NASHVILLE, TN – United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN) today sent a letter to President Joe Biden seeking clarity on his Administration’s plan to terminate President Donald Trump’s Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) and return to a catch-and-release policy with respect to persons crossing the border.
The letter comes amid reports that an estimated 30,000 migrants—a population roughly the size of Cookeville, Tennessee— are waiting at the border right now to be released next week into the United States given the termination of MPP.
“Recent data shows that fewer than one in five asylum claims are granted—including only 1.5 percent of MPP cases, according to a February 12, 2021, Los Angeles Times report—and that roughly half of claimants fail to show up for their hearings. Because MPP cases are many times less likely to be meritorious than the typical asylum claim, and roughly half of all asylum claimants do not even show up to complete their immigration hearings, a policy that forces American taxpayers and communities to provide safe harbor to individuals who are so clearly abusing our laws defies all logic,” Senator Hagerty wrote.
Hagerty also requests responses from the Biden Administration on several basic questions regarding the consequences for American security and prosperity resulting from termination of MPP, including:
- Will these migrants be released into the general population of the United States while their asylum claims are pending? And if so, how does the government plan to ensure that the migrants show up for all of their immigration court proceedings?
- Will these migrants be granted work permits in the United States while their cases are pending?
- Will these migrants be eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine in the United States?
- If it is determined that a migrant is not entitled to asylum, will that migrant be immediately removed from the United States?
A copy of the letter is attached and text can be found below:
Dear Mr. President:
I am writing to express my serious concern and pose several basic questions regarding reports that you are planning to terminate the Trump Administration’s Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) policy and return to a catch-and-release policy with respect to persons crossing the border.
Terminating MPP would unilaterally discard a significant diplomatic achievement, reward abuse of our generous asylum laws, and endanger American communities as a result. Further, it would exacerbate the damage caused by your other unilateral actions on immigration, including: barring virtually all deportations of illegal immigrants, including violent criminals; halting ongoing construction of a border wall demanded by law enforcement personnel on the front lines; and opening the door to admitting immigrants who cite the need to flee climate change.
Human smugglers, who endanger and exploit these migrants while promising passage to the United States in exchange for payment, often train the migrants to falsely claim asylum at the border as their ticket into the interior of the United States. In 2019, the Trump Administration established MPP, which requires that persons seeking asylum in the United States remain in Mexico—rather than being released into the United States—while their claims are adjudicated.
This policy makes sense because admission to the United States should not be automatic, but rather should be based on whether a person is entitled to asylum under the law. Recent data shows that fewer than one in five asylum claims are granted—including only 1.5 percent of MPP cases, according to a February 12, 2021, Los Angeles Times report—and that roughly half of claimants fail to show up for their hearings. Because MPP cases are many times less likely to be meritorious than the typical asylum claim, and roughly half of all asylum claimants do not even show up to complete their immigration hearings, a policy that forces American taxpayers and communities to provide safe harbor to individuals who are so clearly abusing our laws defies all logic.
On June 7, 2019, the United States and Mexico entered the U.S.-Mexico Joint Declaration, under which Mexico agreed to: (1) “take unprecedented steps to increase enforcement to curb irregular migration,” including deploying its national guard; (2) “tak[e] decisive action to dismantle human smuggling and trafficking organizations as well as their illicit financial and transportation networks”; and (3) “commit to strengthen bilateral cooperation [with the United States], including information sharing and coordinated actions to better protect and secure out common border.” Mexico also agreed to accept and offer jobs, health care, and education to persons waiting for asylum determinations under MPP.
The U.S.-Mexico Joint Declaration was an unprecedented and highly successful partnership under which the United States and Mexico worked together to protect our important trade relationship and the economic prosperity and health of both countries’ citizens. Under this agreement, Mexico apprehended 145,682 migrants from June 2019 to May 2020. As a result of this policy, the number of Border Patrol apprehensions of persons crossing our border illegally declined from 144,116 in May 2019 to 36,687 in February 2020. This policy supported American workers and made us safer, including by protecting the victims of drug and human trafficking.
I strongly encourage you not to unilaterally throw away this partnership, given its undeniable success. A February 16, 2021, White House statement provides that, “[s]tarting February 19, the United States will begin to process eligible individuals in the Migration Protection Protocols (MPP) program to pursue their asylum cases in the US.” This statement warns: “We caution people seeking to immigrate to the United States that our borders are not open, and that this is just the first phase in the administration’s work to reopen access to an orderly asylum process.” Issuing warnings that “our borders are not open” while implementing an agenda signaling that the border is wide open will not be effective in deterring a border crisis.
A Los Angeles Times report from February 12, 2021, states that an estimated 30,000 migrants are waiting at the border right now to be released next week into the United States given the termination of MPP—and that’s just at this moment. Once it becomes abundantly clear that the border is open, tens and hundreds of thousands more will follow. n effect, this will result in the mass importation of the equivalent of new towns and cities into the United States—Cookeville, Tennessee, a mid-size city in my state, has roughly 30,000 residents, for example.
Abandoning the MPP partnership is especially puzzling during an ongoing global pandemic that has warranted travel restrictions for citizens and has resulted in the closure of American businesses and schools and the elimination of American jobs. Incredibly, it seems that with this unprecedented wave of executive orders, more COVID restrictions are being placed on American citizens than on illegal immigrants. We need to focus on defeating the virus and getting Americans back to work and school, not on issuing an invitation to migrants to flood into our country unchecked.
Given these concerns and the potential consequences of terminating MPP, please provide written responses to the following questions by March 1, 2021, regarding your apparent decision to allow migrants seeking asylum and currently participating in MPP into the United States while their asylum claims are pending:
- Will these migrants be released into the general population of the United States while their asylum claims are pending, or will they be detained pending determination of their asylum claims?
- And if they are released, how will it be ensured that they show up for all of their immigration court proceedings?
- Will these migrants be granted work permits in the United States while their cases are pending?
- Will these migrants be eligible to receive a COVID-19 vaccine in the United States?
- Is there disagreement with reporting from the Los Angeles Times on August 16, 2019, stating that human smugglers paid to smuggle migrants to the U.S. border “deposit migrants at the Rio Grande and instruct them to give themselves up to U.S. Border Patrol agents to claim asylum” as a strategy for gaining admission to the United States?
- What percentage of persons in the MPP program seeking asylum were granted asylum, compared with persons not in the MPP program seeking asylum during the same period?
- If it is determined that a migrant is not entitled to asylum, will that migrant be immediately removed from the United States?
As this list indicates, proceeding with the termination of the MPP partnership creates basic, unanswered questions regarding the consequences for American security and prosperity, especially in the midst of a pandemic and pandemic-induced recession. Ending MPP would epitomize placing the interests of non-Americans above the interests of American families, communities, and workers. Please reconsider this potentially catastrophic plan.