Despite increased rhetoric about open borders following the end of the Title 42 policy, which was used for about 3 years to rapidly expel migrants at the southern border due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the border is not open. 

Ending the practice of expelling migrants under a public health order does not mean there is no border security. It simply means that border processing will revert back to existing immigration law, as it has for decades. Regulations on immigration are found under Title 8 of the U.S. law code, and were enacted as part of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952. There have been several revisions of the law since the 1950s, but the laws around penalties for unlawful border crossings have remained largely unchanged since the 1990s, when Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act. These laws have applied under multiple presidential administrations across both parties.

In addition to processing migrants using Title 8 rather than Title 42, the Biden administration also launched a stringent new asylum rule in May 2023. Under the new rule, many asylum-seekers will be presumed ineligible for asylum unless they:

• Traveled to the U.S. using one of the parole programs authorized by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS),

• Used the CBP One mobile application to schedule an appointment at a port-of-entry in advance of their arrival, or

• Sought asylum in another country in transit to the U.S. and were denied asylum in that country.

While there are some narrow exceptions, this new rule will make the barriers to claiming asylum much harder. In fact over 11,000 individuals were deported or returned to their home countries within the first week of the new rule.

Furthermore, in June 2024 the Biden administration released a presidential proclamation that closes the southwest U.S. border to migrants crossing between ports of entry when the number of such crossings reaches a 7-day average of 2,500, and would not reopen the border until the numbers dip below an average of 1,500 crossings per day for one week. The average crossings at the time of the announcement were already at that 2,500 threshold, causing the order to go into immediate effect. In addition to closing the border, border officials have stopped implementing credible fear interviews for asylum claims and are working to quickly expel foreign nationals who cross between ports of entry. Migrants expelled under the order will receive a minimum 5-year ban to re-entry and potentially face criminal prosecution. There will be limited exceptions for unaccompanied minors, victims of human trafficking, and individuals who have made asylum appointments through the CBP One app.

These new asylum rules add a complicated layer to existing asylum law and both the 2023 rule and the 2024 order have been challenged in court as unlawful. In the meantime, they challenge existing law that allows asylum seekers to pursue their claims regardless of their means of entry.

Oftentimes we hear about immigrants “getting in line” to come to the United States, but in many cases, there is no line for them. There are four main ways to immigrate to the U.S.:

• Family Sponsor

• Employer Sponsor

• Humanitarian Protection (such as the refugee resettlement program, applying for asylum, or receiving humanitarian parole)

• Winning the Diversity Visa Lottery

Most people in the world do not qualify to enter the US through these pathways. In fact, of those who do qualify for one of these paths, the wait for a visa is often years or even decades long.

To learn more about these pathways, click the links above or view our Immigration 101 webinar.

There are many legitimate reasons for people to leave their home country, which can include war, persecution, poverty, government corruption, and natural disasters. Before being allowed to apply for asylum, an individual must first pass a credible fear interview showing that they have a valid reason to fear returning to their home country. Refugees and asylum seekers in the U.S. must meet the same legal definition: a person who had to flee their country due to persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group. The countries of origin that had the most asylum cases granted in fiscal year 2022 were China, Venezuela, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Honduras, Afghanistan, Turkey, Russia, and Mexico.

In recent years, we have seen many migrants arriving at the southern U.S. border fleeing gang violence, government corruption, frequent climate disasters, and fragile economies. The pandemic further weakened the infrastructure of countries where people already struggled to get by, and many see migration as their only hope for a better future. While many of those seeking safety at the U.S. border may have a path to seek asylum, there are also many who flee similarly dangerous situations but who do not qualify for asylum under its current definition and will likely have their cases denied.

Immigration is a complex legal process with outcomes that vary widely based on an individual’s personal circumstances. This Immigration Primer from the Evangelical Immigration Table explains the basics of how immigration works and provides links to further reading resources. The key terms found in our Glossary are a great place to start as you begin learning more about immigration.

We also encourage you to watch the recording of our Immigration 101 webinar, where we partnered with an immigration attorney to cover the basics of immigration.

Standing with the vulnerable does not need to be an “either/or” choice. Rather than viewing our resources with a scarcity mindset, we can approach the needs of those both within and outside our borders with compassion and creativity. There is room at the table for our neighbors experiencing homelessness, those in the U.S. foster care system, those wounded by systemic injustice and also for immigrants seeking refuge. 

When each follower of Jesus uses their unique gifts to promote the wellbeing of our neighbors, we can accomplish more than one goal at a time. We can help our fellow U.S citizens AND have better immigration policies that promote human flourishing for all.

Birthright citizenship (which means that all children born in the United States are U.S. citizens) is a longstanding principle of American democracy, laid out in the first sentence of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Since 1898, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that this clause applies to children born on U.S. soil, regardless of the immigration status of their parents.

On January 20th, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order seeking to reinterpret the 14th amendment. If allowed to become statute, the order would prevent U.S. citizenship from being granted to children whose parents are not legal, permanent residents of the United States.

This order takes an extreme approach to ending birthright citizenship, intending to prevent this right from being given even to some children whose parents are in the United States legally but on a temporary basis (eg, a student visa). The order was placed on hold after several lawsuits were filed against it, and babies born in the U.S. continue to be U.S. citizens. This is a legal battle experts expect to eventually be decided by the Supreme Court.

Why it matters: “Birthright citizenship is one of the characteristics that makes the United States exceptional… For nearly two and a half centuries, the United States has moved ever closer to realizing the ideals of the Declaration of Independence. Now is not the time to retreat.” - Linda Chavez, senior fellow at the National Immigration Forum.

“Birthright citizenship promotes integration, and it strengthens our nation and communities. It’s one of the things that makes America exceptional: If you’re born here, you belong here.” - Jennie Murray, CEO of the National Immigration Forum

Click here to learn more about birthright citizenship.

Dreamers and DACA recipients are both immigrants who were brought to the United States as children. 

A Dreamer is an undocumented immigrant who was brought to the United States as a child. The name “DREAMer'' originated from the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act, a bill that has been introduced in Congress in several forms since 2001 but has never passed. Although “Dreamer” is a name often given to undocumented youth and now adults, it does not confer any legal status or pathway to permanent residency or citizenship.

A DACA recipient is a Dreamer who has applied for and received relief through Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). DACA was implemented in June 2012 and is aimed at protecting qualifying young undocumented immigrants who came to the U.S. as children, temporarily shielding them from deportation and providing them work authorization with possible renewal every two years. DACA protections are not written into law and can be challenged or revoked by the administration or courts, and DACA recipients continue to lack legal status and a pathway to citizenship.

Continue reading...

There is currently no pathway for Dreamers to apply for citizenship. Instead, they have to renew their DACA status every two years, paying almost $500 for each renewal. There are many other restrictions for Dreamers that limit their ability to thrive. They cannot vote, often do not qualify for higher education scholarships and cannot travel outside of the United States.

Both refugees and asylum seekers must meet the same definition of fleeing persecution due to race, national origin, religion, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. While the two groups flee their homes for similar reasons, they arrive in the U.S. through different means.

Continue reading...

Seeking asylum is a legal right. The terminology and processes are complicated, so let’s break down some key points to understand who asylum seekers are and how they access protection in the United States.

Continue reading...

We often see that when there is an increase in "family unit" encounters with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at the southern border, questions often arise about the legitimacy of these families. Reports about family fraud are not included in the standard monthly data provided to the public by CBP, making it hard to verify information. However, Kids in Need of Defense (KIND), a nonprofit organization that works closely with at-risk children at the border, published a helpful report that examines some of those questions. Pages 5-7 of the report address claims about "fake families" and alleged “recycling rings.” 

While this report is a few years old, the patterns of questions and the data shared are very relevant to the conversations that we hear today. The data shows that while there have always been some cases of people bringing children across the border who are not their children, most of the time they are non-parental family members who are caretakers for the child, not those with nefarious intentions. According to the research from KIND, most "family fraud" cases have historically involved false documents, not false claims to parentage. There hasn’t been any publicly available data to support claims of a widespread phenomenon of groups falsely claiming to be families in order to cross the border today, either. When we hear shocking claims like this, it’s important to take a look at information from trusted sources to examine whether these claims are based on facts or speculation.

Appearance rates in immigration court can vary for a multitude of reasons, but studies show that most asylum applicants attend their court hearings. A 2020 study from the University of Pennsylvania Law Review found that 95% of individuals who applied for asylum or other forms of relief from removal between 2008-2018 attended all of their court hearings. 

Having an immigration attorney makes a significant difference in court appearance rates. A 2019 study from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) of about 47,000 newly arriving family members found that families without legal representation appeared in court at a rate of 76%. However, 99% of those with legal representation attended all court hearings. 

The implementation of the Migrant Protection Protocols in December 2018 made it much harder for immigrants to attend all of their hearings due to the requirement that they wait in Mexico. This caused difficulties in securing legal representation, receiving notices to appear, and challenges in physically making it to court due to the danger and instability of border encampments. TRAC found in 2019 that 89% of those who were allowed to remain in the United States rather than Mexico attended every court hearing.

It’s not possible to seek asylum from your home country. According to U.S. law, you must be physically present in the United States or at a port of entry to apply for asylum.

There are many reasons why people seek asylum, including violence, government corruption and religious persecution. Refugees and asylum seekers meet the same definitions according to the persecution that they face but are processed through different methods. Asylum seekers ask for asylum upon or after arriving, while refugees have already applied and been approved by an agency such as UNHCR before being resettled to a safe third country, such as the United States. 

Asylum seekers must prove their case either to a trained USCIS officer or an immigration judge, and the bar for winning an asylum case is very high. They must prove that they have experienced persecution or that they have a “well-founded fear” of being persecuted if returned to their home country. Most asylum seekers will not ultimately be granted asylum. Over 70% of asylum cases were denied during fiscal year 2020.

We believe that in the ideal world, everyone would be safe to stay in their home rather than needing to flee to another country for refuge. In some cases it is possible for refugees to repatriate and return to their homes -- after a war or famine ends, for example -- but in many cases that is not possible. We support measures to provide aid and support to countries in crisis to allow them to rebuild and create a safe environment for their citizens. When that is not possible, we support a robust refugee and asylum system to welcome those who truly have no safe home to return to. 

As long as there are citizens who can’t trust their government to provide safety and stability, migration will be a necessity. To combat some of the instability in Central America, President Biden has tasked Vice President Harris with the task of addressing root causes of migration. Vice President Harris has already begun meeting with these governments and the latest budget proposal sent to Congress includes a request for increased aid to the struggling region. There are also non-profit organizations, such as ASJ Honduras and WOLA, that work to combat corruption and offer support in these countries.

Other recent efforts to provide greater support in Central America include the launch of “safe mobility offices” in Colombia, Guatemala, and Costa Rica in 2023. These regional processing centers have two main goals:

1. To identify and refer refugees from the Western Hemisphere for potential resettlement, and

2. To create sites for sharing credible information with those on the journey with the hopes of deterring irregular migration when individuals have no real path to immigrate. 

Staff at the centers may also screen applicants for potential relocation to other safe countries, such as Canada or Spain. 

At this stage of implementation, there are differing eligibility criteria and processes based on the country where the office is located, but all of the countries are limited to serving individuals from a list of Latin American countries. Other asylum seekers, such as those from Asia or Africa, would not be eligible. It’s encouraging to see more resources directed toward refugee resettlement in the Western Hemisphere, as well as greater efforts to provide clarity to migrants who may be unsure what their immigration options are. We applaud these efforts, while also calling on the Biden administration to continue expanding legal pathways for migration.

One of the many reasons that often force people to flee their home countries is a lack of secure systems that provide help. Most countries are either dealing with one or multiple of the following issues: war, famine, gang violence, economic crises and government corruption. In many cases people flee not just because their government cannot help them but because their government is actively oppressing them. This is one reason why many policy experts are focused not just on immigration reform, but also on addressing the root causes of migration.

There can be many reasons for making this decision, but a recent driver of the high number of unaccompanied children arriving at the border was the Title 42 Policy. While family units were turned away under this public health order, unaccompanied children were exempt, which created an incentive for parents to send their children alone so that they would not be turned away.

It’s also important to note that every family has a different situation, and in many cases, the parent is not sending the child across the border at all. Not all of the children legally deemed by CBP agents as “unaccompanied” arrived at the border alone. If a child is apprehended at the border with a family member who is not their parent or legal guardian (such as a grandparent or an aunt), they are separated from that person and deemed “unaccompanied.” In some cases the children embark on the journey alone or in groups in an effort to reunite with their parents who are already in the United States. According to ORR records from 2019, 86% of unaccompanied children arrived when they were between the ages of 13 and 17.

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is a designation provided by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to certain individuals who are already in the U.S. and come from countries that are facing conditions or circumstances that prevent their safe return. These conditions could include ongoing armed conflict, environmental disasters, an epidemic, or extraordinary and temporary conditions such as unstable political or economic circumstances. As of March 31, 2024, approximately 863,880 people are living in the U.S. under TPS. 

Continue reading…

A common argument for exclusionary immigration policies is that immigrant workers take jobs from Americans and harm the US economy. But economic experts argue that immigrants are essential in the American workplace.

In recent months, we’ve seen public statements from the Labor Secretary and the Federal Reserve Chairman warning that our severe restrictions on immigration in recent years have harmed the economy. As Labor Secretary Martin Walsh told the Wall Street Journal, "The threat to the American economy long-term is not inflation, it's [about] immigration. It's not having enough workers."

A 2022 study from IZA Institute of Labor Economics found that reduced refugee resettlement and increased bars for asylum seekers in recent years has resulted in a loss to the US economy of billions of dollars each year. According to the study, the drastic cuts to the US refugee admissions program since 2017 has cost the economy over $9.1 billion per year. Researchers found that “these estimates imply that barriers to migrants seeking protection, beyond humanitarian policy concerns, carry substantial economic costs.”

Immigrants and refugees are worth far more than the sum of their economic impact, but it’s worth remembering that policies of exclusion hurt American citizens, too.

There are many different types of worker visas for those wishing to come to the U.S. for either temporary or long-term employment. It’s important to understand that not all worker visas are immigrant visas. Some people arrive with nonimmigrant visas, which allow entry for a designated period of time, but do not include a path to permanent residence.

There are many different types of work visas, but we’ll briefly list who qualifies for some of the most common (this list is not exhaustive).

These visa categories are extremely limited. About 140,000 are available each year, including the spouses and children of applicants. There are also special labor certification requirements for employers seeking to hire workers with EB-2 and EB-3 visas.

Source: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/employment-based-visa-categories-united-states & https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/permanent-workers 

While H-2A visas do not currently have an annual cap, H-1B and H-2B visas are limited. The duration of the visas also vary by visa type, and for H-2A visas the duration will vary based on the seasonal work provided by the employer.

Source: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/employment-based-visa-categories-united-states & https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-nonimmigrant-workers 

Immigrants provide a net positive economic impact to the United States. As our population is aging and our birth rates continue to decline, it would be better for our economy if we allowed considerably more immigrants into our country. 

Immigrants contribute to our economy in many positive ways. Studies from New American Economy in 2019 showed that  immigrants paid $492 billion in taxes and immigrant entrepreneurs generated $88.5 billion in income.  In 2016, 30% of new entrepreneurs were immigrants, despite the fact that they only made up 14% of the U.S. population. Almost 45% of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or the children of immigrants. When we welcome new talent into our country, everyone benefits.

There is no evidence to support the idea that immigrants are a strain on public services. While there are some immigrants, such as refugees and asylees (those who have already received asylum), who qualify for some government aid, those still in the asylum process are not eligible. Also, family members who sponsor immigration for their relatives must agree to take responsibility for them financially in the event they need it.

The majority of illicit drugs, including fentanyl, are smuggled through the border via official U.S. points of entry.  Consistently over time the data shows that these drugs are brought in by legal immigrants or U.S. citizens using their personal or commercial vehicles rather than those apprehended crossing illegally between ports of entry. While some of the drugs are apprehended at the border checkpoints or points of entry, staffing shortages and less than adequate screening technologies continue to expose border vulnerabilities. Re-allocating funds to modernize infrastructure and enhance security at our points of entry can resolve these issues.

Refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants are all heavily vetted, but refugees go through an especially strenuous vetting process. This extensive and thorough process is a coordinated effort between multiple U.S. government agencies under the Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), an agency under the Department of Homeland Security, facilitates the immigration process. By law, the agency is required to both protect the American public from threats to public safety and national security and fulfill its obligation under U.S. law to assist those fleeing persecution. 

This fact sheet from USCIS provides information about security screening and background checks required by the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), and this infographic from the White House archives shows the many steps of multi-agency cooperation that occur during refugee resettlement.

The Department of State (DOS) is the managing agency that coordinates with several other government and non-government partners to facilitate the USRAP. USCIS is responsible for the interviewing and application processing for all refugees that enter the U.S. and currently conducts all interviews in person. They are supported in this process with information and assistance from multiple federal intelligence, counterterrorism, and law enforcement agencies.

While the screening process is not the same for all immigration avenues, it’s worth noting that studies show that immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native-born US Citizens. There is no logical basis or evidence to say that immigrants create a security risk.

Check out our free infographic.

Often the news reported about the U.S.-Mexico border is inflammatory, and it’s difficult to know if the numbers being shared by reporters or politicians are accurate. However, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) provides monthly data that can add context to these reports.

Before we get to the data, first let’s take a look at some of the terminology used to describe border crossings. Sometimes the numbers are described by the media as “arrests,” but it’s important to note that the numbers reported by CBP are encounters. These encounters include apprehensions by Border Patrol, Title 42 expulsions, and also those who were deemed inadmissible [1] at ports of entry by the Office of Field Operations. Many of these encounters do not involve detention or an arrest. They also do not always involve an illegal border crossing.

Continue reading...

While existing asylum law allows someone to apply for asylum regardless of their immigration status, a couple of policies implemented by the Biden administration have created additional barriers for many asylum seekers.

Under the “Circumvention of Lawful Pathways” rule enacted in May 2023, most asylum seekers would be presumed ineligible for asylum unless they or an accompanying family member have either:

• Received advance permission to travel to the U.S. through a DHS-approved parole process,

• Used a DHS-approved system such as the CBP One phone app to schedule an appointment in advance at a port of entry, or

• Have already sought and been denied protection in another country while in transit to the United States.

Furthermore, in June 2024 the Biden administration released a presidential proclamation that closes the southwest U.S. border to migrants crossing between ports of entry when the number of such crossings reaches a 7-day average of 2,500, and would not reopen the border until the numbers dip below an average of 1,500 crossings per day for one week. The average crossings at the time of the announcement were already at that 2,500 threshold, causing the order to go into immediate effect. In addition to closing the border, border officials have stopped implementing credible fear interviews for asylum claims and are working to quickly expel foreign nationals who cross between ports of entry. Migrants expelled under the order will receive a minimum 5-year ban to re-entry and potentially face criminal prosecution. There will be limited exceptions for unaccompanied minors, victims of human trafficking, and individuals who have made asylum appointments through the CBP One app.

These new asylum rules add a complicated layer to existing asylum law and both the 2023 rule and the 2024 order have been challenged in court as unlawful. In the meantime, they challenge existing law that allows asylum seekers to pursue their claims regardless of their means of entry.