That is a new element you are injecting into the bill. If it somehow in the bill, then that is an ever grater reason to reject the bill.

Rhetorical Question: If the bill prevents shutting down the border, just how many have to be let in to establish there is no shutdown.

Eliminated the proposed new ability to shut down the border that would have been created by the bill.

Under current law, you have the right to request asylum at the border. The proposed border bill would have added a new restriction on that right - if the triggers were hit, then you could be deported immediately and not allowed to request asylum. The bill would not have prevented shutting down the border, because the current law does not allow the border to be shut down - you have the right to request asylum under current law.

So the bill: i) created a new draconian enforcement power; and ii) limited the circumstances in which that new power could be implemented. The fact that the new power was limited to circumstances with large numbers of border encounters did not codify the border encounters as legal - it was just a limitation on when the new enforcement power kicked in.

Albaby

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.