Immigration remains an important and contentious topic in the 2024 US election. Former president Donald Trump has adopted a firm stance, aiming to deport large numbers of immigrants and refugees, whereas Vice President Kamala Harris has indicated she would uphold the Biden administration’s policies with her own adjustments.

Immigration remains an important and contentious topic in the 2024 US election. Former president Donald Trump has adopted a firm stance, aiming to deport large numbers of immigrants and refugees, whereas Vice President Kamala Harris has indicated she would uphold the Biden administration’s policies with her own adjustments. How will President Trump affect immigration policies? Throughout the campaign and debates, Trump has repeatedly accused Harris of supporting “open borders.” He has also wrongly claimed that immigrants are responsible for a rise in crime. His argument that immigration is “out of control” has become a main point in his campaign. One of his biggest promises is to deport millions of undocumented immigrants if he wins. Also read: Trump told Netanyahu to end Gaza war ‘before he returns to office’: Report Additionally, the 78-year-old Trump has proposed ending birthright citizenship for children born to immigrants residing illegally in the US, a move that has raised concerns within various immigrant communities, including those from Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan. Many pro-immigration groups have criticised Trump’s stance, especially his push to end birthright citizenship. They argue that this right is protected by the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. At a recent rally, Trump accused Harris, 60, of allowing "migrant gangs and illegal alien criminals" into the country, calling her approach to immigration “a crime against our country.” How will immigration policies change under Kamala Harris? On the other side, Vice President Harris, running as the Democratic candidate, has talked about reducing illegal immigration and described the current system as “broken.” She believes it needs new laws to make it work better. Rather than focusing on harsh policies, Harris says she wants to improve border security and help people seeking asylum with fair processing. She claims this will address what she calls a "broken immigration system." Harris has also argued that Trump’s focus on punishment and conflict is a distraction from important issues like the economy and healthcare. She believes a more compassionate approach would serve the country better. The election outcome is expected to have significant implications for US immigration policy. If Trump wins, the policies will probably get tougher, while a Harris administration would aim to introduce reforms balancing security concerns with humanitarian priorities. (With inputs from agencies)

US elections | How US election results affect immigration policies

In a significant blow to President Joe Biden's administration, a federal judge has overturned the 10-week-old asylum policy, dealing a setback to the administration's efforts to control migration across the southern border of the United States.

The ruling by Judge Jon Tigar of the US district court in San Francisco declared the policy, which required asylum seekers to apply for admission from their home countries or countries they pass through, as "unlawful".

This decision could potentially renew a surge of migrants at the US-Mexico frontier after a recent decline over the past two months, reported AFP.

<h2>Immediate suspension with possibility of appeal</h2>

Judge Tigar's ruling immediately suspended the policy for 14 days, giving the Biden administration time to appeal. The Justice Department promptly filed a notice of appeal, signalling its intent to challenge the decision. The appeal process may keep the policy in limbo for an extended period, and the case could eventually reach the Supreme Court.

<h2>Biden's policy aimed at stemming migration</h2>

The policy, put in place by the Biden administration in May, aimed to address the up to 200,000 monthly migrants attempting to cross the southern border.

It replaced the use of Title 42, a COVID-19 pandemic rule that had been employed since 2020 to summarily block the entry of migrants on public health grounds.

Last year, border authorities intercepted over two million individuals attempting to enter the US, either illegally or through asylum applications.

This significant influx became a major political concern for Biden, with the Republican opposition criticising him for lax border policies.

Also watch |&nbsp;Did Hunter Biden put then VP Joe Biden on speakerphone with foreign business partners?

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/did-hunter-biden-put-then-vp-joe-biden-on-speakerphone-with-foreign-business-partners-619386/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

<h2>Rigid asylum process and reduced encounters</h2>

In an effort to manage the flow of migrants, Biden's policy instituted a more stringent asylum process.

Asylum seekers at the border were required to use a smartphone app to schedule interview appointments, which could lead to weeks or even months of waiting.

Alternatively, they had to request asylum from their home country or special centres&nbsp;in transit countries. Those who crossed the border without following the process would automatically lose the chance to seek asylum.

This policy raised the burden of proof for applicants and subjected them to prolonged waits for rulings. The impact of these measures was apparent, as border patrol encounters with migrants fell from 212,000 in April to 145,000 in June, according to Customs and Border Protection data.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-forest-service-burn-started-wildfire-that-nearly-reached-los-alamos-new-mexico-619273">US Forest Service burn started wildfire that nearly reached Los Alamos, New Mexico</a>

<h2>Judge's criticisms and DHS secretary's response</h2>

Judge Tigar found several flaws in Biden's policy, including its non-compliance with the Immigration and Nationality Act's asylum rules and its inconsistency due to certain exceptions it offered.

He deemed the policy "arbitrary and capricious" and criticised its rushed implementation, which bypassed the legally required 60-day review period for such complex policies.

As Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas confirmed that the Biden policy remains in place for now, he warned migrants about the consequences of attempting to enter the country without proper documentation.

They face minimum five-year bans and possible prosecution. The ruling was hailed as a victory by Katrina Eiland of the American Civil Liberties Union, but she also expressed concern that the prolonged legal battle may leave many people fleeing persecution in grave danger.

The asylum policy's fate now rests with the appeals process, which could determine the future course of migration control at the US-Mexico border.

(With inputs from agencies)

&nbsp;

WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

<iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe>

In a significant blow to President Joe Biden's administration, a federal judge has overturned the 10-week-old asylum policy, dealing a setback to the administration's efforts to control migration across the southern border of the United States.

In a significant blow to President Joe Biden's administration, a federal judge has overturned the 10-week-old asylum policy, dealing a setback to the administration's efforts to control migration across the southern border of the United States. The ruling by Judge Jon Tigar of the US district court in San Francisco declared the policy, which required asylum seekers to apply for admission from their home countries or countries they pass through, as "unlawful". This decision could potentially renew a surge of migrants at the US-Mexico frontier after a recent decline over the past two months, reported AFP. Immediate suspension with possibility of appeal Judge Tigar's ruling immediately suspended the policy for 14 days, giving the Biden administration time to appeal. The Justice Department promptly filed a notice of appeal, signalling its intent to challenge the decision. The appeal process may keep the policy in limbo for an extended period, and the case could eventually reach the Supreme Court. Biden's policy aimed at stemming migration The policy, put in place by the Biden administration in May, aimed to address the up to 200,000 monthly migrants attempting to cross the southern border. It replaced the use of Title 42, a COVID-19 pandemic rule that had been employed since 2020 to summarily block the entry of migrants on public health grounds. Last year, border authorities intercepted over two million individuals attempting to enter the US, either illegally or through asylum applications. This significant influx became a major political concern for Biden, with the Republican opposition criticising him for lax border policies. Also watch | Did Hunter Biden put then VP Joe Biden on speakerphone with foreign business partners? Rigid asylum process and reduced encounters In an effort to manage the flow of migrants, Biden's policy instituted a more stringent asylum process. Asylum seekers at the border were required to use a smartphone app to schedule interview appointments, which could lead to weeks or even months of waiting. Alternatively, they had to request asylum from their home country or special centres in transit countries. Those who crossed the border without following the process would automatically lose the chance to seek asylum. This policy raised the burden of proof for applicants and subjected them to prolonged waits for rulings. The impact of these measures was apparent, as border patrol encounters with migrants fell from 212,000 in April to 145,000 in June, according to Customs and Border Protection data. Also read | US Forest Service burn started wildfire that nearly reached Los Alamos, New Mexico Judge's criticisms and DHS secretary's response Judge Tigar found several flaws in Biden's policy, including its non-compliance with the Immigration and Nationality Act's asylum rules and its inconsistency due to certain exceptions it offered. He deemed the policy "arbitrary and capricious" and criticised its rushed implementation, which bypassed the legally required 60-day review period for such complex policies. As Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas confirmed that the Biden policy remains in place for now, he warned migrants about the consequences of attempting to enter the country without proper documentation. They face minimum five-year bans and possible prosecution. The ruling was hailed as a victory by Katrina Eiland of the American Civil Liberties Union, but she also expressed concern that the prolonged legal battle may leave many people fleeing persecution in grave danger. The asylum policy's fate now rests with the appeals process, which could determine the future course of migration control at the US-Mexico border. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

US: Federal judge blocks Biden's asylum policy in a major blow to administration

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday (September 11) granted a request by President Donald Trump's administration to fully enforce a new rule that would curtail asylum applications by immigrants at the U.S.-Mexico border, a key element of his hardline immigration policies.

U.S. Supreme Court ratifies Trump's  asylum policy

Uber Technologies Chief Executive Officer Travis Kalanick quit President Donald Trump&#39;s business advisory group amid mounting pressure from activists and employees who oppose the administration&#39;s immigration policies.

Critics included Uber drivers, many of whom are immigrants themselves.

&quot;Joining the group was not meant to be an endorsement of the president or his agenda but unfortunately it has been misinterpreted to be exactly that,&quot; Kalanick, who had planned to attend a meeting of the group on Friday, said in an email to staff that was seen by Reuters.

Uber spokeswoman Chelsea Kohler later confirmed that he had left the group.

Social media campaigns had targeted Uber, urging users to delete accounts and opt for rival Lyft. Uber has been emailing users who deleted their accounts to say it shares their concerns and will compensate drivers affected by the ban.

Kalanick said he spoke briefly to Trump about the immigration order &quot;and its issues for our community&quot; and told the president he would not join the economic council.

The CEO came under increasing pressure to leave the council after Trump issued an executive order temporarily barring people from seven majority-Muslim nations from entering the United States.

&quot;There are many ways we will continue to advocate for just change on immigration but staying on the council was going to get in the way of that. The executive order is hurting many people in communities all across America,&quot; he wrote in a note to employees. &quot;Families are being separated, people are stranded overseas and there&rsquo;s a growing fear the US is no longer a place that welcomes immigrants.&quot;

The White House said in a statement Thursday evening that did not mention Uber that Trump &quot;understands the importance of an open dialogue with fellow business leaders to discuss how to best make our nation&#39;s economy stronger.&quot;

The move could put pressure on other CEOs expected to attend a meeting with Trump on Friday. General Motors said its chief executive would attend, while Walt Disney said earlier Thursday its chief executive would not attend because of a long-planned board meeting.

Others expected to take part include the CEOs of JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co, Blackstone Group LP, IBM Corp and Wal-Mart Stores. Others that are part of the council include Tesla Inc CEO Elon Musk, PepsiCo Inc CEO Indra Nooyi and Boston Consulting Group CEO Rich Lesser.

Musk said he would attend the meeting. &quot;In tomorrow&#39;s meeting, I and others will express our objections to the recent executive order on immigration and offer suggestions for changes to the policy,&quot; he said in a tweet on Thursday. 
Kalanick&#39;s departure could signal a growing rift between technology companies and Washington.

&quot;There is a battle brewing between Trump and Silicon Valley,&quot; said Neeraj Agrawal, general partner at Battery Ventures. &quot;They (the Trump administration) clearly don&#39;t value the economic activity generated by tech.&quot; 
Microsoft Corp on Thursday said it proposed a modification of Trump&#39;s travel limits.

Technology companies including Microsoft, Google owner Alphabet, Apple and Amazon.com Inc have opposed Trump&rsquo;s order, arguing that they rely on workers from around the world.

Amazon and Expedia have filed court documents supporting a legal challenge to the order by the Washington state attorney general.

(Reuters)

&nbsp;

Travis Kalanick left the council after Trump issued immigration policies

Uber Technologies Chief Executive Officer Travis Kalanick quit President Donald Trump's business advisory group amid mounting pressure from activists and employees who oppose the administration's immigration policies. Critics included Uber drivers, many of whom are immigrants themselves. "Joining the group was not meant to be an endorsement of the president or his agenda but unfortunately it has been misinterpreted to be exactly that," Kalanick, who had planned to attend a meeting of the group on Friday, said in an email to staff that was seen by Reuters. Uber spokeswoman Chelsea Kohler later confirmed that he had left the group. Social media campaigns had targeted Uber, urging users to delete accounts and opt for rival Lyft. Uber has been emailing users who deleted their accounts to say it shares their concerns and will compensate drivers affected by the ban. Kalanick said he spoke briefly to Trump about the immigration order "and its issues for our community" and told the president he would not join the economic council. The CEO came under increasing pressure to leave the council after Trump issued an executive order temporarily barring people from seven majority-Muslim nations from entering the United States. "There are many ways we will continue to advocate for just change on immigration but staying on the council was going to get in the way of that. The executive order is hurting many people in communities all across America," he wrote in a note to employees. "Families are being separated, people are stranded overseas and there’s a growing fear the US is no longer a place that welcomes immigrants." The White House said in a statement Thursday evening that did not mention Uber that Trump "understands the importance of an open dialogue with fellow business leaders to discuss how to best make our nation's economy stronger." The move could put pressure on other CEOs expected to attend a meeting with Trump on Friday. General Motors said its chief executive would attend, while Walt Disney said earlier Thursday its chief executive would not attend because of a long-planned board meeting. Others expected to take part include the CEOs of JPMorgan Chase & Co, Blackstone Group LP, IBM Corp and Wal-Mart Stores. Others that are part of the council include Tesla Inc CEO Elon Musk, PepsiCo Inc CEO Indra Nooyi and Boston Consulting Group CEO Rich Lesser. Musk said he would attend the meeting. "In tomorrow's meeting, I and others will express our objections to the recent executive order on immigration and offer suggestions for changes to the policy," he said in a tweet on Thursday. Kalanick's departure could signal a growing rift between technology companies and Washington. "There is a battle brewing between Trump and Silicon Valley," said Neeraj Agrawal, general partner at Battery Ventures. "They (the Trump administration) clearly don't value the economic activity generated by tech." Microsoft Corp on Thursday said it proposed a modification of Trump's travel limits. Technology companies including Microsoft, Google owner Alphabet, Apple and Amazon.com Inc have opposed Trump’s order, arguing that they rely on workers from around the world. Amazon and Expedia have filed court documents supporting a legal challenge to the order by the Washington state attorney general. (Reuters)

Uber CEO quits Trump's business advisory group

immigration-policies

Immigration Policies, News on Immigration Policies, stories on Immigration Policies, articles on Immigration Policies, Immigration Policies stories at Wion, Immigration Policies news, Immigration Policies latest news