Under international
convention to which it is a signatory America must entertain requests for
asylum based upon persecution or fear of persecution on grounds of race,
religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political
opinion, either by a foreign government or private entities that the government
too carelessly allows to persecute people on these bases. A procedure must be
followed to ensure the claim is entertained and adjudicated.
The U.S. famously has had very
welcoming standards for such individuals, including a standard known as “credible
fear” that means that upon application – which is as simple as turning up at a
border and announcing a request for asylum – the seeker will be allowed into
the U.S. and is supposed to be under some form of detention until adjudication
to determine whether the “well-founded fear” of persecution test necessary under
the law to grant asylum can be determined. In the past, it was not unusual for
such determinations to be made within weeks of the request being made, with
many seekers housed in detention facilities.
But in the last few years, a
series of executive
branch and judicial decisions have abrogated detention for most and enlarged
discretion for what qualifies as “credible fear.” Now, basically ignoring the
law, the federal government engages in “catch and release,” where seekers are
relocated at government expense to an agent that promises to house them. The
Obama Administration also has mostly scrapped protocols to protect against
fraudulent applications, allowing more such individuals to remain in the country
for a longer period of time, and judicial fiat has expanded what qualifies and
removed some checks, such as use of criminal histories, that make it easier for,
respectively, persons not genuinely facing persecution and dangerous
individuals to apply for asylum and even receive permanent residence status.
Foreigners have noticed the
relaxed standards, leading to a tripling of “credible fear” claims in just the
past couple of years and they have increased sevenfold in just seven years. This
has started to overwhelm the system in certain jurisdictions, particularly
Louisiana where now dockets for review are estimated to be full well over a
year in advance. Meanwhile, such individuals are not allowed to work legally
anywhere from 6-18 months and if they have children the states and local school
districts are required to shell out taxpayer dollars to educate these minors.
And the simple fact is, most of these recent arrivals, many of whom are fleeing
crime and poverty, should not qualify because these and other non-political justifications
are not legally-acceptable reasons to be granted asylum. Even when they are
rejected, in recent years 40-50 percent ordered deported defied such orders and
vanished into the underground – creating additional fiscal strains on
government by their use of government services without (with the exception of
buying goods and services) paying taxes.
But creating needless extra tax
burdens on all of national, state, and local citizens is not the most
problematic aspect of the recent relaxation of standards and procedures. These
encourage those individuals in engaged in criminal enterprises, often
drug-related, to gain a foothold in the U.S., perhaps for years, and thereby
allow them to expand their cartels’ violent operations. Worst of all,
terrorists can do the same.
Yet none of this appears to
concern Obama or Democrats, because whatever costs they may admit these policies
have they seem to have a greater goal in mind: to get as many illegal aliens
into the country as possible and have them stay as long as possible in order to
maximize the number that can be declared legal residents, if not citizens,
through amnesty. The political strategy seeks to mimic the electoral impact of the
association that many blacks made 50 years ago: a Democrat in the White House
helped sweep away disenfranchisement and civil rights violations, so, no matter
what Democrat policies have done for them since, they faithfully vote for
Democrats. Eventually getting illegal aliens to citizenship Democrats believe
will create disproportionately among these beneficiaries loyalty to Democrat
candidates for a generation to come. As long as they remain in power, there's little hope for anything different in asylum policy.
Thus, federal policy changes
such as downsizing if not eliminating “catch and release,” stricter application
of the “credible fear” standard, and circumscribing judicial activism that expands
eligibility to turn asylum requests into permanent residence will happen only
by changing the elites that control such policy – meaning this fall through the
ballot box putting into office U.S. House and Senate candidates committed to
these reforms (usually Republicans, but not just any or all Republicans), and
repeating this in 2016 and including the presidency. Failure to do so not only
threatens government taking more of what people earn to pay for ineffective
asylum policies, but perhaps through criminal violence and terrorist activities
threatens their very liberty and lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment