For decades, granting political asylum has been part of the story America has told about itself. As a Western democracy and a nation of immigrants, in keeping with its national ethos, the United States has an obligation to provide a safe haven for those fleeing persecution in their home countries.
But regardless of who wins the White House in November, interviews with about two dozen immigration lawyers, academics, and former federal officials show that the 2024 presidential election will be a major challenge to the refugee system as we know it. It is said that it is likely to mark the end. The system is broken, said many critics, supporters and even ordinary Americans, the result of its transformation into something not intended at its creation.
Former President Donald J. Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have very different views on immigration policy, but both candidates have nonetheless promised significant limits on asylum grants, making the United States a world leader in aiding refugees. This suggests a complete review of long-standing commitments.
The changes, which come in response to a growing number of Americans concerned about the arrival of immigrants, could have far-reaching implications for those who have long seen the United States as a beacon of hope that protects them from violence and political oppression. At least 169,000 people have applied for asylum at the U.S. southern border last year alone, and as other Western democracies have similarly strengthened their borders and authoritarian governments have expanded their powers, many have been sent to camps and camps. Increasingly, people are finding themselves stranded in desperate and unsafe situations, such as crowded boats.
During his presidency, Trump sharply reduced the number of refugees and asylum seekers allowed into the country, but has promised even more drastic measures to curb both legal and illegal immigration if re-elected.
Harris vowed to continue executive measures enacted this year by President Biden that restrict how and where people can apply for asylum south of the border. These measures solidified Democrats’ rejection of the longstanding tradition of providing asylum, a change that had been unthinkable for them until recently.
Please wait while we confirm your access. If you’re in reader mode, exit and log into your Times account or subscribe to all Times.
Please wait while we confirm your access.
Already a subscriber? Log in.
Want to know all about The Times? Subscribe.
