Protect Migrants' Right to Seek Asylum!

President Donald Trump has signed a presidential proclamation that will block migrants caught crossing the U.S.-Mexico border from seeking asylum. The move aims to funnel asylum seekers towards ports of entry.

The proclamation put into effect a new rule the Trump administration entered into the federal registry that would ban migrants from applying for asylum outside of official ports of entry. The impact will be that most migrants who cross the southern border illegally will no longer be eligible for asylum claims in the United States for at least 90 days. U.S. law specifically allows individuals to apply for asylum regardless of their entry procedure. It is illegal to circumvent that by agency or presidential decree.

Migrants arrested between ports of entry will still be able to apply for humanitarian relief through other legal avenues, such as “withholding of removal” or protection under the Convention Against Torture, though under these programs migrants face a higher bar to prove a fear of returning to their home countries.

The proclamation references the same federal statute the administration employed for Trump's travel ban. Under the statute, the president can bar the entry of foreigners deemed "detrimental to the interests of the United States."

We know that asylum seekers from Central America and elsewhere are fleeing violence and persecution, and that as Christians we are called to, “Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.” Contact the Trump Administration today and protect migrant’s right to seek asylum!

Read a Backgrounder or return to the Office of Social Justice website.

Contact the White House today!

Subject:

Protect Migrants' Right to Seek Asylum

Greetings

Greetings,

As a Christian, I am called to, “Defend the weak and the fatherless and uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed,” and am writing in opposition to your presidential proclamation blocking migrants caught crossing the U.S.-Mexico border from seeking asylum.

This ruling will likely force migrants to wait for weeks outside of overcrowded ports of entry, thus putting their families, especially their children, in danger because of the threat of gangs and human trafficking. Additionally, U.S. law specifically allows individuals to apply for asylum regardless of their entry procedure. It is illegal to circumvent that by agency or presidential decree.

The proclamation references the same federal statute your administration employed for the Muslim travel ban. Under the statute, you can bar the entry of foreigners deemed "detrimental to the interests of the United States." These families are fleeing violence, desperation, and persecution and are traveling together for safety on their dangerous journey. Blocking vulnerable people fleeing violence and persecution from accessing protection is immoral, cruel and unnecessary. There is simply no evidence to suggest that these migrants pose a threat to our country and I ask that you reverse this proclamation, and protect asylum-seeking migrants.

Regards, Your Name

Send me future advocacy emails

Please encourage others to act by sharing on social media.

My name is [Name] and I am a consituant from [City, State].

As a Christian, I affirm the dignity of all human beings made in the image of God. I believe the poor and vulnerable should be protected, welcomed into our communities, and not forced to choose between continuing to access programs their families need, and risking the loss of their legal immigration status.

The Trump administration has announced that immigrants in the United States who legally use public benefits such as food assistance and Section 8 housing vouchers could be denied green cards under a new “Public Charge” ruling. Federal law has always required those seeking green cards to prove they will not be a burden and has taken into consideration the acceptance of cash benefits. But the government has never before considered the use of other public benefits, like assistance for food, thus widely expanding the breadth of who is considered a “public charge”.

I ask that you reconsider the expansion of who is considered a ‘Public Charge’ and not force families to make the choice between choosing food, housing, health care, and immigration status.