Empty Campaign Promises: What Title 42 Says About Democrats’ Commitments
Protestors gather at an immigration rally. Photo by Victoria Pickering.
Venezuela’s rapid economic deterioration and subsequent political turmoil, hyperinflation, and food insecurity have accelerated the world’s second-largest external displacement, with over 6.8 million refugees seeking asylum. As of August 2022, Venezuelans were only second to Mexicans in terms of the largest nationality group crossing the U.S.-Mexico border, leading the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to announce its efforts to curtail illegal crossings.
President Biden’s most recent program includes a restrictive legal avenue for 24,000 qualifying Venezuelans with valid passports and U.S.-based sponsors to enter the U.S. through airports. However, the Biden administration’s concurrent decision to expand Title 42 of the Public Health Services Act, a Trump-era policy preventing migrants from pleading asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border, to Venezuelans is drawing heavy criticism from immigration activists emphasizing the policy’s discriminatory undertones and failed compliance with U.S. refugee law. The administration’s decision to fall back on this historically cruel policy undermines the Democratic Party’s commitment to their humanitarian obligations and reflects a tendency of politicians to take glorified positions on hot-topic issues until actually confronted with them.
On March 20, 2020, the Trump administration effectively set Title 42 into motion—a policy that supports expelling asylum-seekers at U.S. ports of entry without allowing them to contest their expulsion or plead refuge from persecution. Though introduced under the guise of addressing COVID-era public health concerns, this provision of U.S. health law signaled the administration’s long-held commitment to turning away asylum seekers. Public reporting later traced the policy’s origin back to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Trump White House, even noting that though it is under their authority, CDC scientists found no public health rationale to support the invocation of Title 42.
Since March 2020, the policy has facilitated the mass expulsion of asylum seekers, returning over two million to either Mexico or their home country—areas often riddled with human rights abuses and failing governments. Aside from the humanitarian concerns and updated CDC guidelines, the policy has been counterproductive in deterring immigration, considering that following its implementation, one in three individuals apprehended have at least one failed attempt at crossing the border. In short, Title 42 provides no safeguard to public health and undermines the fundamental right to seek asylum.
The Biden administration originally intended to terminate Title 42 on May 23, 2022. However, the policy remained in effect following a Louisiana federal court’s verdict that cited a procedural issue. Around the same time, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the Department of Homeland Security could not expel migrant families under Title 42 “to places where they will be persecuted or tortured.” In theory, this legal rationale and U.S. refugee law oblige the DHS to refrain from returning anyone to a place where they would be subject to persecution. Even then, Customs and Border Protection, the border enforcement sector of DHS, continues rejecting people at U.S. ports of entry without screening for asylum, leaving many vulnerable to an uncertain future. Oddly enough, the Biden administration is involved in ongoing court battles to terminate Title 42, despite currently extending its reach to include Venezuelans.
And that is the problem: the left is quick to proclaim its commitment on critical issues like immigration, but is even faster to turn on its stances and fall short of its promises. Only two years ago, President Biden, who now enables the continued use of his predecessor’s negligent practices, openly criticized the Trump administration’s immigration policies. Just this past summer, the Biden administration and twenty other countries signed the Los Angeles Declaration on Migration and Protection, signaling their intent to implement “humane border management policies and practices” and affirming their shared commitment to “strengthening and expanding regular pathways and access to international protection.”
More recently, the White House disapproved of Republican governors’, Ron DeSantis and Gregg Abbott, politically motivated efforts to send Venezuelan migrants to Democratic strongholds like New York, Chicago, and Washington D.C. in an attempt to draw out liberal hypocrisy. The government’s decision to extend Title 42 contradicts the aforementioned narrative, revealing an administration that aims to check off the bare minimum ahead of the midterm elections.
Granted, the 24,000 visas included in the Biden administration’s recent program, in theory, sound promising—or at the very least, an improvement from previous efforts. However, the magnitude of the Venezuelan crisis, with the 6 million refugees worldwide, renders the policy limited in scope and insufficient in addressing the ongoing displacement. That is not to mention the financial barriers surrounding a policy that favors wealthier individuals with pre-existing ties, those with U.S.-sponsors, and the means to fly northward. Yes, the parole program is a step toward creating safe, legal pathways—but it does not justify simultaneously denying others the right to seek asylum, as enshrined in domestic and international law.
Democrats have long prided themselves in their pro-immigration stance—a platform centered around welcoming those from different nationalities and financial backgrounds, fleeing various degrees of persecution. Now should be no exception. Past the political stunts, anti-immigrant rhetoric, and back-and-forth blame game are those committed to holding the party accountable and protecting individuals’ right to seek asylum. The current immigration crisis is an opportunity for Democrats across the spectrum to coordinate a comprehensive approach, bolster the capacity of the U.S. Refugee Admission, and re-familiarize themselves with the ideals of the base that put them in power.
Monica Vazquez is a first-year at Columbia College, planning to major in Political Science. Her current interests include foreign policy, immigration law, and prison reform.