End Special Temptations to Rush the Border

Cornyn Cuellar Proposal

Maybe the effectiveness is in the details but if this  sketch from the New York Times provides the essence of the Cronyn- Cuellar proposal to deal with the current surge on the border from residents of three Central American countries, we doubt it will stem the tide:

The legislation by the two Texas lawmakers — Senator John Cornyn, the chamber’s No. 2 Republican, and Representative Henry Cuellar, a Democrat — would amend a 2008 law intended to stop sex trafficking that grants migrant children from Central America extra legal protections when they cross the border,

The Cornyn-Cuellar bill, known as the Humane Act, would allow children from Central American countries to opt to be voluntarily sent home, as migrant children from Mexico and Canada can currently choose. It also would allow children with a legal claim for remaining in the country to make their case before an immigration judge within seven days of undergoing a screening by the Department of Homeland Security. Judges would then have 72 hours to decide whether the child can remain in the country with a sponsor while pursing legal action .

The legislation would also authorize up to 40 new immigration judges to expedite the process, and it would require a plan, as well as additional resources, for gaining operational control over 90 percent of the nation’s southern border.

The proposal does not seem to offer much in essential change. All of the rushers’ parents or champions are presumably already using legal claims along with the special “legal”consideration of the claimants country of origin, (other “children” from strife torn countries be damned).  That aspect does not seem to change.  Claims for the great majority of the rushers are largely unprovable in a short amount of time or no more horrendous than might apply to “children” of other countries.  Why continue the racial chauvinism providing special considerations for them compared to the limitations applied to residents of other countries with horrendous sex trafficking experiences,  Thailand for example?

The provision in the bill for additional judges would seem to be not even a finger in the dike if the incentives bringing them here remain. Claims under the existing statutes provide hearings and we see that 65% are being approved initially with the others probably being appealed.  More judges without a change in the law may be just a faster rubber stamp.  The appeals can take forever, resulting in long term residency and fading into the system.  Nothing would appear to change.

Given the track record of lies and manipulations and misfeasance by the Obama administration, the idea that the No 2 Republican in the Senate John Cornyn would sign on to a law with a provision even bothering to call for 90% “operational control” of the southern border suggests the utmost in naivete.   Obama will certify 100% if that is Cornyn’s approach, so why  not make it 100%.  Of course the actual performance will be the same, whatever Obama wants it to be.

The NYT article goes on to report:

Two Republican senators from Arizona, Jeff Flake and John McCain, are working on similar legislation that would amend the 2008 law and increase the number of immigration judges available to hear the cases of unaccompanied minors. Their bill would also increase the number of refugee visas for Guatemalans, Hondurans and Salvadorans by 5,000 each, to encourage children to seek asylum through legal channels in their home countries.

If the essence of the Flake and McCain proposal is as reported, it would seem to represent  a superior approach as it at least limits the draw on our country’s ability to cope with the surge and the opportunistic abuse of the well intentioned if naive laws being abused. Requiring  a process that begins in the origin country, or an intermediary country seems appropriate unless critics can defend that the whole region is made up of countries involved in sex trafficking.  Not knowing the details of their not as yet introduced bill, we will continue to maintain that the most humane, most even-handed approach is to end the instigating law and provide no special provision for Central America compared to claims originating in other countries.

Border security and sovereign integrity is the fundamental need now. Immigration limits need to be adhered to with some adjustments for the overall total only by act of congress. Immigration cannot be open-ended as current law seems to allow for or ignore as regards “children” from Central America. Each country’s quota might be adjusted within a narrow range  but prioritization of reasons from that country’s existing quota should not alter the total except by act of congress. Any adjusted quota should be temporary, not an open ended categorical invitation to fudge the truth.

The manipulations of the administration cannot be trusted nor carte blanche be applied to the sincerity of all applicants. The prioritization of claims within the overall limits is best determined via embassy personnel from policy established by Congress.  To end the incentive to rush the border and give birth to an anchor baby, citizenship should be awarded not by birth place but by citizenship of the parents or a naturalization process.

Bush did it

Jason Riley of the Wall Street Journal reports that George W Bush employed a clear response to border rushers that worked effectively. Granted it was before the sex trafficking law that came into existence on his watch,  now being used and abused by border rushers from Central America.  Nevertheless it illustrates the likely result of assertive responses and the need to end laws with provisions for endless litigation built in with residency granted in the meantime.

The U.S. faced a similar challenge in the mid-2000s, when border patrol was caught unawares by a surge of Brazilian illegals. The Bush administration determined that word had gotten back to Brazil that people apprehended at the border would be released and able to stay, so the Department of Homeland Security initiated an operation dubbed “Texas Hold ‘Em.”

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff explained the results during a Senate hearing in 2005. “We prioritized the existing space, dedicated bed space and began detaining and removing all of the illegal Brazilians we apprehended,” said Mr. Chertoff. “The word spread surprisingly swiftly; within its first thirty days, the operation had already begun to deter illegal border crossings by Brazilians. In fact, the number of Brazilians apprehended dropped by 50%. After 60 days, the rate of Brazilian illegal immigration through this sector was down 90%, and it is still significantly depressed all across the border. In short, we learned that a concentrated effort of removal can actually discourage illegal entries by non-Mexicans on the southwest border.”

R Mall

This entry was posted in IMMIGRATION, UNCATEGORIZED. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to End Special Temptations to Rush the Border

  1. Roy Munson says:

    I love how the “William Wilberforce act of 2008” is all Bushes fault now like it was bad to begin with. When the Senate (including Senator Obummer at the time) passed it unanimously and the House only had 2 people vote against it. Everybody voted for it!

    Here’s the overly partisan Huffpost’s take if you want to gag, or laugh-


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *