A Quick Fix to the Immigrant Caravans Crisis

Esta entrada contiene una propuesta para darle una salida al problema de las caravanas masivas de inmigrantes de Centroamérica que están inundando Ciudad Juárez en grandes números y que al paso que vamos van a terminar reventando la economía de la ciudad porque no se cuenta con la infraestructura ni los recursos para dar alojamiento y atender las necesidades básicas de los miles de indocumentados cuya llegada ya empezó, y como la propuesta se refiere a una acción que no depende de las autoridades en México sino de las autoridades norteamericanas la entrada ha sido redactada en Inglés. De cualquier modo, con los recursos del  navegador Chrome de Google se puede traducir al Español todo lo que se se ha puesto abajo en Inglés.

ABSTRACT: A proposal given here reflects the conviction that all of the current undocumented immigrants coming from Central America should state their asylum claims before they reach U.S. soil, in a process that would somehow resemble the refugee application process. A model is proposed here for a document that could be implemented for such purpose.

When the first large waves of undocumented illegal migrants started flooding the southwestern border in 2012, the Obama administration established in 2014 the Central American Minors (CAP) Refugee Parole Program, which allowed them to apply for refugee status within their own countries. That allowed Central American minors to submit their claims, and learn their fate, without having to make the dangerous trek to the U.S. border. laHowever, that program was terminated by the current administration, and there is nothing left to replace it.

By now, everybody knows or is aware that in 2018 there was surge in the number of undocumented aliens entering the continental USA, grouped into large numbers of people numbering in the thousands, coming mostly from Honduras and Guatemala. It has been argued that most of those who are part of such caravans are no political refugees who are fleeing persecution in their home countries because of their political or religious beliefs, but are just freeloaders who are attempting to take up permanent residence in the USA solely to flee from poverty in their countries, economic refugees who are unwilling to take their turn in the long queue of those applying for legal entry into the USA and who have no remorse in circumventing those who are applying for legal entry. President Barack Obama once said at a now forgotten news conference: “We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently and lawfully to become immigrants into this country”. When he said so during his tenure, the phenomenon of massive caravans of people more than ready to use and abuse the asylum policies of the USA did not exist. During his time in office, there were no large groups of undocumented illegal aliens from Homduras overrunning the Southern border of Guatemala in order to force their entry into Guatemala and later on into Mexico and defy the Mexican authorities in order to walk all the way to the US-Mexico border with the intention of doing the same thing they did at the Mexico-Guatemala border, forcing their entry into the USA with their large numbers.

Interestingly, there is a quick fix to this challenge to authorities that could have been applied months ago by the US government and which could be applied right now, but is not even being mentioned. It sounds so simple it is almost inconceivable that it was not put into practice months ago before the problem of massive influx of caravans of undocumented aliens numbering in the thousands exploded. The fix can be stated in the following simple terms:

Any person seeking asylum in the USA with the granting of permanent residence status must first file an application in a US Consulate (like the US Consulate in Tijuana) or US Embassy in his/her country of origin. Upon filing his/her application, the asylum seeker will be given a date for an interview with a consular officer who will, based upon the information given to the US Consulate by the asylum seeker, grant a Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum purposes (TPLERA) where his/her request for asylum will be given follow up by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and almost surely an Immigration Judge. Those asylum seekers outside the USA who have not previously received from a US Consulate of a US Embassy in their countries of origin a valid Temporary Permit for Legal Entry for Request for Asylum purposes into the USA and who are not the bearers of such Temporary Permit for Legal Entry for asylum request purposes will be deported back immediately to their countries of origin instructing them to file their applications in their home countries and thereafter patiently wait in line for their turn according to the interview date that may be given to them by a Consular official in case their application is accepted.

Before throwing away this idea to the trash can, it is worth to list some of the benefits to put it into effect:

1. The procedure given above is FAIR in that it essentially puts all of the asylum seekers on an equal footing with those non-asylum seekers who are applying for legal permanent residence status in the USA without resorting to the asylum claim. It forces everyone to take his/her turn on the long waiting lines at Consular offices. It forces all those in a would-be-caravan of asylum seekers to stand in line, take their number and wait for their turn.
2. It is FAR LESS EXPENSIVE to do the above than to keep on doing things the way they are being done right now (the current expensive status quo is simply letting undocumented asylum seekers pour in unchecked in large numbers) and no massive expenditures are needed abroad, since US Consulates and Embassies outside the USA already have experienced staff and office space and procedures and data processing equipment for the handling of those applying for legal permanent residence, and extending their reach to take care not just of legal permanent residence seekers but also of asylum seekers entails up sizing what they already have in place instead of having to create something new entirely from scratch.
3. This proposal MEETS CURRENT JURISDICTION AND LEGISLATION. First and foremost, asylum seekers do not have any US Constitution given-right to demand that their request for asylum be processed inside the continental USA (i.e., in US territory), any more than those filing for lawful permanent residence have any right to receive entry into the USA during the time their application is being processed at the US Consulate in their country of origin. The current status quo is unfair in that it gives asylum seekers priorities and privileges not being received by those who are trying to obey the law. Also, it can be further argued that, under international law, the piece of land where a US Embassy is located in another country is a sovereign extension of the USA itself, receiving and processing the asylum application of a seeker of asylum in another country (e.g. the US Embassy in Honduras or the US Embassy in Guatemala) is as equally valid legally and acceptable as if the asylum application was to be processed inside the continental USA itself. This essentially does away with the need to make an undocumented travel from El Salvador or Honduras all the way to the USA across several countries, since the asylum seeker's claim can equally be received and processed legally in his/her country of origin.
4. BONA FIDE ASYLUM SEEKERS CAN BE MORE EASILY AND QUICKLY WEEDED OUT FROM OTHERS WHO ARE MERELY ECONOMIC REFUGEES. It is lots tougher for an immigration judge inside the continental USA to decide whether an asylum petition is a valid petition coming from one who deserves it, i.e. a person fleeing from persecution because of his political/religious beliefs, and not just a request coming from an economic refugee or even worse, someone who is fleeing from the law in his/her country of origin. Any US Consular officer living in another country like Honduras is certainly much more aware of who are those who are bona fide refugees than a US Immigration judge who lives in the USA in the Bronx or in Colorado far far away from Honduras, and the US Consular officer living and working in a foreign country such as Honduras is in better shape to tell apart those who are lying just to get an easy entry into the USA which otherwise they would not receive, from those who hide in large caravans because they are unfit to receive legal entry into the USA.
5. PROPOSAL GIVES CREDIT TO THE TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE OF CONSULAR OFFICIALS. In each country such as Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, there is already a pool of US Consular officers who have ample experience in the approval or disapproval of those applying for legal immigration into the USA. Letting them take care of would-be asylum seekers would give them an opportunity to either accept a valid request or turn down right there on the spot an application unworthy of consideration.
6. CONFIDENCE ON DATABASE OF ALL ASYLUM SEEKERS CAN BE VASTLY INCREASED. By the mere simple fact of requiring all asylum seekers to previously file an application in their country of origin such as Honduras, much more detailed information can be obtained from them right there on the spot than after they have left the country, and by follow up checks it can be determined whether they lied whey they first filed the asylum application in their country of origin. Since in the filing of an asylum application into the USA in their countries of origin they would have to provide information such as names of parents, spouses, children, phone numbers, addresses, etc., information that can be easily checked by US Consular officials, such information might later on prove to be extremely valuable to US law enforcement agencies. The current status quo impedes or obstructs this possibility thus endangering the USA.
7. PROPOSAL MAKES CARAVANS COMPLETELY OBSOLETE. If even before embarking on a long journey all the way to the continental USA, the asylum seeker finds out that his application has been rejected by the US Consulate of Embassy in his/her country of origin, joining a caravan would be just wasted time and money.
8. LARGE CARAVANS IMPOSSIBLE TO FORM UNDER THE GUIDELINE. Since applications for asylum entry into the continental USA would be handled outside the USA in some US Consulate or US Embassy on a first come first serve basis, and the scheduled appointments would be granted randomly at the criterion of each Consulate/Embassy, this would have the effect of granting appointments to those seeking asylum at different times in different days in different weeks in different months, instead of gathering many (thousands?) of them at the same time on the same day by means of cell social networks, making it impossible for large caravans to form. With large caravans no longer being able to be formed in a matter of just a few days, the caravans crisis can quickly become a thing of the past. This in turn can be far more effective in controlling the borders and preserving the sovereignty of the USA than a big Chinese Wall type of fence.
9. NEW PENALTIES TO THOSE BREAKING THE IMMIGRATION LAWS CAN BE APPLIED AND ENFORCED. By the mere application of some severe penalty (such as the inhabilitation from five to ten years of being able to apply for a Temporary Permit for Legal Entry for Request for Asylum purposes) in case of being caught while attempting illegal entry into the USA, asylum seekers would be discouraged from joining large caravans of undocumented immigrants for, if they are caught by the US Border Patrol, they would be unable to file an application for asylum entry for a long time at the Consulate or Embassy in their countries of origin, which is a stiff price to pay for attempting to break the law. This is an enticement to do things legally. At present, there is no such enticement.
10. FAR BETTER CONTROL OF THE WEEKLY OR MONTHLY NUMBER OF ASYLUM SEEKERS ENTERING THE USA
    By sharing the numbers sent from US Consulates from all around the world (especially from Latin America) of all asylum request applications that have been accepted, computer modelling can be used for the granting of appointment schedules. Thus, instead of having a rush of 500 applications processed on one day, and none in the next day, by simple computer real-time modelling the appointment schedules can be distributed in such a way that there will be 250 applications processed one day, and the other 250 applications processed the following day. At present, such a thing is not being done and cannot be applied, with the ensuing chaos and loss of control.
11. TEMPORARY PERMIT CAN BE MADE UNFORGERABLE AT A VERY LOW COST. The probabillity that a Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum purposes (TPLERA) card could be forged or used by look-alikes can be reduced all the way down to zero at a very low cost, this in case one such document is ever lost or stolen. Why? Because a proven and well tested technology for such purposes already exists, it is the one implemented on all B1/B2 Border Crossing Cards currently being used daily by hundreds of thousands of Mexicans who cross the US-Mexico international bridges, and to date not a single unauthorized individual has been able to gain entry into the USA through a US Customs/Immigration port of entry by using someone else's laser visa, a document considered the world's most counterfeit resistant card and now a textbook example of case studies in biometric machine-readable ID. Furthermore, the electronically encrypted data, unbreakable for all practical purposes, can be taken in by card readers that instantly connect with the large database used by the US Immigrarion authorities and law enforcement agencies, instantly providing feedback in the field to agents of all US federal agencies regarding the status of the TPLERA Permit Holder using one such document. The degree of security provided is comparable to the currently available in ordinary US credit/debit cards, and the reliability and confidence in such technology as well as its low implementation cost allows every Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum purposes (TPLERA) document to be valid and useable only by the person to whom it was issued, and no one else.
12. THE US CONSULATE-ISSUED TEMPORARY ENTRY PERMITS FOR ASYLUM REQUEST PURPOSES CAN ACTUALLY IMPROVE THE SAFETY OF ALL ASYLUM SEEKERS ON THEIR JOURNEY TO THE USA. Thousands of undocumented Central America immigrants pouring into Mexico on their way to the USA are currently receiving from the Mexican government so-called humanitarian visas valid for one year that not only allow them to stay in the country but even allow them to seek employment in Mexico, thus  encouraging caravan migrants to stay and work while they figure out a way to break into the USA. These Mexican documents, not being issued in the countries of origin of the petitioners of asylum, are a far cry from the close inspection that should be given to any asylum petition, and many of the holders of such visas are as unreliable as they can be. However, as soon as Temporary Permits for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum purposes (TPLERA) begin to be issued, the unreliable Mexican humanitarian visas issued on the spot at the Mexico-Guatemala border entries would quickly be replaced by the much more reliable US Consulates-issued documents, and such US Temporary Permits may prove extremely useful to Mexican authorities as a worthwhile aid for blocking entry into Mexico of those who are not the bearers of such document. The Mexican government may actually be convinced that the Temporary Permits are a much more reliable means of identification of all would-be asylum seekers who want a safe passage through Mexico on their journey to the USA, thereby improving their safety including the safety of the children they might bring along.

There are still more advantages and benefits on requiring all Latin American asylum seekers to first file a request for a Temporary Permit for Legal Entry for Request for Asylum TPLERA purposes at the US Consulates and Embassies in their countries of origin. I'm sure the reader can guess them out.


What information would the Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum contain?


Assuming that a US Consular officer has determined that the request for asylum of an asylum seeker is a valid petition and not just a request coming from an economic refugee who merely wants to improve his/her economic well being, and has determined that such person is elegible to receive a Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum TPLERA, the following question now arises: what information would the Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum contain? From something that is already in place and has been used for years, there is a quick and easy answer to such question:

Each Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum TPLERA would contain exactly or at least the same information such as the one displayed on each individually issued Border Crossing Cards (known as the B1/B2 visa):

In other words, each Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum TPLERA card or document given by a US Consular officer to an asylum seeker would at the very least have up front and clearly displayed the photograph of the holder of such Permit, it would also have his/her legal name in full, it would have the expiration date of the Permit, and it would contain electronically encoded data with the fingerprints of such person, and the clearly displayed warning that such document cannot be used to seek and find employment inside the USA. Enough information so that in case something happens to the holder of the Permit while in the USA after arriving and entering into the continental USA, or in case a holder of such Permit breaks the law and commits a very serious crime, US authorities such as the US Border Patrol, the FBI and the DEA can track him down and know whom to contact in the country of origin of such asylum seeker (Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, etc.) in case something has happened to the holder of the permit after arriving and entering into the USA (e.g. an accident, a stroke, a heart attack, etc.) or in case such person has committed a serious crime (murder, drug trafficking, kidnapping, etc.)

It must be remarked that, in the US border with Mexico, ALL law-abiding Mexican citizens who live in bordering cities such as Tijuana and Ciudad Juárez (numbering in the millions) are required by law to be the holders of a document such as the Border Crossing Card (no exceptions allowed at present!) in case they want to enter into the USA even if only for a couple of hours to do some shopping. Otherwise, they are barred from entry into the USA. Below is a snapshot of a US Immigration agent at a checkpoint where he is verifying the legal entry into the USA of a Border Crossing Card holder after he has slided the laser visa through the scanner (the white rectangular shaped box) on his desk:

Below is the photo of yet another US Immigration agent also equipped to scan Border Crossing Card (with minimal changes, he could also be prepared to quickly scan a Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum TPLERA):

If technology already available and the human staff already available are not being used in the manner proposed here to better control the caravans of tens of thousands of undocumented migrants who are attempting night and day to force their entry into the USA, it could be because of...????

In requiring ALL asylum seekers from countries such as Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador to be the bearers of a Permit akin to a Border Crossing Card, they would be forced to comply with a regulation that is already being enforced and obeyed by millions of Mexican citizens living along the US-Mexico border, and thus the enforced requirement of a previously issued Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum TPLERA cannot be considered as a human rights violation, not even by UN standards. If it were so, then all of the millions of holders of US government issued B1/B2 cards (known colloquially as laser visas) would have had their human rights violated, and to date not a single person has ever made any such claim, nor has this requirement from the US government ever been challenged in a US court.

There is also a health issue involved. People from Central America or South America demanding asylum in the continental USA could even be required at their countries of origin while applying for a Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum purposes TPLERA, before going and being admitted into the USA, to undergo health screening to ensure they are free of some contagious disease (such as TB, HIV/AIDS, chicken pox, lice, hepatitis, smallpox, scabies and leprosy) that could end up as a health crisis and perhaps even as an epidemic in the continental USA after their unchecked arrival (most of them come from an endemically poor social economic strata in their home countries and have never been vaccinated against any disease). At present no such safeguards exist, and this could end up becoming a major social issue as time goes by, with corrective measures applied later on proving to be too little too late. It might be remarked that this medical screening is currently being required abroad from all those who are applying for legal immigration into the USA to become permanent residents, and all of those applicants have been complying with none of them ever challenging in court this requirement.

To discourage asylum requests without merit, a processing fee could be applied by the US Consulate or US Embassy for each TPLERA application being filed (the current fee for the processing of a legal Border Crossing Card application is 150 dollars) which would certainly be far far less than the thousands of dollars that are currently being demanded and expected by human traffickers known as coyotes or polleros. Thus if a request for asylum is intrinsically without basis or merit, it will be much less costly for a would-be asylum seeker to find it out by simply filing his/her application at a US Consulate or US Embassy instead of resorting to the services of a coyote whose outrageous fees may range between five thousand and ten thousand dollars. Solely on an economic basis, how can any self-proclaimed NGO Human Rights group object to the implementation of a TPLERA program that can end up saving a lot of money to all those asylum seekers whose applications will eventually turn up being rejected?

It hasn't dawned yet upon many that after the September 11 attacks, going all the way back to 2001, a refugee fleeing from war-ravaged country like Syria or Iraq (and who is desperately trying to save his/her life) cannot simply jump into a plane and fly all the way directly to the USA to request asylum after arrival at an international airport inside the USA. At international airports overseas, there is a procedure known as border preclearance that makes it very hard to simply board a US bound plane with only the travel ticket on hand; and even if some person is not required to have a US visa, such person is still required to have received previously some sort of clearance from something like an ESTA travel authorisation, otherwise such person will not be allowed to board the plane and will have to remain in the country of intended departure. The following snapshots show US agents manning Immigration/Customs inspection stations at the Shannon Airport in Ireland in a section of this airport carved out for the Department of Homeland Security where passengers are screened for explosives and cleared to enter the United States by American Customs and Border Protection officers before boarding (and since the 9/11 attacks security measures have been tightened over and over for US bound flights at international airports around the world):

The above is in sharp contrast with what happens with ALL asylum seekers (in reality, economic refugees) pouring in from Honduras or Guatemala who are simply showing up at the front door in the continental USA demanding asylum and fully expecting to be taken care of in all their needs (food, lodging, medical needs, transportation, etc.) while their asylum request is being processed at some US Court as years go by. Right now, there is not a single US Immigration/Customs agent posted at Honduras or Guatemala or El Salvador checking any of those migrants who end up joining the massive caravans that arrive at the US border with Mexico.

The bottom line is that for any non-US citizen or non-legal US resident it is simply impossible to board a plane at the Heathrow airport in England or the Orly airport in France to travel to the USA for request for asylum purposes, unchecked in some manner by US Customs and Immigration agents posted overseas.

The lack of compliance in the requirement of a previously issued Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum purposes TPLERA, a document that should have been requested from ALL asylum claimants travelling from Central America to the USA and who now enjoy the lack of such requirement versus the difficulties a desperate person leaving war torn Syria or war torn Iraq must face in trying to travel to the USA for true asylum purposes (as opposed to merely seeking to escape poverty by finding a job in the USA) is abysmal. Indeed, it could be considered discriminatory, with the one being discriminated against living on the other side of the world instead of Central America. This unfair and unequal treatment of people clashes with the philosophies of equal opportunity and equal rights, ripping the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by establishing preferences based upon national origin (i.e. one treatment given to persons coming in large caravans from Central America, and a different treatment given to everybody else). Just to cite an example of the effects of differential treatment, the USA recently had admitted only 44 Syrian refugees in half a year. But this is a figure far far less (by several orders of magnitude) than the number of asylum applications that are being processed in the continental USA from caravans of illegal aliens coming from Honduras and Guatemala and El Salvador. Therefore those who were not born in Central America such as Syrians and Iraqis are clearly at a disadvantage as opposed to those born in countries like Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador when trying to seek asylum in the USA.

Applying for a Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum TPLERA at the country of origin of the asylum petitioner

This is a snapshot of the US Embassy in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, where all those would-be members of a caravan would first have to file an application for asylum in the USA before being allowed any kind of entry into the USA:

It is right here where the long journey of all economic refugees (undocumented immigrants) from Honduras to the USA should start. If 10 Temporary Permits for Legal Entry for Request for Asylum purposes TPLERA applications were filed today right now at the above Embassy in Tegucigalpa, twenty more tomorrow, 15 the day after, and ten on each of the following four days, there would be 85 Temporary Permit for Legal Entry for Request for Asylum requests filed after an entire week has gone by. With only 85 Temporary Permit for Legal Entry for Request for Asylum seekers approved and issued for the entire week, it would be impossible for human traffickers to gather enough people in some place (as they usually do) to form a caravan numbering in the thousands as the current status quo now allows. And even if they could somehow gather them together in the attempt to form a caravan of close to a hundred people, it would be futile because it is assumed that each person whose TPLERA application form has been accepted for processing expects to receive (barring coincidences) an entirely different Consular appointment date from the rest of the members of the caravan, and knowing beforehand that none of them will be allowed inside the continental USA unless they have previously filed in their countries of origin and received a TPLERA approval at the US Consulate or US Embassy (after a long wait time), formation of a caravan with such people is automatically made an impossible feat.

Quintessentially, the proposal shown herein makes it no more easy nor more difficult to gain entry into the USA by first applying for a Temporary Permit for Legal Entry for Request for Asylum purposes in the USA than by filing an application for an Immigrant Visa (legal permanent resident) and standing in line waiting for one's turn. At present, legal immigration is being discouraged by the US government itself in countries like Honduras because it is far easier and quicker to enter into the USA simply by jumping the fence and saying "I hereby request asylum" and being taken care of almost immediately at US taxpayers expense than to do it legally from the outset. Levelling the playing field for all parties involved might actually convince asylum seekers to stand in line alongside legal residence (green card) applicants rather than joining all those crazy caravans whose only true beneficiaries in the long run are smugglers and human traffickers who promise a quick entry into the USA with legal permanent residence by merely asking for asylum.

The current chaos is expected to grow much worse in the coming months, since according to a November 2018 State Department’s bulletin, it will take up to 23 years for the U.S. to issue green cards for those in the longest lines; while those who are granted asylum can apply for a green card in just 12 months! And while legal immigrants are required to prove that they can be self-sufficient financially before they are granted a green card; those granted asylum and newly arrived from Honduras and Guatemala and El Salvador do not have to prove they can support themselves financially and will most surely end up taking food stamps, welfare, or Medicaid. Furthermore, while legal immigrants are subject to limited visas, country quotas, and lengthy wait times to sponsor a family member, successful asylum applicants immediately attain asylum status for their spouses and children under the age of 21 — even if they are still living in their home country. And yes, the spouse and children are eligible to apply for their green cards after just 12 months. With such a preferential treatment, why would any Honduran or Guatemalan in his right mind waste any time and money applying for legal immigration entry into the USA since just by saying (after reaching the USA Southern border) the magic word “asylum,” he/she will essentially be given a free pass to the promised land at the same time other not-so-clever immigrants stand in line? The typical Central American asylum seeker knows (after being tipped off by organizations such as Pueblo sin Fronteras that specialize in finding ways to help people circumvent the law) that with the way the US court system treats asylum applicants once they are in the USA, the odds are high that law enforcement and immigration personnel will never see him/her again, having the law breakers been thoroughly informed previously by Pueblo sin Fronteras and the likes that it is far easier to arrive illegally as an undocumented alien at the USA southern border, claim asylum, and enter the country with certain legal protections in place, than it is to legally immigrate into the USA with a visa issued at his/her country of origin. And if any of the small children they bring along with them as pawns die once in the USA, who gets blamed? Not them of course! It is the US government who gets blamed and cursed both inside and outside throughout the entire world. The lax US asylum laws are the very reason why the flow of caravans into the US will not subside in the coming months and will most likely worsen perhaps until something very big and unexpected happens and the whole situation explodes. Already these large groups are becoming more emboldened in their blatant disregard for the law, and recently have been resorting to violence against the Mexican Immigration authorities and even against the US Border Patrol. A former US Attorney General once said: "asylum was never meant to alleviate all problems – even all serious problems – that people face every day all over the world". And if a major human social tragedy occurs, who will end up being blamed? Not them, of course. Take a guess.

A growing number of analysts and academicians agree that asylum laws in the USA were designed to protect political dissidents and those who are truly in danger of speaking out against hostile regimes like the one in Nazi Germany or the former Soviet Union. It was meant to be narrow in scope, admitting small numbers of people who deserved U.S. protection every year. However, it was not meant to be used for the mass migration of unskilled laborers who are simply seeking to escape poverty by finding a job in the USA and sending money back to their home country. Using asylum for this purpose is a blatant abuse of an immigration system and violates the trust of the American public and especially the American taxpayer who has to foot a rapidly increasing bill. A former US Prosecutor General once concluded that most Central American asylum claims were fraudulent attempts to game the system, as he announced new rules limiting the ability of victims of domestic abuse and gang violence to win asylum, stating that "the United States can't accept everyone who has been the victim of any crime". Well, so far he has been proven wrong by the mere lack of the implementation of the Temporary Permit for Legal Entry into the USA for Request for Asylum purposes TPLERA document, or something similar to such document.

At present, the current system now in place is a joke resulting in utter chaos and confusion. And it is very unlikely that the US Congress will come to the rescue given its utter inability to even try to  mend a little bit the current broken immigration system which is being strained to its limits. The solution given above does not entail the passing of new legislation, much less modifying the US Constitution, or dramatically changing the way US Consulates and Embassies operate, it just requires a little bit of good faith and some effort of conscientious citizens to try to at least manage a situation which is right now getting out of control not just in the USA but also in neighboring Mexico where in the long run it could end up collapsing the Mexican democracy thus making applying the above patch much more difficult, perhaps even impossible, too little too late.