of entry is because border agents have taken to illicitly shooing them away from authorized ports…

    That’s the ONLY reason? Do you think maybe another reason is that they know their asylum claims are dubious or bullshit, and they’d rather take their chances on crossing the border illegally and living here as illegal aliens, like tens of millions of others are doing successfully, than risk being sent home when their asylum claims are rightfully rejected?

  17. Can we build a pipeline to Canada? Let them go there.

  18. I want to share my wonderful testimony on how i got back my Husband of my life back,i want to tell the people in the world there is a real spell caster online and is powerful and genuine, His name is Baba Wale Wiseman, He helped me recently to reunite my relationship with my Husband who dumped me, When i contacted Wiseman he cast a love spell for me and my Husband who said he doesn’t have anything to do with me again called me and started begging me. To anyone who is reading this article and needs any help Wiseman can also offer any types of help like Reuniting of marriage and relationship, Curing of all types of Diseases, Court Cases, Pregnancy Spell, we are now very much happy with our self. Wiseman makes him realize how much we love and need each other. This man is for real and good.he can also help you to fix your broken relationship. I had my husband back! It was like a miracle! No marriage counseling and we’re doing very well,in our love life.Contact this great man if you are having any problem with a lasting solution
    through Email: babawalewiseman01@gmail.com
    WhatsApp: +2348129806153

  19. What a pathetic biased article…and obviously only an opinion!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.