The people who come to the U.S.-Mexican border requesting asylum (or at least temporary refuge until they can go home) are fleeing for their lives. Their family members have been killed. Their homes and businesses have been destroyed. They have received death threats. They have been attacked with bombs and machine guns.
Yet to hear immigration hardliners tell it, migrants and refugees are an “invading” force. Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, running for the U.S. Senate, has issued a legal opinion claiming that the state is under “invasion” and is therefore permitted, under the Constitution, to “engage in war” against smugglers and cartels. In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott has enacted a series of anti-immigrant measures that include “increased military activity” on the border.
These politicians are also upset about President Joe Biden’s plan to end Title 42, the pandemic-era public-health rule that has allowed the government to expel migrants and refugees immediately, regardless of circumstances. Arizona, Louisiana and Missouri are suing to keep the administration from ending the program.
Title 42, Remain in Mexico and other Trump-era policies have resulted in some 75,000 refugees from Central America, Cuba, Venezuela, Haiti and other places languishing in dangerous camps and shelters in Mexico for months or even years. Some have become victims of extortion, rape and murder. Human rights advocates are speaking out against these atrocities and calling for greater protections for migrants and refugees.
Title 42 is no longer required from a public health standpoint, if it ever was, and must end.
But should Biden end Title 42 by May 23 as promised, there’s concern about a renewed “flood” of migrants — another word that grossly mischaracterizes the situation.
For comparison, Poland, a country of about 38 million, has taken in more than 2 million Ukrainian refugees in the past six weeks. These refugees may not ever be able to go home again. Germany, with a population of 83 million, took in 1 million permanent refugees during the first few years of the Syrian civil war.
Meanwhile, the United States, a country of about 330 million, has in recent years been accepting less than 100,000 asylum seekers a year.
“We can do this,” Tucson Mayor Regina Romero said on April 5, when asked on NPR about the potential surge of asylum seekers after Title 42 is rescinded. “Just give us the resources.”
As Romero noted, the border has seen migrant surges before, under President Barack Obama in 2014 and President Donald Trump in 2018-19. Tucson and other cities responded both times with a network of public and private agencies and faith-based groups to provide shelter, food, transportation, health care, legal aid, counseling and other services. These groups are mobilizing again.
Chris Magnus, the former Tucson police chief who is now head of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, says his agency is prepared to handle any surge. He says CBP will be able to process up to 18,000 migrants a day at the southern border, more than twice as many as the current 7,100. He’s hiring more personnel to take asylum claims and reduce the backlog. Magnus is also eager to work with local communities and nonprofits, which are expected to receive about $150 million in new FEMA funding to provide services to migrants.
On the border, we have shown we have the resources and the ability to meet the needs of desperate people. The only question is, do we, as a nation, have the heart?
____
ABOUT THE WRITER
Miriam Davidson is author of “The Beloved Border: Humanity and Hope in a Contested Land” (University of Arizona Press, 2021). This column was produced for Progressive Perspectives, which is run by The Progressive magazine, and distributed by Tribune News Service.
