A new Department of Homeland Security rule will allow asylum applications to be referred directly to immigration judges, a change officials say is intended to reduce delays and prevent applicants from using the system to prolong their stays or obtain work authorization.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
The Trump administration announced Monday that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will be permitted to send certain asylum applications directly to immigration court without first conducting an interview with the applicant, marking a significant change in how claims are processed.
The new procedure is intended to reduce the government’s asylum backlog and eliminate what the Department of Homeland Security described as a duplicative review process that effectively gives some applicants two opportunities to pursue the same claim.
Under the existing system, USCIS may either decide an asylum application itself or refer the case to an immigration judge after interviewing the applicant. The revised process will allow the agency to bypass that interview and place the claim directly before a judge for adjudication.
DHS said in a Monday press release that the current structure can provide applicants with a de facto “second chance at asylum” by allowing the matter to proceed through both administrative and judicial review.
USCIS Director Joseph Edlow said the change would allow the agency to focus its personnel and resources on applicants with legitimate protection claims.
“For far too long, the asylum system has been exploited for purposes of delay and work authorization, not legitimate claims of protection,” Edlow said. “America’s asylum system exists to protect individuals who genuinely fear persecution and this rule will help ensure that resources are directed to the timely adjudication of these claims instead of those seeking to use the system as a loophole.”
Asylum allows foreign nationals to request protection in the United States by asserting that they face persecution or a credible threat of persecution if returned to their country of origin.
The process has become one of the most frequently used avenues through which illegal immigrants seek temporary protection or eventual legal status after entering the United States. Applicants may remain in the system for extended periods while their claims are reviewed, particularly when cases move through multiple stages of adjudication.
Administration officials have argued that long processing times, access to work authorization and repeated procedural reviews have encouraged applicants without valid persecution claims to use asylum filings as a means of delaying removal.
The new rule is designed to shorten that timeline by placing cases before immigration judges earlier in the process. Those judges will remain responsible for determining whether applicants meet the legal standard for asylum.
The change does not eliminate an applicant’s ability to present a claim or receive a judicial decision. It instead removes the requirement that USCIS conduct an initial interview before referring some cases to immigration court.
The administration’s broader immigration strategy also includes President Donald Trump’s Remain in Mexico policy, which requires certain migrants who cross the southern border illegally to wait in Mexico while their asylum cases are pending.
Under that policy, applicants are not routinely released into the U.S. interior during the adjudication process. Supporters say the approach reduces incentives for migrants to file weak claims in order to gain entry and remain in the country for months or years.
The asylum overhaul reflects the administration’s effort to distinguish between individuals facing genuine persecution and those officials say are using the process to delay deportation or obtain employment eligibility.
USCIS did not specify how many pending applications could be affected by the revised referral procedure or how quickly the change would reduce the existing backlog. The agency said its goal is to accelerate legitimate claims while preventing the system from being used as a procedural loophole.
Original article
Comments