Commentary
The Biden administration’s approach to the southern border has been alarming due to the influx of over ten million individuals in just over three years. However, a recent revelation has shed light on a concerning aspect of the border policy.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), led by Alejandro Mayorkas, proposed a new rule that unveiled a lack of background checks on the millions of illegal immigrants entering the country. Rather than immediately deporting those with criminal records or ties to terrorism, DHS has deferred this determination until their asylum hearing, which can take years. In the meantime, these individuals remain in the U.S. awaiting their hearing.
It is important to note that the premise allowing these immigrants to enter the United States is flawed. Individuals can freely cross the southern border without going through official entry points, leading to immediate processing and entry into the country.
These individuals are considered refugees seeking asylum, not illegal immigrants, under U.S. immigration law. However, the majority are not fleeing persecution but are coming for economic reasons, which does not qualify for asylum. The lack of reports of widespread persecution based on race or religion raises questions about the validity of their asylum claims.
Most illegal immigrants will likely be denied asylum at their hearings due to their lack of eligibility. DHS’s failure to deport individuals who do not qualify for asylum and pose a security risk is concerning.
According to DHS, individuals posing a national security or safety risk are not eligible for asylum. However, this determination is currently delayed until the later stages of the asylum process, allowing potentially dangerous individuals to remain in the country.
The proposed rule aims to address this issue by allowing Asylum Officers to consider security risks during initial screenings, enabling quicker deportation of threats to national security.
Despite the urgency of the situation, the rule change is still pending public comment until June 12, delaying its implementation. This raises questions about the administration’s commitment to addressing the border crisis promptly.
While some individuals are detained during the asylum process, others are released into the country, raising concerns about public safety and the allocation of resources to house individuals who may not qualify for asylum.
The proposed rule is intended to enhance national security and public safety, but its effectiveness and implementation remain to be seen.
It is intended to ensure that individuals with serious criminal histories or links to terrorism can be removed as early as possible in the process to address national security and public safety concerns.
If individuals are detained for years until their hearing, how is this a national security and public safety issue? It seems that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) now recognizes the severity of the security problem due to past failures.
Consider the case of Jose Ibarra, the
alleged murderer of Laken Riley, a nursing student. Ibarra, a Venezuelan national, was arrested near El Paso in September 2022 after crossing the border illegally. Despite his criminal history, he was paroled and released, eventually leading to the tragic death of Ms. Riley.
While there are no reports of Ibarra’s criminal record in Venezuela, his actions in the U.S. suggest a concerning pattern of criminal behavior.
In a related development, the FBI and DHS issued a joint public service
announcement warning about potential threats from foreign terrorist organizations during Pride Month, specifically mentioning ISIS messaging targeting the LGBTQIA+ community. This raises questions about potential ties between ISIS and individuals crossing the southern border.
Recent incidents, such as illegal immigrants attempting to breach security at Marine bases in Quantico, Virginia and Twentynine Palms, California, further underscore the security risks posed by individuals with criminal records or terrorism ties entering the country illegally.
It is evident that DHS faces a significant challenge in handling illegal immigrants with criminal backgrounds or connections to terrorism.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
