The border crisis must be treated as human rights issue, not a political game
Get the latest Syracuse news delivered right to your inbox.
Subscribe to our newsletter here.
During the Trump administration, despite the failure to construct a border wall, the former president enacted a series of stringent policies that caused long-lasting damage to many migrant families seeking help and asylum. The “Zero Tolerance” policy separating migrant families from their children and the use of Title 42 of the U.S. Code to expedite the expulsion process are two such examples.
While President Joe Biden abolished “Zero Tolerance” in 2021 and ended Title 42 expulsions in 2023, there has been no systemic reform in Southern border policies. The cycle of stringent policies and the polarized reaction to attempts at reform highlight a deeper issue within American politics, where a lack of substantive change becomes a casualty of political battles.
This situation, coupled with the exploitation of immigration issues for electoral gains, proves that current political dynamics are ill-equipped to resolve crises that fundamentally concern human dignity.
The anti-immigration sentiment of Trump and other right-wing politicians is dangerous, not only to the safety of the migrants, many of whom are impoverished individuals fleeing violence, but also to the rhetoric of our country’s voters. Just under half of Americans now consider the border as “a crisis” and 63% want tougher measures. This discourse surrounding the border crisis in the United States emphasizes a pressing need for policies that prioritize the human rights and dignity of migrants.
Approximately 11 million undocumented immigrants now live across the country, which account for nearly 5% of the U.S. workforce. Due to their status, they are often forced to work in poor conditions for long hours under no legal protection and often receive little to no healthcare benefits, causing widespread physical and mental health challenges.
Bridget Overby | Presentation Director
Right now in the Senate, where the Democrats have a thin majority, members are working more constructively on resolving the border issue, creating The Emergency National Security Supplemental Appropriations Act with support from Democrats and Republicans.
This legislative proposal represents the most substantial overhaul of U.S. immigration and border policy in the 21st-century.
The bill introduces many measures, yet one of the most crucial parts is the establishment of a “Border Emergency Authority,” allowing the president to conduct expedited deportation of migrants entering between ports of entry under certain thresholds while also raising the bar for asylum claims to a “reasonable possibility” standard.
In their analysis, the American Immigration Council, a nonpartisan immigration policy think tank, called it “a serious attempt to acknowledge, and solve, some of the key problems with current border and asylum policy.”
Unfortunately, in today’s Congress, where partisanship matters more than achievements and any bipartisan cooperation can be seen as a betrayal, this law has been met with outright resistance from both Trump and current House Speaker Mike Johnson, who deemed it “dead on arrival.” Due to intense pressure, the bill’s advancement was hindered by a narrow 49-50 vote against proceeding with debate. Trump took credit for the bill’s failure, telling a rowdy crowd of supporters to, “Please blame it on me. Please.”
Trump and Johnson’s attitudes, showcasing their disregard for human rights and dignity of migrants, have been successfully stoking fear and resentment among voters. These efforts have concealed the humanitarian side of this debate and shifted them into political games by exploiting the vulnerability of migrants.
This bill’s opposition came not only from the Republicans, it was also met with strong criticism from the progressive wing of the Democratic party as well. Rep. Pramila Jayapal, the chair of the Congressional progressive caucus, called the Senate bill “cruel, inhumane and unworkable.”
Additionally, the National Immigrant Justice Center, a nonprofit that aims to provide human rights protections for migrants, criticized the bill for its increase of detention and surveillance as well as the emergency power to potentially “close” the asylum seeking process.
While valid in their criticisms, the truth of the matter is that border policy, and all policy-making, will very rarely please anyone entirely. Because of how politicized border issues have become, we’ve lost the ability to address migration as the human rights issue that it is, instead we’re forced to make decisions that only consider the political ramifications. Due to a lack of enough representation in Congress, the progressive voices against the passage of this bill have been largely overlooked.
The national immigration issue has projected deeply into the livelihood and politics of New York as well. Since 2022, Texas Governor Greg Abbott has been regularly busing migrants to New York City and other places in trips that are often unannounced and uncoordinated as a measure of protest against a lack of border policy reform.
In May 2023, Onondaga County Executive Ryan McMahon issued an emergency order stopping New York City from sending migrants to houses in the county, a measure which Mayor Eric Adams was forced to back off of. Now, after the border bill failed in the Senate, Hochul sent a scathing letter criticizing many New York House Republicans, including Syracuse’s representative Brandon Williams, for taking “no action to help address this national crisis.”
While media outlets have framed the border bill’s failure as a “win” for Biden, it is crucial to remember that the border crisis is a human rights crisis where real people are suffering. This political process should not be a game of scoring narrative points.
Some reports on this issue focused on Congress’s inability to pass effective reform and emphasized how this could potentially benefit Biden’s reelection chances, forgetting to mention that hundreds of thousands of people’s lives are in limbo due to this impasse. When it comes to the rights of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, what actually matters is the government’s attitude and responsibility toward basic human rights issues.
Criticism of the bill is not only valid but necessary, as it highlights the urgent need for systemic reform in how we address migration and asylum. This reform requires a paradigm shift that prioritizes human rights, moving away from viewing the situation merely through the lenses of security and regulation.
The current discourse and legislative efforts must reflect a deeper understanding of the border crisis as a multifaceted human rights issue. This understanding should guide the development of policies that are compassionate, fair and aligned with international human rights standards. Only then can we begin to address the root causes of migration and asylum-seeking and ensure that the rights and needs of migrants are at the forefront of our national conversation and policy-making.
Allen Huang is a second year Media Studies masters student. He can be reached at xhuang49@syr.edu.
