For more than three years, the US government has been rejecting migrants, including those seeking asylum, at the US-Mexico border under the Title 42 public health order, which was implemented by the Trump administration during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic and has remained in effect under the Biden administration as well.
Despite the fact that multiple court rulings have addressed Title 42, the Biden administration is currently planning to lift the health directive on May 11.
Here are some essential points about this legislation that you should be aware of.
What is Title 42?
The Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released Title 42, a public health order, in March 2020. The directive authorizes the US government to deport migrants at the border without providing them the opportunity to claim asylum.
The original edict was made in reaction to the COVID-19 epidemic. The CDC claimed that the injunction was required to prevent the virus from spreading. Human rights groups, however, have criticized the decree, claiming that it violates the rights of asylum applicants.
Why was Title 42 activated ?
In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, the Trump administration implemented Title 42 in March 2020. The directive authorizes the US government to deport migrants at the border without providing them the opportunity to claim asylum.
The CDC claimed that the injunction was required to prevent the virus from spreading. Human rights groups have criticized the decree, claiming that it violates the rights of asylum applicants.
The order was due to expire on May 23, 2023, but the Biden administration extended it for 30 days. The order will now expire on June 22, 2023.
The expiration of Title 42 is projected to increase the number of migrants coming at the border. The Biden administration has stated that it is prepared for this rise and that it will try to expedite and humanely process migrants.
Here are a few of the reasons why Title 42 was implemented-
- The Trump administration said that the order was required to stop the spread of COVID-19.
- The directive was designed to reduce the number of people crossing the border.
- The decree was also considered as a means of discouraging migrants from entering the United States.
Human rights groups have criticized the decree, claiming that it violates the rights of asylum applicants. The injunction has also been contested in court, and it remains to be seen if it will be upheld in the end.
Below are some essential points to be aware of regarding Title 42:
- The Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released Title 42, a public health order, in March 2020.
- The directive authorizes the US government to deport migrants at the border without providing them the opportunity to claim asylum.
- The original edict was made in reaction to the COVID-19 epidemic.
- The CDC claimed that the injunction was required to prevent the virus from spreading.
- Human rights groups have criticized the decree, claiming that it violates the rights of asylum applicants.
- The order was due to expire on May 23, 2023, but the Biden administration extended it for 30 days.
- The order will now expire on June 22, 2023.
- The expiration of Title 42 is projected to increase the number of migrants coming at the border.
- The Biden administration has stated that it is prepared for this rise and that it will try to expedite and humanely process migrants.
What is the number of migrants who have been expelled based on Title 42?
Since March 2020, immigration authorities have used this health order over 2.7 million times to deport migrants, some of whom have been deported several times after attempting to cross the southern border into the United States multiple times. According to statistics, the recidivism rate, which refers to the proportion of those caught by the Border Patrol more than once, has climbed from 7% to 27% under Title 42.
Are all migrants removed under Title 42?
No, before a migrant may be expelled under Title 42, their home country or Mexico must agree to receive them. Migrants from Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Venezuela have been accepted by Mexican authorities.
If a migrant suspected of illegally crossing the border cannot be removed under Title 42, immigration officers employ Title 8, the customary process used by Border Patrol personnel.
Undocumented immigrants who seek to enter the nation unlawfully might face criminal charges under Title 8. The charge is usually a misdemeanor, but it can be upgraded to a felony if they have previously been charged with attempting to enter the nation illegally.
What will happen if Title 42 is terminated?
When the administration repeals Title 42 this month, Border Patrol agents will most certainly revert to using Title 8 to control migrants. Previously, the Biden administration devised a six-step approach to go beyond this policy before being barred from doing so by a Louisiana judge last year.
In anticipation of the lifting of Title 42, a public health order employed to expel migrants at the border during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Biden administration has unveiled several modifications to its immigration policy.
These modifications include the vaccination of migrants under federal custody against COVID-19, the deployment of 600 extra U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents along the southwest border, and an expansion of the capacity of federal holding centers from 12,000 to 18,000 individuals.
The administration has also urged migrants to use CBP One, a cell phone-based application that allows people to request asylum from their home countries or from Mexico and schedule an appointment with immigration agents at a U.S. port of entry. Across the expansive 2,000-mile southern border, the application provides a total of 740 daily appointments.
These changes are intended to address the expected increase in migration at the border once Title 42 is lifted. The administration has said that it is committed to processing asylum claims fairly and expeditiously, but it has also warned that it will not tolerate illegal immigration.
The changes to immigration policy have been met with mixed reactions. Some advocates for immigrants have praised the administration for taking steps to address the expected increase in migration, while others have criticized the changes as being too harsh.
It remains to be seen how effective the changes will be in deterring illegal immigration and processing asylum claims fairly and expeditiously.
