6.8 C
Houston
Thursday, December 3, 2020

Why does the ‘open borders’ lobby oppose Trump’s rule against asylum for abusers, gang members, and violent criminals?

On Oct. 21, the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security finalized a new rule that will prevent gang-bangers, violent felons, domestic batterers, and dangerous drunk drivers from being granted asylum. You’d think that every American would agree that our country doesn’t need more criminals, nor should they be allowed to take advantage of the asylum process.

Yet don’t be surprised if the “open borders” lobby challenges the rule on meritless grounds, hoping some activist judge will toss it out. After all, that’s how they’ve tried to overturn almost every major immigration action taken by this administration.

Under the asylum process, both legal and illegal aliens can find refuge in the United States by establishing that a return to the home country would be too dangerous due to “persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” The granting of asylum is discretionary; even if an alien technically meets these requirements, he can still be denied asylum if the individual facts don’t merit granting asylum.

The asylum process has become a major loophole in the immigration system. Recognizing that the immigration courts are overburdened and an asylum claim triggers a lengthy legal process, illegal immigrants often falsely claim eligibility for asylum as a tactic to extend their stay in the country. From 2008 to 2017, asylum claims exploded by almost 1,700%. Ultimately, about 90% of these claims were rejected as invalid or fraudulent.

Gang members certainly don’t merit discretionary asylum. Criminal transnational gangs continue to take advantage of our immigration system to smuggle drugs and people into the country, engaging in human trafficking, sex slavery, and committing violent crimes. They earn tens of billions of dollars through these operations.

In July, the administration announced the results of a joint Department of Justice-Department of Homeland Security task force that charged 13 leaders of the violent MS-13 gang, which was transporting bulk quantities of methamphetamine and weapons into the country.

According to Nicholas Trutanich, U.S. attorney for the District of Nevada, the arrests “disrupted MS-13’s leadership and significantly undermines the gang’s ability to engage in violence and other criminal conduct.” This major investigation is only one example of the administration’s focus on MS-13 and other transnational gangs.

It’s not just gang members whom the new rule would exclude from receiving asylum. Child abusers, wife beaters, drunk drivers, and felons who have committed crimes under federal, state, or tribal law would be excluded as well, and for good reason. The asylum process was intended to protect those who are threatened with prosecution not because of their own violent criminal or reckless behavior but because of things they cannot change, such as their race or nationality, or should not have to change, such as their religious beliefs, political opinions, or membership in a particular social group. It makes no sense to extend this definition to include criminals and others who pose a threat to public safety.

Those who are aware of the shortcomings of foreign legal systems, particularly when it comes to protecting women and children from domestic abuse, should be pleased to know that the new rule takes that problem into account. For example, it doesn’t require a foreign court conviction for wife-beating to make an applicant ineligible for asylum. Instead, if “there are serious reasons to believe” that the alien has “engaged in acts of battery or extreme cruelty,” that can be considered by immigration officers in evaluating the asylum claim.

All of this, no doubt, seems like common sense to the vast majority of Americans who welcome legal immigrants and support our asylum laws. Many will be surprised to learn that these criminals were eligible for asylum in the first place. They may also be surprised to learn that some on the Left are already planning legal challenges to the rule.

Yet, as Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Ken Cuccinelli told the Daily Caller, “This is part of President Trump’s four-year effort to bring some sanity to the asylum system and our legal immigration system in particular.” It is intended “to get the charlatans out of the system and preserve it for those who are deserving of America’s tremendous generosity.”

We wholeheartedly agree. Abusers, gang members, and other criminals do not deserve asylum.

Hans von Spakovsky is a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies. Mike Howell is a senior adviser in government relations at the think tank.



Read More at Washingtonexaminer

Latest news

California boy dies after shooting himself during Zoom class

An 11-year-old boy died after he shot himself in his California home during a Zoom class this week, according to a new report. The pre-teen...

Colorado passes $290M relief package on final day of special session

Colorado’s special session ended after three days on Wednesday with lawmakers passing a...

Start Of OPEC+ Meeting Delayed As Cartel Debates Output Cut Extension

A critical OPEC+ summit was set to begin at 8am ET when it was unexpectedly delayed by 1 hour to 3pm Vienna time.The OPEC+...

Pompeo invites 900 people to State Department holiday parties amid pandemic

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo invited hundreds of guests for holiday gatherings in the...

Related news

Was Insecure Voting This Year’s ‘Insurance Policy’ For Democrats?

Democrats spent 2020 insisting they would not only win the presidency in a landslide but ride a “blue wave” through Congress. If they were...

Claims Of Election Fraud In Nevada Are About To Get A Hearing In Court

Since the November election, Democrats and the media have kept up a constant, mantra-like refrain that there is “no evidence of widespread election fraud.”...

‘Hillbilly Elegy’ Didn’t Need Politics To Tell A Heart-Wrenching Story

Perhaps the reason critics so often get under our skin is that they’re not always wrong. In the case of “Hillbilly Elegy,” the Ron...

Identity Politics’ Speech Controls And Self-Government Cannot Coexist

Much evidence suggests that freedom of speech may be banned in the coming years under the guise of regulating “hate speech.” Many on the...

Why Speech Controls Will Cancel Self-Government If We Don’t Resist

Much evidence suggests that freedom of speech may be banned in the coming years under the guise of regulating “hate speech.” Many on the...

Expanding prison education benefits everybody

Sitting in a hot, stuffy men’s minimum-security prison, seven incarcerated students described their experiences...

Hillary Clinton, Bill Kristol Heart Neera Tanden. That Says A Lot

Federalist Publisher Ben Domenech sparred with Fox News contributor Leslie Marshall Tuesday over former Vice President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Office of...