Author: Mary Giovagnoli

Mary Giovagnoli is an immigration attorney and policy expert who has worked for over 25 years in both the federal government and nonprofit advocacy to improve the immigration system. She is a former executive director of the Refugee Council USA. She served as the DHS deputy assistant secretary for immigration policy from 2015 to 2017.

Biden’s Border Closure Is a Gamble That Won’t Pay Off

At 12 a.m. on June 5, 2024, the southwest border closed to thousands of people desperate to reach the United States. By taking matters into his own hands, President Biden is following the oft-heard mantra of the last decade: Executive action is the last resort when Congress doesn’t take its responsibilities seriously. However, to justify the border suspension, the president had to determine that something about people who didn’t have permission to enter the U.S., as a category of individuals, meant that their admission—even temporarily—would threaten the best interests of this country. 

Until we all stand up for genuine immigration reform that tackles the tough questions of managing migration flows, ensuring sufficient legal immigration pathways, honoring our protection obligations and valuing immigration as a public good, politicians of both parties will take the easy way out; the odds are good that nobody wins.

Compassion, Not Rejection, Will Do Something About the Border

For months now, the words “we must do something about the border” have been thrown about in the United States—as though the border were a leaky roof or broken window that could be quickly repaired and made new again. Listen closely, however, and it becomes apparent that many politicians mean something different altogether. To them, “doing something about the border” means preventing people from accessing border crossings and preventing them from obtaining asylum or other legal means of entry.

The impact on those real people easily gets lost in budget talks and political squabbling. Understanding who is coming to the border can help us make better decisions about what actually needs to be done to create a functioning migration system.

The White House Cannot Back Away From Asylum Protection

With only a few days remaining before the U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to adjourn for the winter break, the White House has signaled that it is willing to trade asylum protections and other immigration concessions to secure its foreign aid package. The reaction to this news has unleashed a torrent of criticism from human rights and immigration groups, but this is a moment that requires outcry from the broader public. 

Time and again, important policies and decisions are derailed by a small group of Republican legislators who exercise far more control over the future of our country than should be tolerated. In this case, the stakes are so high that the Biden administration appears to be willing to agree to Trump-era policies for managing the border in exchange for aid to Ukraine, Israel, and other sensitive foreign policy objectives. 

New DOJ Settlement Aims to Reunite Separated Families

Five years after the Trump administration separated nearly 5,000 children and families in an attempt to deter migration, the Department of Justice has agreed to settle a class action lawsuit, Ms. L v. ICE, brought on behalf of those families by the ACLU. What began as a lawsuit representing one mother and one child quickly grew, as initial discovery in the case revealed that the scope of separations was far greater, and started far earlier, than May and June 2018, when the bulk of the separations took place.

“All of the consequences of such a horrific policy came, in part, because we don’t have an immigration system that actually centers the welfare of the child in decision-making.”

Access to Asylum Can’t be Treated as a Bargaining Chip in the Foreign Aid Debate

The Senate is feverishly debating the president’s $106 billion supplemental budget, which includes requests for additional aid to Ukraine and Israel, measures to counter China’s influence, significant humanitarian assistance funds, and border security. 

Republican negotiators have chosen to use the urgency of the foreign aid requests to squeeze concessions from the administration and Democratic senators around the asylum process itself.

Women Need the Afghan Adjustment Act

Thousands of Afghan women entered the United States as part of Operation Allies Welcome. Still, they continue to be hampered by the lack of a simple, straightforward and reliable way to obtain permanent legal status and to become citizens.

Congress can change that by passing the Afghan Adjustment Act (AAA), which was reintroduced this summer by a bipartisan group of senators and representatives. AAA would allow Afghans paroled into the United States to apply for their green cards, provided they met basic background checks and other eligibility requirements.

Overturning Roe Creates More Barriers for Asylum-Seekers and Immigrants

Hostile state or federal laws that ban or restrict abortion and criminalize pregnancy outcomes could have yet another devastating impact: threatening eligibility for legal immigration status and undermining efforts to create more equitable and humane immigration laws.

The politics of immigration and the politics of choice will continue to collide as extreme lawmakers cynically trade the reproductive health of immigrant and non-citizen women for political gain.