WASHINGTON — Senators have emerged with a carefully negotiated $118 billion compromise that ties tens of billions of dollars in war aid to Ukraine to new border laws aimed at reducing historic numbers of people who have come to the U.S. border with Mexico to seek asylum , to reduce.
The legislation met immediate opposition from many Republicans in both chambers, and Republican Party leaders in the House of Representatives said it would not even be voted on. But bipartisan negotiators are trying to sell the package as part of a last-ditch effort to approve money to defend Ukraine against Russia, emphasizing that Congress has its best chance in years to make changes to U.S. immigration law.
The bill would also send military aid to Israel, funding for allies in the Asia-Pacific and humanitarian aid for refugees fleeing Gaza.
Although President Joe Biden has been working toward a deal with Republican and Democratic leaders in the Senate, this faces a difficult, if not impossible, path. Echoing opposition from their House colleagues, Republican senators have said the border policy does not go far enough and have questioned additional aid to Ukraine. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., called it “an easy NO.”
The package has also drawn strong opposition from Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.
Some Democrats are also expected to oppose the deal. Sen. Alex Padilla, D-California, said he opposes the changes this would make to the asylum process. “This border agreement misses the mark,” Padilla said in a statement.
Here’s what you need to know about the package:
The package includes $60 billion in aid for Ukraine and $14 billion for Israel. It would invest in domestic defense production, boost humanitarian aid and manage the flow of migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border. In addition, $10 billion would support humanitarian efforts in Ukraine, Israel, Gaza and other places.
The package would also send $20 billion to immigration enforcement, provide money to hire thousands more agents to review asylum claims, add hundreds of additional Border Patrol agents and help stem the flow of fentanyl.
The bill would overhaul the asylum system with stricter standards and faster enforcement.
Asylum offers protection to people fleeing persecution because of race, religion, political beliefs or membership of a discriminated group. It’s part of international law and helps the U.S. protect human rights, but the system has become overwhelmed in recent years with historic numbers of people seeking asylum at the border with Mexico.
Under the proposal, migrants would have to demonstrate during initial screenings that they have a reasonable chance of being granted asylum. Migrants would also be barred from submitting an asylum application if it turns out they have a criminal past, have settled in another country or could have found safety if they had resettled in their home country.
Migrants illegally crossing the border between a port of entry would be detained and screened within 10 to 15 days.
Migrants who pass the new screening will then receive a work permit, be placed in a guidance program and have their asylum case decided within 90 days. And migrants seeking asylum between ports of entry would be taken into custody while they wait for initial screening for an asylum claim. The proposal calls for a major increase in detention capacity.
The proposal also calls for a major expansion of a Biden administration program that tracks families arriving at the border as they wait for their asylum claims to be screened. The program was developed as an alternative to detention for families.
Immigration advocates have raised concerns about the asylum changes, saying the current standard is deliberately low because migrants are often fleeing desperate conditions, have no legal representation and are still shaken by their journeys.
Under the proposal, migrants would not be able to apply for asylum at all if the number of illegal border crossings reaches a certain number.
The policy is similar to one first implemented by President Donald Trump. Known as Title 42, it justified the rapid expulsion of migrants from the country in the name of stopping the spread of COVID-19.
The bill proposes similar expulsion authority if the number of encounters with migrants counted by Customs and Border Protection reaches 4,000 per day over a five-day average at the southern border. Once the number of encounters reaches 5,000, the expulsions will automatically take effect. For context, some days in December saw more than 10,000 border encounters, marking the highest month ever for illegal crossings.
Under the proposal, migrants can still apply at ports of entry. And once the average of illegal crossings fell by 75%, the government would have two weeks to end the use of the emergency authority.
Supporters of using Title 42 say it was a necessary tool that allowed border officials to quickly expel migrants and give them the freedom to patrol the area they were charged with protecting. But critics have questioned how effective Title 42 really was. They say it’s difficult to get an accurate picture because migrants turned away under Title 42 would repeatedly try to cross the border. Critics also say it strengthened cartels preying on the build-up of migrants south of the border.
If migrants facing expulsion raise concerns with border patrol agents that they could face prosecution if specifically returned to Mexico, they can still seek asylum.
The legislation would place limits on how presidential administrations can use “parole” to allow migrants into the country at the border. It would eliminate parole, like the one used when migrants illegally cross the border or show up at ports of entry, and instead place them in the new system for reviewing asylum claims.
The Biden administration could still schedule asylum screenings through an app. The government’s authority to allow people into the country when they are fleeing unrest or war would also be retained. The authority, known as Humanitarian Parole, had been a sticking point in negotiations.
While progressive and Hispanic Democrats have expressed concern that the package will hurt migrants seeking asylum, the legislation offers some measures aimed at helping migrants already in the U.S. and in the cities and states where they went to. It would send $1.4 billion to local programs, such as shelters that have seen a large influx of migrants and fast-track work permits for migrants waiting to apply for asylum.
The legislation would also authorize sanctions and anti-money laundering tools against criminal enterprises that smuggle fentanyl into the US. And it would provide 50,000 employment and family immigration visas each year for the next five years.
However, the bill does not include broad immigration reforms or protections against deportation of illegal immigrants, which were fundamental to previous deals in the Senate.
The legislation would also provide residency to Afghans who have worked alongside U.S. soldiers in America’s longest war. Nearly 76,000 Afghans who worked with U.S. soldiers as translators, interpreters and partners since 2001 arrived in the U.S. on military aircraft after U.S. troops were removed from Afghanistan in August 2021.
The provision would ultimately allow qualified Afghans to apply for U.S. citizenship and adjust the status of eligible evacuees to grant them lawful permanent resident status after vetting and screening procedures.
