A参议院两党新法案试图解决美国面临的最复杂、最具政治色彩的问题之一:该做什么关于南部边境.
尽管这个提议面临越来越渺茫的成为法律的前景其支持者表示，这将对该国的移民制度进行“戏剧性”的改变。
总体而言，这项立法将实现拜登政府过去三年推动的大部分目标，并试图在扩大执法措施(长期以来是共和党人的目标)和更有针对性的人道主义救济之间找到一条路线。
虽然保留了合法移民的某些途径，但这项立法将在边境引发强硬限制，比如在太多人试图同时非法进入美国时拒绝许多移民入境的紧急权力。
但是，也许任何妥协都会导致这一提议遭到批评政治光谱的两端.
众议院议长·迈克·约翰逊在X(原名推特)上的一份声明中说:“这项法案比我们预期的还要糟糕，不会结束边境灾难。”
约翰逊指责总统乔·拜登(Joe Biden)，他甚至在协议文本公布之前就批评了参议院的谈判——包括在他作为议长的第一次发言中。他和其他众议院共和党领导人声称，关键条款充满了“漏洞”。
另一方面，拜登表示，他希望该法案成为法律，并可以利用其新的权力“关闭”边境——这引发了民主党批评人士的疑问，即关闭边境会是什么样子，以及如何处理悬而未决的寻求庇护者。
移民倡导者表示，虽然该法案加快了处理速度，但根据该提案，对人道主义申请的更快裁决速度也可能导致弱势群体被送回危险之地，而对入境口岸之间人员的新限制可能会使许多寻求庇护的人处于危险之中。
移民仍将被允许在美国入境口岸申请庇护，但有一个更快决定申请的新程序。
美国移民律师协会执行董事本·约翰逊周一表示，“我认为这项提议为我们实现所需的改革开启了一个机会。”。“但为了实现这一目标，归根结底，我们需要政界人士在这个问题和这个特定提案上使用少得多的危险且坦率地说不准确的语言。”
移民律师和政策专家告诉ABC新闻，该法案将于周三在参议院进行关键的测试投票，将使边境面临的许多挑战悬而未决。
这些专家认为，这是因为移民可以有更多选择合法抵达美国并在美国居留，这对于阻止非法越境和减少边境人数至关重要。边境人数有时会因庇护申请而使系统不堪重负。
相比之下，移民反对者表示，扩大执法和逮捕是必要的。
该法案为移民开辟了一些新的途径，包括25万个额外的签证名额，其中一些将适用于家庭，其他一些将适用于在美国就业。
美国广播公司新闻的最新报道
同时，它大大扩大了迅速驱逐移民的紧急权力。
美国移民委员会执行主任杰里米·罗宾斯称这项立法“从起草方式来看是一个非常生硬的工具。”他指出，该法案的一部分规定，如果在一天内遇到超过5000名移民，将触发实施大规模快速驱逐的能力。
共和党人抓住了5000这个数字不放，称这个数字仍然允许太多未经授权的移民进入该县。但这个数字仅仅是新的庇护限制开始的门槛。
非法进入美国的移民人数低于5，000人，如果他们没有有效的人道主义申请，仍将被驱逐出境。
代表边境巡逻人员的工会支持该法案。国家边境巡逻委员会主席布兰登·贾德告诉ABC新闻，尽管该提案在限制移民方面走得不够远，但该提案比现状要好，因为它增加了执法力度并扩大了机构资源，如处理资源。
美国广播公司新闻的最新报道
“如果他们(移民)被释放，他们可能会潜逃，”贾德承认，他指的是诋毁者所说的所谓“抓了再放”的风险
“但是，”贾德说，“如果他们那样做，至少会有一些非常严重的后果。因为这些事情，我相信这将减少非法移民。我从来不认为我们会在这种情况下突破5000大关。”
贾德说，随着移民处理资源的增加，更多的特工将能够回到前线履行他们的典型职责。以前，巡逻人员被拉进处理中心记录未经授权的移民，并帮助确保他们有遣返诉讼的法庭日期。
鉴于墨西哥过去不愿接受移民，人们仍对该国政府将如何应对新的驱逐机构存有疑问。
罗宾斯说:“关于墨西哥政府将采取什么行动，有很多假设都没有得到事实的证实。”
移民倡导者担心大量移民将被困在危险的墨西哥边境城镇，容易受到剥削。
鉴于暴力犯罪率居高不下，美国国务院继续对南部边境墨西哥一侧的大部分地区发出旅行警告。
当寻求庇护者在特朗普政府的“留在墨西哥”政策下被迫返回墨西哥时，人权组织记录了大量针对等待者的暴力犯罪。
“不幸的是，正如我们当时看到的那样，这些营地...美国移民律师协会负责政府关系的高级主管格雷格·陈说。“卡特尔很可能会对这些人下手。因此，我们将会有更多的犯罪和暴力行为。也不清楚这是否会成为一种有效的威慑。”
Amid battle over Senate border bill, here's how it would overhaul the system
Anew bipartisan bill in the Senateseeks to address one of the most complex and politically fraught issues facing the United States: what to doabout the southern border.
Though the proposalfaces increasingly dim prospects of becoming law, its supporters have said that it would make "dramatic" changes to the country's immigration system.
Broadly, the legislation would accomplish much of what the Biden administration has pushed to do for the past three years and attempts to walk a line between expanded enforcement measures -- long a goal of Republicans -- and more narrowly targeted humanitarian relief.
While preserving certain avenues for legal immigration, the legislation would trigger hard-line restrictions at the border like an emergency power to deny many migrants entry if too many people attempt to cross illegally into the U.S. at once.
But as perhaps any compromise would, the proposal has drawn criticism fromboth ends of the political spectrum.
"This bill is even worse than we expected, and won't come close to ending the border catastrophe," House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a statement on X, formerly known as Twitter.
Johnson, who blames President Joe Biden, had criticized the Senate negotiations even before the text of the deal was released -- including in his first floor speech as speaker. He and other House Republican leaders claim that key provisions are riddled with "loopholes."
Biden, on the other hand, said that he wanted the bill to become law and could use its new authority to "shut down" the border -- raising questions from Democratic critics about what such a closure would look like and what to do with asylum-seekers who hang in the balance.
Migrant advocates said that while the bill speeds up processing, for example, faster paced adjudication of humanitarian claims that would be seen under the proposal could also result in vulnerable people getting sent back into harm's way and the new restrictions on people who cross between ports of entry will likely put many of those seeking asylum in jeopardy.
Migrants would still be allowed to apply for asylum at U.S. ports of entry with a new process for deciding claims more quickly.
"I view this proposal as the opening of an opportunity to get the reform we need," the executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, Ben Johnson, said on Monday. "But to get there, at the end of the day, we're going to need a lot less dangerous and, quite frankly, inaccurate language from politicians around this issue and around this particular proposal."
Immigration lawyers and policy experts told ABC News that the bill, which is set for a key test vote in the Senate on Wednesday, would leave unsolved many of the challenges seen at the border.
That's because more options for migrants to arrive and stay in the U.S. legally, these experts argue, are essential to discouraging illegal crossings and reducing the number of people at the border, who have sometimes overwhelmed the system with asylum claims.
Immigration opponents, by contrast, say expanded enforcement and arrests are needed.
The bill opens some new avenues for immigration, including 250,000 additional visa slots, some of which will be available for families and others for employment in the U.S.
At the same time, it greatly expands emergency authority for rapidly expelling migrants.
American Immigration Council Executive Director Jeremy Robbins called the legislation "a hugely blunt instrument, the way this is drawn up." He pointed to part of the bill that would trigger the ability to implement widespread, fast-track expulsions if more than 5,000 migrants are encountered in a single day.
Republicans have seized on the 5,000 number, saying it still allows too many unauthorized immigrants into the county. But that number is merely a threshold for new asylum restrictions to begin.
Migrants who illegally enter the U.S. below the 5,000-mark would still be subject to deportation if they don't have a valid humanitarian claim.
The union representing Border Patrol agents backs the bill. National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd told ABC News that while it does not go far enough in restricting migration, the proposal is better than the status quo because of how it increases enforcement and expands institutional resources, like for processing.
“If they're [migrants are] released, they can abscond,” Judd acknowledged, referring to what detractors call the risk of so-called "catch and release."
“But," Judd said, "at least there's some very serious consequences if they do that. And because of those things, I do believe that this will drop illegal immigration. I don’t ever think we will hit the 5,000-mark under this.”
With more resources for migrant processing, Judd said more agents will be able to return to the front line to perform their typical duties. Previously, patrol agents were pulled into processing centers to document unauthorized migrants and help ensure they have court dates for removal proceedings.
Questions remain about how the Mexican government would respond to the new expulsion authority given the country's reluctance to accept migrants in the past.
"There are a lot of assumptions in this about what the Mexican government will do that are not borne out by factuality," Robbins said.
Immigrant advocates worry that large groups of migrants will be stuck in dangerous Mexican border towns and will be vulnerable to exploitation.
The U.S. State Department maintains travel warnings for most of the Mexican side of the southern border given the high rates of violent crime.
When asylum-seekers were forced back into Mexico under the Trump administration's "Remain in Mexico" policy, human rights groups documented volumes of violent crimes against those waiting.
"And unfortunately, as we saw back then, these encampments ... they'll be unsafe and unsanitary," American Immigration Lawyers Association Senior Director for Government Relations Greg Chen said. "Cartels will likely prey upon these individuals. And so we'll have an increase of crime and violence due to that. It's also not clear that it's going to be an effective deterrent."
