Chris Carlson/AP Photo
Democratic presidential candidates, from left, Senator Elizabeth Warren, former Vice President Joe Biden, and Senator Bernie Sanders participate during a Democratic primary debate, December 19, 2019, in Los Angeles.
On Thursday night, we saw the first questions on immigration in a Democratic primary debate since September. One was about Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Another was about a path to citizenship for undocumented people living in the U.S. And then the candidates quibbled about comprehensive immigration reform—whatever that means to you.
An anti-immigration stance is central to Trump’s political brand, and his administration’s comprehensive strategy has only intensified since Democrats and their would-be leaders eased off on making immigration and border policy a focus. Led by Stephen Miller, whose recently leaked emails indicated white nationalist leanings, the administration has not only cracked down on immigration at the border, but raised fees for all sorts of immigration services and dramatically minimized the asylum system.
Let’s break it down. Since September, the administration has made it harder to gain asylum in every way possible. More than 60,000 people have been forced to remain in Mexico while they wait for an asylum hearing—and many of them will never get their notice. Thousands have banded together in tent camps along the border in notoriously dangerous cities such as Tijuana as the administration essentially forces Mexico to do our deportation work for us. Trump’s administration recently added minor infractions such as using a fake ID to the list of crimes that would block asylum seekers. After forcing the hand of Central American countries into signing safe third country agreements, which force asylum seekers to apply in the first country they pass through, the administration has begun to send asylum seekers back to Guatemala and Honduras. And it seems that Guatemala is nearly set to start receiving Mexican asylum seekers.
In November, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether to uphold the Trump administration’s decision to end the DACA program that allowed so-called Dreamers to stay in the United States. General reporting indicated that it’s likely the conservative Court will side with the Trump administration.
This month, investigative journalism published by ProPublica and The New York Times uncovered how the consulting firm McKinsey recommended to ICE cuts in spending on food for migrants, medical care, and the supervision of detainees. The government also plans to collect DNA samples from people detained in federal immigration custody and track the data in a national criminal database.
Immigration is also getting much more expensive. For the first time ever, the Trump administration has proposed charging a fee to asylum applicants—not to mention upping the cost of DACA renewals and raising the fee for becoming a citizen by more than 80 percent. Other moves have attempted to make it harder for poor migrants as well. Trump has continued to push the public charge rule, which would make it harder for immigrants who are seen as likely to start using government assistance programs to obtain lawful permanent resident status. He has also worked to expand migrant family detention.
Immigration judges have struggled to keep pace with the number of asylum seekers, and their union leaders have complained of the lack of independence they have. The administration has faced numerous legal challenges to its proposed rules and policy changes, but the Supreme Court is friendly to the White House and the administration frequently seeks legal relief there.
None of these consequential changes in immigration policy were mentioned during Thursday’s debate. With all the talk of values, there was not one mention of asylum seekers. This time around, the questions were hardly serious. And it showed in the candidates’ answers. In Andrew Yang’s response to the DACA question, he said he would of course look for a permanent solution for Dreamers, but his response almost immediately drifted to campaign finance, an “anti-woman marketplace,” and his proposal for “democracy dollars,” which would give voters money to donate to candidates they choose.
Then, moderator Amna Nawaz tossed another softball, directing the question first to Senator Bernie Sanders and then to other candidates. She questioned if, given the opportunity for bipartisan reform, Sanders would have a path to citizenship for all undocumented immigrants living in the U.S., or just some. On day one, Sanders replied, he would restore the legal status of people in the DACA program and he would change border policy “so that federal agents will never snatch babies from the arms of their mothers.” Finally, Sanders said he will create a path to citizenship for all undocumented immigrants living here, arguing, “That is what the people of our country want.” In response to Sanders’s answer, Senator Amy Klobuchar offered a tepid non-answer while noting her work with President Obama on immigration reform.
Billionaire Tom Steyer pointed out that the Trump administration’s policies are aimed not just at curbing immigration, but especially at denying immigrants of color any path to permanent residency. Mayor Pete Buttigieg chimed in, adding that children who have been separated from their parents should have financial compensation and a fast track to citizenship. And former Vice President Joe Biden offered the staid “This is a nation of immigrants.”
The answers were as unimaginative as the questions. The insidious harm of an administration chipping away at protections for asylum seekers and immigration went unmentioned.
