Biden Caught Lying About Border?

Gage Skidmore from Peoria, AZ, United States of America, CC BY-SA 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

( – The recent court filing has shed light on the anticipated impact of the Biden administration’s immigration policy, revealing a potential decline in the number of migrants eligible to apply for asylum at the southern border. This development has triggered a wave of criticism from various advocates who have raised concerns about the new “asylum ineligibility” policy. It is now being observed that only 46 percent of single adult migrants who have crossed the U.S. border are considered eligible to pursue asylum. This figure marks a substantial decrease compared to the period spanning from 2014 to 2019 when an estimated 83 percent of migrants had the opportunity to seek asylum.

In response to this controversial policy, immigration advocates, led by the American Civil Liberties Union, have initiated a lawsuit to challenge its validity and potential consequences. While these advocates argue that the policy hinders the rights of asylum seekers, the Biden administration has steadfastly defended its stance, particularly in light of the mounting number of encounters at the border. This influx of migrants has placed an immense strain on border communities, overwhelming their resources and exacerbating existing challenges. As a result, the Department of Homeland Security has resorted to releasing migrants into the country’s interior before their scheduled court dates, as a means to mitigate overcrowding and alleviate pressure on border facilities.

In a court filing made on Friday, Blas Nuñez-Neto, the assistant secretary of border and immigration policy at the DHS, provided a staunch defense of the administration’s asylum policy. Nuñez-Neto asserted that this policy has facilitated a deeper understanding within the DHS regarding the potential consequences faced by individuals who enter the country without proper authorization. Furthermore, he emphasized that the DHS has taken steps to enhance the availability of legal pathways and streamlined processes for noncitizens to lawfully enter the United States. By expanding these alternatives, the administration aims to provide individuals with legitimate means to access the country while maintaining the integrity of the immigration system.

The initial report on this court filing was first brought to public attention by the Los Angeles Times, further igniting the ongoing national conversation surrounding immigration policies and their implications. The debate encompasses concerns ranging from the protection of human rights and the treatment of migrants to the national security considerations and the capacity of border communities to effectively manage the increasing influx of individuals seeking refuge or better opportunities within the United States.

As the legal battle over the Biden administration’s immigration policy unfolds, it remains to be seen how the court will interpret the validity and implications of the “asylum ineligibility” policy. In the meantime, the issue continues to generate significant public discourse, prompting discussions about the delicate balance between border security, humanitarian obligations, and the fair treatment of those seeking asylum in the United States.

Copyright 2023,