Comment For three straight election cycles, running as the party of “border security” has largely failed for the GOP. Although Republicans devoted enormous resources to painting immigrants in the most wretched and threatening terms imaginable, Democrats won the House in 2018, ousted Donald Trump from the White House in 2020, and dramatically exceeded expectations in 2022. Now, Republicans have a chance to do something new. Instead of treating the southern border as a blank screen on which to project their storehouse of demagoguery, they can support an emerging compromise with a real shot at achieving a more orderly border. Sens. Thom Tillis (RN.C.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) have reached an agreement on a draft compromise immigration reform framework, sources familiar with the situation tell me. They include issues such as the fate of “dreamers” brought here as children and the processing of asylum seekers at the southern border. Will the 10 Republican senators needed to overcome a filibuster get along? A white paper laying out that Tillis-Sinema plan is circulating on Capitol Hill, congressional aides and advocates involved in the talks tell me. While details are in flux, here’s a partial list of the main items it contains:
Some form of path to citizenship for 2 million dreamers. A big boost in resources to speed up the processing of asylum seekers, including new processing centers and more asylum officers and judges. More resources to expedite the removal of immigrants who do not qualify for asylum. Continue the Title 42 restriction on immigrants applying for asylum until the new processing centers are up and running, targeting a one-year shutdown. More funding for border officers.
The idea behind this compromise is this: It gives Democrats protections for 2 million Dreamers and strengthens protections for the due process rights of some immigrants. It gives Republicans faster removal from the country of immigrants who don’t qualify for asylum, an ongoing cap on applications for next year and more border security. Follow Greg Sargent’s viewsFollow The boost in resources will hopefully reduce pressure at the border, moving migrants through the asylum process more quickly. The processing facilities will be temporary detention centers, but additional lawyers will be present, allowing for more robust representation. On the other hand, if immigrants fail in the initial interview to determine whether they have a “credible fear” of persecution if they return to their countries of origin, they will be removed much more quickly. A “Title 42” health rationale, which is indefensible as a border management tool, will ostensibly be maintained to control flows while reforms are implemented. The Accounts General will have the power to terminate it after one year if the processing centers are up and running. It’s hard to say whether 10 Republican senators would support such a deal to overcome a GOP filibuster. This will become more difficult when former President Donald Trump and advisor Stephen Miller scream that it represents a massive betrayal by “elite,” as they undoubtedly will, and right-wing media propagandists like Tucker Carlson amplify this toxic message to anger the base. If 10 GOP senators could support it, they would come from those who are retiring (Sens. Roy Blunt of Missouri and Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania) or those willing to challenge the Trump wing of the party (Sens. Mitt Romney of Utah and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska). A big question is whether these Republicans will see any merit in actually trying to solve the border problems. They may decide that the GOP won’t get any credit even if the effort succeeds — that credit may go to President Biden — and that it’s better to keep the permanent “border crisis” an issue. But this is the last chance for these GOP senators to try to reach a bipartisan compromise. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who hopes to be the next speaker, has vowed not to pass any immigration reform legislation until he determines the border is secure, which he will not never, ever happen. By supporting this, retired GOP senators could reasonably argue that they helped the party distance itself from Trump and add to their legacy of bipartisan reform on a violent national problem. On the other hand, however, it is unclear whether 50 Democratic senators would support such a compromise. The continuation of Title 42, which has been a human rights disaster, and the improved removal process may make it a non-starter among progressives in both houses. “The devil is in the details,” Robyn Barnard, a lawyer at Human Rights First, told me. “We believe that Congress should protect dreamers,” he said, but noted that it is “unconscionable” to “exchange the lives of one immigrant group for another.” Still, the pull for Democrats to strike a bipartisan deal may be strong. “There are bitter pills in this compromise,” longtime immigration advocate Frank Sarry told me. “But the status quo is clearly unacceptable. If they get the details right, this would be a bipartisan breakthrough.” Time and time again over the years, the most carefully crafted compromises on immigration reform have fallen apart. If 10 GOP senators appear open to reforms that would make life more humane for more than 2 million immigrants and show Republicans that immigration compromise is possible without the political sky falling in, progressives may have a hard time saying no.
