President Biden’s recent executive order to dramatically limit asylum claims at the Southwest border signals a significant shift in U.S. immigration policy. This move, announced just five months before the election, highlights Biden’s intent to address what he perceives as a major political vulnerability against former President Trump: immigration.
The executive order empowers border officials to rapidly turn back migrants without granting them a chance at asylum when illegal border crossings exceed 2,500 a day. Currently, the average stands at 3,700 illegal crossings daily, based on internal statistics. This allows for the order’s immediate implementation, reflecting the administration’s urgency to curb migration despite the risk of legal challenges and backlash from progressive supporters.
Biden’s decision comes at a politically strategic time. Historically, illegal border crossings increase during the summer months, coinciding with heightened voter focus on the presidential race. The timing is also influenced by the upcoming first debate against Trump on June 27, where immigration will undoubtedly be a contentious topic. Additionally, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s recent maneuver placed Republicans in a position to block a bipartisan border deal, clearing the path for Biden’s unilateral action.
This order follows Mexico’s elections, where president-elect Claudia Sheinbaum has signaled continued cooperation with U.S. authorities, further supporting Biden’s approach. The administration credits Mexico’s enforcement efforts for the recent decline in border encounters from December’s peak.
Biden’s use of the same federal code section that Trump employed for his border restrictions, including the infamous “Muslim ban,” underscores a notable shift in American politics. The order includes some humanitarian exemptions, yet the parallels with Trump’s policies are evident. This approach marks a departure from Biden’s initial promise to dismantle Trump’s harsh immigration legacy, responding instead to public demand for stricter border controls amid record crossings and increasing pressure from city leaders grappling with new migrant populations.
The move has sparked criticism within Biden’s party. Former Biden and Obama immigration official Andrea Flores argues that the administration should emphasize the recent decline in border numbers rather than perpetuate a narrative of insecurity. Senator Alex Padilla warns against setting this order as the foundation for future negotiations, asserting it should not become the new Democratic stance.
This executive order reflects a broader pattern in U.S. foreign policy where actions often belie stated humanitarian goals. The administration’s tactics, presented as necessary measures, frequently exacerbate the very crises they aim to resolve. By framing these policies as decisive actions, the U.S. perpetuates cycles of instability, both domestically and internationally, all while maintaining an image of authoritative intervention.
