That bill is HB2
2. The bill would significantly limit asylum in the U.S.
my
H.R.2 would restrict both access to and eligibility for asylum. In particular, the bill would:
- Raise the initial screening standard so that a noncitizen would have to prove they were “more likely than not” to ultimately qualify for asylum in order to continue pursuing their protection claim and not be quickly removed from the U.S.;
- Ban the vast majority of asylum seekers from requesting protection at a U.S. border if they traveled through a third country en route to the U.S. and had not already been denied asylum there;
- Generally restrict asylum claims to only those migrants who arrive in the U.S. at an official port of entry;
- Add exclusions to asylum eligibility, including by enacting restrictions against those who unlawfully received a federal public benefit or could reasonably avoid persecution by relocating to a safer area within their home country;
- Deny employment authorization if an asylum seeker entered or tried to enter the U.S. at a place other than a port of entry;
- Impose a fee of not less than $50 to apply for asylum, which might make it harder to afford to make a protection claim;
- Narrow who qualifies for asylum based on their political opinion or membership in a particular social group, in ways that would curtail protection claims by generally excluding cases related to interpersonal violence, gang-related activity, or crime;
- Allow the DHS secretary to indefinitely suspend access to a land or maritime border for migrants who enter without admission or parole, misrepresent themselves to enter, or do not have valid documentation to enter, if doing so would help achieve “operational control;”
- Require the DHS secretary to expand detention capacity, including by potentially reopening detention facilities that have been closed or whose use has been altered during the Biden administration;
- Limit release from detention for asylum seekers with positive credible fear determinations, requiring immigration detention for the duration of their asylum adjudication process. With some cases taking multiple years, this provision would mean that some asylum seekers with credible claims could face lengthy periods of detention;
- Expand the use of programs modeled after the Trump administration’s Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), so that migrants are returned to Mexico or Canada pending their removal proceedings or reviews;
- Require the U.S. to negotiate an international agreement where the Mexican government would accept the continued presence of non-Mexican asylum seekers during their adjudications for asylum in the U.S., like under MPP; and
- Make other changes to current asylum procedures.
These provisions would make it harder for individuals to request asylum, even in cases where they can demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution, effectively disqualifying people who would be able to receive protection under the U.S.’s current laws. Taken together, the bill’s restrictions would severely limit asylum for most migrants who traveled through Latin America to reach the U.S.-Mexico border. The new fee requirements could box out asylum seekers without the ability to pay for refuge, while mandatory detention or long-term waits abroad could make it more difficult for migrants to access legal counsel and ultimately win their cases.
Programs such as MPP would also represent a significant safety concern;
well over a thousand migrants became victims of rape, murder, torture, kidnapping, and other attacks after the U.S. returned them to Mexican border towns under MPP.