Hispanic Democrats are increasing pressure on President Biden to take unilateral action to protect immigrants living and working in the United States.
Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) are irate that Biden moved this week To set fresh restrictions for asylum seekers without simultaneously advancing legal protections for farmworkers, “Dreamers” and other undocumented immigrants – reforms they unveiled at a meeting with the President at the White House last month.
In the wake of Biden’s fresh restrictive asylum policy, they want the White House to launch another round of immigration policy executive orders to strike a balance between strict immigration enforcement and immigrant rights – a tough feat in an election year when Biden is struggling to manage the border crisis without alienating Hispanic voters.
“I think he’s trying to address half the problem, the half of the problem that he’s been able to address. But he’s got to address the other part as well,” said Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), a first-term CHC member. “I’m hopeful, and that’s true of my conversations with the White House, that more action will follow, and that’s what I’m hoping for.”
Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.), vice chair of the Hispanic Caucus, has placed a number of reforms at the top of the CHC’s wish list. These reforms include efforts to protect spouses of undocumented U.S. citizens (estimated to number over one million) from deportation; similar protections for the so-called “Dreamers” (people brought to the country illegally as children, estimated to number over three million); fresh labor protections and legal rights for immigrant farmworkers; and expanding work permits to more undocumented immigrants.
“I think these four – maybe in that order – could be interesting elements that could balance what appears to be an initiative that is only aimed at enforcement,” Espaillat said.
These are not the only proposals put forward by the CHC.
The group is also calling for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the US to have an easier path to citizenship – or in some cases, simply to create it. Many of these people are already employed, pay taxes and contribute to social security and health insurance and should therefore also be able to benefit from these contributions, argue the Democrats.
“I find it disappointing that this is an executive order that is just for enforcement, and I think we really need to make sure that we actually solve the problem, which requires expanding a path to citizenship,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (DN.Y.) told reporters shortly before Biden formally introduced his measure.
However, the path to citizenship has been controversial for decades, especially among conservatives who describe such a policy as an “amnesty” for those who broke the law upon entering the country.
In 2014, when Republican leaders in the House of Representatives proposed a comprehensive Immigration reform package which included legal status for the population without papers, conservatives in their conference killed it within daysAnd the party has only moved further to the right since then.
Against this backdrop, some Democrats are suggesting that Biden should pursue a more targeted proposal that would provide U.S. citizenship for members of the U.S. armed forces – a less controversial concept that could protect the president from Republican attacks during the election campaign.
“There’s more conversation to be had about whether he can formalize a better path to citizenship for people who serve in the military, to strengthen the issues around DACA,” Garcia said. “So I think there are – and he’s already done some of that – areas where more can be done, and I strongly encourage the president to move forward on that.”
Other Democrats, however, are urging the administration to streamline the system for processing asylum claims at the southern border, where thousands of migrants arrive every day.
Funding to boost the number of immigration judges was included in a bipartisan Senate deal earlier this year that was killed by Republicans after former President Trump opposed the package. But Rep. Juan Vargas (D-Calif.), who represents a border district around San Diego, suggested Biden could shift funding internally to boost that number without congressional intervention.
“The solution is to reallocate resources within the available budget. I think that can be done by presidential decree, and that’s what I would like to see,” Vargas said. “People could then apply for asylum, but you could find out pretty quickly if they really are eligible or if they are just applying for economic asylum even though they are not eligible.”
Biden, for his part, has signaled that further measures – including on immigration – are on the way after he got the situation at the southern border under control with the adoption of an executive order that would stop asylum applications if the number of border crossings exceeds an average of 2,500 people per day over a seven-day period.
“Today I talked about what we need to do to secure the border. In the coming weeks – and I mean the coming weeks – I will talk about how we can make our immigration system fairer and more equitable,” he said Tuesday.
His decision to go it alone came after Senate Republicans twice blocked bipartisan border legislation – once in February and again in May – even though it was negotiated by Republican Senator James Lankford (Oklahoma) and hailed as a conservative product.
But the timing is significant: The situation at the southern border has become a central campaign issue—and a central vulnerability for Biden—this election cycle. Voters have consistently identified immigration and the border as the most significant issue facing the United States in the run-up to November, and more than voters have said they would trust Trump to resolve the situation rather than Biden.
This animated led to Biden’s executive order, which split the Democratic caucus between vulnerable Democrats concerned about the situation at the southern border – and looking for a campaign issue in their “red” constituencies – and liberals outraged by what they see as tough policies reminiscent of the Trump administration’s actions.
“Today’s executive order severely restricts access to asylum and is of great concern to our caucus,” Espaillat wrote in a statement alongside CHC Chair Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.) and Caucus Leader Sylvia Garcia (D-Texas). “Such measures impede progress and harm migrants fleeing violence and persecution who might otherwise have a credible and valid reason for seeking asylum.”
But even in some of the most liberal corners of the Democratic caucus, Biden’s decree is dividing progressives.
In a move that raised eyebrows, Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.) — an at-risk lawmaker who chairs the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) — praised Biden’s move as “an essential step to protect our border,” while Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), co-chair of the CBC’s Foreign Affairs and Immigration Working Group, railed against the executive order, arguing that it will “prevent countless Black immigrants” from exercising their legal right to seek asylum in the U.S.
“We should take a more nuanced approach that takes into account the real humanitarian problems that migrants face on a daily basis,” she added.
