How subjective is the Asylum process?


#1

From much of what I have been hearing is that most of the people from Central America trying to come here are claiming that they are seeking Asylum under the Asylum laws we have? My impression is that many on this forum believe they all have legitimate claims. I would assume that most of the claims center around escaping poverty and political corruption? Under those circumstances wouldn’t most of Central America qualify for Asylum in the United States?


#2

“The Immigration and Nationality Act (‘INA’) authorizes the Attorney General to grant asylum if an alien is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin because she has suffered past persecution or has a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of ‘race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.’”[1]

Asylum is for those who are particularly singled out for the above listed reasons. Obviously this does not apply to everybody who doesn’t have a good job and joins in the latest caravan headed for our border. And yet we are not even supposed to make them wait in Mexico till their cases can be heard?
Our laws are being massively abused and liberals seem to be offended that Trump wants to do anything to correct it.


#3

I recall someone in another thread commented that about 65% of the Central Americans qualify for Asylum? Also in the end it is up to a person to decide this. Couldn’t that individual grant Asylum to as many people as he or she wants to no matter what their situation?


#4

There is no reason to grant asylum to people from any of those three countries.


#5

I thought if a person is fleeing their country in fear for their lives, and seeking
asylum, legally, they’re suppose to do so, in the first safe country that they come too?

So what’s wrong with the refugees from Central America, staying in Mexico?


#6

I would assume that the Welfare type benefits in Mexico are no where near what they are in the United States. Especially if they have a child with them, the American taxpayer will covering 100% of those costs.


#7

No, sadly, that’s called a safe harbor restriction and it’s an agreement between two countries, we don’t have one with Mexico like we do Canada, just more great negotiation skills from America’s past leaders.


#8

Its like winning the lotto there are only 3,000 slot per year.


#9

Besides, if they qualify because Central American governments are corrupt and dangerous conditions due to narco gangs, Mexicans would qualify under those assumptions as well.


#10

No there are Quotas set by Congress on how many can be allowed each year. current 2019 quota is 3,000


#11

Except in the lotto, they don’t give you thousands of dollars a year while you wait to see if you won. Oh and that isn’t true, the US grants an average of around 23k asylum pleas a year.

from https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/asylum-united-states

Total annual asylum grants averaged 23,669 between FY 2007 and FY 2016.


#12

Wrong again, 30,000 not 3,000.


#13

That is in total most of those are from middle east / Africa which have the highest quotas.

Central America has the lowest along with Europe because the risk factor is low.


#14

3-5% of claims accepted are from South America the rest are from Middle east / Africa.


#15

Does it matter? Once they’re in, they aren’t leaving.


#16

why I would propose creating a UN camp in Southern Mexico for to house them as their claim are processed.


#17

Neither Democrats or Mexico would allow it. So you would be wasting your time.


#18

Better then the current solution of nothing.


#19

A proposed solution that has no chance of passing is better than no solution how exactly?


#20

Especially if they have a child with them. Every illegal immigrant child is a Dreamer.