Asylum protection act of 2019 to be voted in the congress

M

MJ_irani

Member
A new bill was introduced in the congress known as asylum act of 2019

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/481/all-info

It will have very serious ramifications for the asylum seekers especially those from Latin America and will impose tighter standards on “credible fear interview assessments”

It hasn’t been debated or voted in the congress or the senate yet. They are saying it has a slim chance of getting enacted because of Democrats opposition.
 
The link you have above only talks about shortening the time to apply for asylum after arrival. Is there more information somewhere about the credible fear aspect?

I am very pro asylum but it is also clear that there are many frivolous claims and many people who try to abuse the system, resulting in backlogs and other issues for those who genuinely need asylum. I don’t know about this bill specifically but I’d think legislation that helps keep asylum for those in genuine need can only be a good thing?
 
MJ_irani said:
Check this out,

https://immigrationforum.org/article/bill-summary-asylum-reform-act-of-2019/

These are the changes that the bill proposes. I think it will have a negative impact overall on the approval rate
Click to expand...

Hmm, at first glance looks like the main impact is that it will be harder to apply in the first place? Will definitely discourage those who come on temporary work or student visas and then suddenly discover a reason for asylum when their visa ends. Not sure if the threat of tougher punishment for fraud will really disincentivize anyone but yeah if the standard is tougher it implies more refusals.
Also, not totally dissimilar to other countries which also have rules about applying first safe country you arrive in.
 
The second link is not an official US government link.

The proposed reforms would only strengthen the asylum laws in favor of genuine applicants with reasonable fear of persecution. It is reasonable and incumbent for those fleeing persecution to seek asylum right away at a POE. Why would anyone want to wait any length of time?

Extending the statute of limitations for use of fraudulent documentation is a step in the right direction that any genuine applicant should have no issue with.
 
SusieQQQ said:
Hmm, at first glance looks like the main impact is that it will be harder to apply in the first place? Will definitely discourage those who come on temporary work or student visas and then suddenly discover a reason for asylum when their visa ends. Not sure if the threat of tougher punishment for fraud will really disincentivize anyone but yeah if the standard is tougher it implies more refusals.
Also, not totally dissimilar to other countries which also have rules about applying first safe country you arrive in.
Click to expand...
It will make it harder for those who do not have a legal status in the US (tourists) to apply because they have only one month to submit their asylum

The third country rule is mainly targeted towards hispanic asylum seekers because they first go to Mexico and then apply for asylum at the port of US entry. The new rule renders them ineligible because they landed in a third country first before reaching the US
 
1AurCitizen said:
The second link is not an official US government link.

The proposed reforms would only strengthen the asylum laws in favor of genuine applicants with reasonable fear of persecution. It is reasonable and incumbent for those fleeing persecution to seek asylum right away at a POE. Why would anyone want to wait any length of time?

Extending the statute of limitations for use of fraudulent documentation is a step in the right direction that any genuine applicant should have no issue with.
Click to expand...
You have to admit that there is no clear definition for a genuine asylum applicant and it is all at the mercy of the USCIS interviewer whether they think you have a credible fear or not. If this bill finds its way to the books, it will basically asks officers to now be more strict in making this decision. For example, you may have been once attacked in your country of origin and the officer might believe that according to the new law, my jaded judgement tells me that being assaulted once is not enough to pass and you should have been attacked twice to be eligible. I think they will make a botched job of asylum decisions in the first year after this bill is passed until they gather enough precedents.
 
MJ_irani said:
It will make it harder for those who do not have a legal status in the US (tourists) to apply because they have only one month to submit their asylum

The third country rule is mainly targeted towards hispanic asylum seekers because they first go to Mexico and then apply for asylum at the port of US entry. The new rule renders them ineligible because they landed in a third country first before reaching the US
Click to expand...

I don’t understand your first point. Tourist status is a legal status. In my understanding it’s not unusual for asylees to apply from B status. I agree with @1AurCitizen , if you know you need asylum, why would you wait?

And the third country rule is not dissimilar to other countries as already said. If your main focus is being safe, rather than earning $, it makes sense, just like it makes sense to apply for asylum in Romania rather than Germany if persecution is your worry. (The Bill seems to have a provision for those who would not be safe in Mexico to continue to the US.)
 
Asylum is reserved for those with a genuine fear of persecution, to be applied for in any nation that is not COP. Therefore personal safety should be just as much of a guarantee in say Germany or the UK. The US is geographically ways away from COPs in Eastern Europe or parts of the Middle East.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top