Recent changes to the asylum system by the Trump administration could send more immigrants to deportation courts, making it more difficult to obtain legal status.
White House says ICE vehicle stops remain a necessary enforcement tool
White House press secretary Caroline Levitt said ICE vehicle stops will continue as authorities respond to recent fatal crashes.
The Trump administration has announced changes to the asylum system that could potentially force hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers into deportation proceedings without an initial interview.
The rule, which went into effect on July 27, eliminates the requirement for trained refugee workers to interview asylum seekers who have entered the country legally or who have not been charged with an immigration violation.
Currently, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which oversees the majority of asylum claims, can send these cases directly to immigration courts for deportation proceedings, which could lead to a surge in deportation orders.
The Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Immigration Services said in a joint statement that the new rules are aimed at reducing significant backlogs in the asylum system, where an estimated 1.4 million applications are pending.
“For too long, the asylum system has been exploited for delays and work authorization rather than legitimate protection claims,” Immigration and Immigration Services Commissioner Joseph Edlow said in a statement.
But immigration law experts criticized the new rules as an attempt to advance the administration’s deportation policies by stripping immigrants already limited protections within the U.S. immigration system.
Ingrid Eagly, an immigration law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the new policy could “prevent people from meaningfully considering their asylum claims” and risks sending credible asylum seekers to immigration courts that reject their claims.
“This (rule) allows you to do that without even allowing people to be interviewed,” he told USA TODAY, highlighting the risks asylum seekers face if they are forcibly returned to the country they fled for fear of persecution.
Trump administration’s thorough efforts to restrict asylum
The sudden rule change is one of the latest moves by the Trump administration to transform the U.S. asylum and immigration process.
Last year, President Donald Trump closed the border to asylum-seekers and suspended refugee programs before lowering the refugee admissions cap from 125,000 to a record-low 7,500. He eventually raised the cap to 17,500 people, but that slot was only given to Afrikaners, South Africa’s white minority.
In recent days, temporary protected status for hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Syrians expired following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that allowed the administration to end the designation for both countries and strip recipients of work permits and protection from deportation.
Meanwhile, immigration courts across the country are increasingly holding “megamaster” hearings, cramming more than 100 immigration cases into a single proceeding. Critics of the tactic describe it as a blunt weapon used to speed up deportations.
Immigration law experts and former U.S. Immigration and Immigration Services officials argue that the rule changes are another route for the administration to turn the U.S. immigration system into a deportation mechanism.
“This is just another way President Trump is making asylum in the United States nearly impossible,” said Ernesto Castaneda, director of the Center for Latin American and Latino Studies at American University. “As a result, there will be more people who are here illegally and who don’t have permission to work here.”
The Trump administration said the asylum process was being used by people without credible claims for protection, work permits or other benefits.
“One of the biggest barriers to effective immigration enforcement is intentional delays by undocumented immigrants and the open border attorneys who represent them,” DHS General Counsel James Percival said in a statement. “My office works with DHS’ Immigration Division every day to improve efficiency and fulfill the President’s mission. The rule will do just that.”
From fact-finding to high-pressure court hearings
Asylum is a form of protection afforded to immigrants who have a well-founded fear of being persecuted in their home country because of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.
Historically, aliens who entered the country legally or who have not been charged with immigration violations have been able to apply for asylum through USCIS and enter the so-called active asylum process. The process has long involved an in-person interview with one of the agency’s trained asylum workers.
These interviews were non-adversarial in nature and provided immigrants an opportunity to discuss their cases and resolve discrepancies in their applications. An asylum officer will then decide whether to grant asylum or refer the case to immigration court for deportation proceedings.
Under the new rules, authorities could bypass the interview process altogether and refer cases directly to immigration courts, creating a more difficult environment for gaining asylum.
Michael Valverde, a former top Immigration and Immigration official who spent several years in the department overseeing asylum applications, said the active asylum program was built primarily on these interviews. He said officers received specialized training on how to scrutinize applications, investigate discrepancies and assess the credibility of asylum seekers.
“This is the basic foundation of an active asylum program,” Valverde said. “This is a big change from that.”
“Every little contradiction counts against you.”
In immigration court, asylum seekers face government lawyers who seek to have their cases dismissed. Experts say the process is overseen by immigration judges appointed by the executive branch, who do not receive specialized training as USCIS asylum officers.
Immigration courts face a massive backlog, with more than 3.5 million cases pending as of late April, including asylum claims referred by USCIS, according to the Office of Immigration Review, part of the Department of Justice.
In recent months, immigration authorities have turned to large-scale hearings to speed up the backlog, with judges hearing more than 100 cases in a single court proceeding. Meanwhile, the administration has made a record hiring spree of immigration judges, many of whom have no clear immigration law experience, according to a Washington Post analysis.
Joseph Perez, a Virginia immigration attorney who represents hundreds of asylum seekers, said aliens who go to immigration court are at a significant disadvantage compared to those who can speak with USCIS asylum officers.
“If you go to court and there is a slight deviation in the documents, the case will be dismissed,” he said. “If this happens in an asylum office, you can resolve the issue or explain it. But in court, every little discrepancy will be used against you.”
Concentrating cases in immigration courts also increases the risk that asylum seekers will be detained for weeks or months while awaiting trial.
Under the Trump administration, detained immigrants are transferred to multiple facilities before appearing before a judge, making it difficult for foreign nationals to handle their cases, especially without a lawyer.
Asylum seekers who are detained and cannot afford legal representation face a challenge some immigration lawyers describe as “nearly impossible” as they seek a path to citizenship.
“It’s almost hopeless for them,” Perez said.
The asylum system is in crisis. There is disagreement on how to fix it.
Immigration law experts said there is a legitimate need to reduce the backlog of asylum cases. The average wait time for an asylum application is estimated to be four to seven years, according to the Migration Policy Institute, and some experts say they have seen applications lasting longer than that.
The institute said the immigration court backlog more than doubled from fiscal year 2021 to fiscal year 2024, reaching 3.8 million cases, largely due to record numbers of border arrivals and mass asylum applications under the Biden administration.
“There is no denying that there is a backlog of orders,” said Castaneda, a professor at American University.
Experts said the rule change, if implemented wisely, could reduce detention conditions without leading to a surge in detentions or the rejection of valid asylum claims.
Perez, the Virginia-based immigration attorney, said there are many cases where there is clear evidence that they do not meet the criteria for asylum, including cases involving people who have been convicted of serious crimes.
But he added that implementing the rule beyond these cases and without the advice of trained asylum workers could penalize law-abiding asylum seekers who have worked for years to gain a path to citizenship.
For asylum seekers, the risks are enormous.
On July 28, Guatemalan authorities announced that a man deported from the United States and his self-deported wife were found dead in a sugar cane field with their hands tied behind their backs. The couple’s young daughter was found alive next to them, authorities said.
His wife, Glendy Marisol Gonzalez, is pursuing an asylum case with a hearing scheduled for next year, according to the Missouri Workforce Center, of which the couple were members.
Christopher Cann is a national reporter for USA TODAY. Email us at ccann@usatoday.com.
