Read on Twitter
Heads up. I've got a report coming out tomorrow that gets into history. My point is: we have taken a variation on same bad approach at US border for so long we cannot even see the humane and workable alternative policy approaches we could take. It's time to take the blinders off!
Another point. The US pats itself on the back for influencing policy approaches all over the world. (Your welcome Australia and EU for gifts of interdiction and expedited border screening). Maybe, just maybe, the US can lead a world wide swing in the opposite direction!
I felt the need to start w/ asylum seekers at the southern U.S. border--because that is what everybody is worried about. In the new year, I'll tackle asylum more generally -- and there the US can certainly learn from what some other countries have done.
(Warning to historians: by history and "so long," I mean thirty-forty years. Not US-Mexico-Central America relations stretching back further. But I did what I could to bring a longer perspective into policy brief & show where approaches that are familiar today began.
To read the long history stretching back to 19th century, you'll have to read the book it's taking me too long to finish :) But a lot of that book isn't about the border. Because policy at the border has been distinctly shaped--and has followed a distinct pattern--more recently.
Here's the report: half devoted to a history, half to recommendations to do better.
(There's a lot more I could say about the 1990s and 2000s--for that, next report on asylum). https://www.refugeesinternational.org/reports/2020/12/17/building-better-not-backward-learning-from-the-past-to-design-sound-border-asylum-policy#_ftn3
(There's a lot more I could say about the 1990s and 2000s--for that, next report on asylum). https://www.refugeesinternational.org/reports/2020/12/17/building-better-not-backward-learning-from-the-past-to-design-sound-border-asylum-policy#_ftn3
This report focuses on BORDER PROCESSING. Asylum is a huge topic--couldn't cover it all in one report. To all who are commenting: more to come from me on asylum eligibility more generally in the new year!
One policy approach I didn't get into the report and that I will address in the next one:
We need to dismantle the separate defensive asylum system and have everyone affirmatively apply. B/K it is not illegal to apply for asylum, even if you are unauthorized or arrive w/out docs.
We need to dismantle the separate defensive asylum system and have everyone affirmatively apply. B/K it is not illegal to apply for asylum, even if you are unauthorized or arrive w/out docs.
How do we change culture and retrain throughout DHS to have a fair handling of those who ask for asylum at the border? This report is only partial answer.
End goal: one UNIFORM asylum system that doesn't treat people at border differently, and assume they're more frivolous.
End goal: one UNIFORM asylum system that doesn't treat people at border differently, and assume they're more frivolous.
Finally, asylum adjudication should not be adversarial. But until we are sure asylum officers fairly assess claims, the immigration courts need to review and need to be fair. The issue of asylum seekers knowing their rights and how to qualify, is, as I say in report, the key.
Last and maybe most important. We literally have not come up with a good way to do this since 1980s. I'll be thinking and writing about this in coming months, especially how to make that one uniform system. So, pm me your ideas!
