It’s Tuesday, the traditional day for elections and for our pause-and-consider newsletter on politics and policy.

[link removed]

[link removed]

Photo by Adrees Latif/Reuters

It’s Tuesday, the traditional day for elections and for our pause-and-consider newsletter on politics and policy. We think of it as a mini-magazine in your inbox.

THE LATEST ON IMMIGRATION AND THE BORDER
By Lisa Desjardins, @LisaDNews ([link removed])
Correspondent

As we have ([link removed]) reported ([link removed]) , immigration and the border will likely be a top election issue this year — a drumbeat of concern for Republicans especially.

This week, Senate Democrats are making a strategic move to remind voters that Republicans blocked a bipartisan compromise ([link removed]) on immigration. They plan to force a symbolic vote Thursday on that compromise, purposefully setting it up to fail to show that more Republicans than Democrats oppose an attempt at a border solution.

For their part, House Republican leaders said the measure was “dead on arrival,” ([link removed]) if the measure makes it to the lower chamber. (It’s not expected to.)

It made us think this was a good time to look at the latest numbers surrounding border and immigration policy.

The numbers

U.S. Customs and Border Protection released new numbers ([link removed]) , last week, reflecting what happened in April.

On the southwest border:
* The topline. CBP encountered fewer people trying to enter illegally between ports of entry. In April, the figure was nearly 128,900. That is a dip of more than 6 percent from March and a significant drop of 30 percent from April of last year.
* That is the second-lowest monthly figure for encounters the U.S. has seen since March 2021, when numbers started spiking.
* That said, encounters are still historically high. This number is still much higher than it was between fiscal years 2009 and 2019, aka the pre-pandemic decade before Biden.
* One more piece of context you don’t see often. These current levels are closer to figures seen repeatedly in the Clinton and Reagan administrations. That is to say, this has been a chronic problem in past decades, but was quelled around the time of the 2008 recession and for the next 10 years. (Check out Figure 1 in this report from the Congressional Research Service ([link removed]) a few years ago.)

Next, let’s talk about asylum seekers. We know that U.S. asylum policy is part of the draw ([link removed]) for many who come to the border.
* Data compiled by Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse shows immigration courts are struggling ([link removed]) to handle the large increase of asylum seekers encountered in the past few years.
* New cases. Since October, immigration courts have received 1.3 million new cases, but have completed just 517,000 in that time.
* The average wait time for cases in the system is now 530 days, a continued decline from more than 900 days in fiscal year 2021.
* Chances of staying in the United States. In the past decade, two-thirds of all asylum seekers were allowed to remain in the United States for asylum or another form of relief from deportation, according to a new analysis by Syracuse University. ([link removed])

New rules
* In the meantime, the Biden administration has continued proposing new rules to bar entry to more migrants, especially some applying for asylum.
* The latest proposal would give officials a chance to turn away more asylum seekers at an earlier point in the process, when an asylum officer asks if they meet the threshold for “credible fear.” CBS News reported that officials see this as largely affecting those who are suspected of posing a threat to the U.S. — a “limited” population ([link removed]) , they said. This proposal is going through the finalization process now.

There is no effort at a new immigration compromise in Congress and indeed, major legislation rarely passes this late in a presidential year, as lawmakers are already preparing to campaign and working across party lines becomes more difficult.

For now, the near future of immigration is in the hands of the Biden administration.

And from there, in the hands of voters who will decide which candidate should steer things starting next year.
More on politics from our coverage:
* Watch: How Trump’s legal team is trying to ruin Michael Cohen’s credibility ([link removed]) in the hush money trial.
* One Big Question: Why are Trump’s Republicans allies rallying around his trial? NPR’s Tamara Keith and Amy Walter of the Cook Political Report with Amy Walter discuss ([link removed]) .
* A Closer Look: Immigrants are vastly underrepresented in elected office. This program is trying to change that ([link removed]) .
* Perspectives: In her new book, health reporter Shefali Luthra of The 19th News describes how the reversal of Roe v. Wade reshaped American life ([link removed]) .

THE ICC’S 'TREMENDOUS' MOVE

[link removed]
Watch the segment in the player above.

By Joshua Barajas, @Josh_Barrage ([link removed])
Senior Editor, Digital

The International Criminal Court made the unprecedented announcement this week that it was seeking warrants to arrest Israeli and Hamas leaders ([link removed]) , including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Here’s a brief breakdown of the court’s symbolic blow ([link removed]) , seven months into the war in Gaza.

Who could face arrest warrants? Karim Khan, the court’s chief prosecutor, said in a statement Monday that he believes that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and three Hamas leaders — Yehya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh — are responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza Strip and Israel. Read Khan’s full statement here ([link removed]) .

How have leaders reacted? Israeli leaders condemned the move ([link removed]) , with Netanyahu calling it “blood libel.” U.S. President Joe Biden called the ICC’s announcement “outrageous,” adding that “there is no equivalence — none — between Israel and Hamas.”

How significant is the ICC’s move? Adil Haque, a professor of law at Rutgers Law School, said the significance is “tremendous ([link removed]) ” because the ICC is raising “extremely serious” charges against leaders of both sides of the conflict.

But the practical significance, he said, may be limited.

“Even if arrest warrants are issued by the pretrial chamber, it may be very, very difficult to execute them,” Haque said. But the ICC’s move would have “the expressive value of affirming the rights and the dignity of the victims of crimes committed by both sides of this terrible conflict,” he added.

For Yuval Shany, a former chair of the U.N. Human Rights Committee, the applications for the arrest warrants could become another impetus for Israel to draw the war to a close. “It does appear to be in a state of a tailspin, where the legal front and the diplomatic fronts are … becoming more and more complicated every week that passes by.”

What’s next? It’s unlikely Netanyahu or Gallant will face any form of immediate prosecution. First, a panel of ICC judges needs to consider the application for warrants. But even if warrants are issued, Israel and the United States are not part of the ICC’s 124 member nations.

#POLITICSTRIVIA
By Joshua Barajas, @Josh_Barrage ([link removed])
Senior Editor, Digital

Each U.S. state is allowed two statues to put on display in the halls of Congress. It’s a way to honor noteworthy figures in a state’s history.

About nine years ago, North Carolina began a process to replace one of its two statues in the Capitol building, specifically the one of state Gov. Charles Aycock, who led a white supremacy campaign ([link removed]) in the early 20th century and used his power to disenfranchise Black people.

North Carolina’s new 7-foot-tall statue was installed in National Statuary Hall last week, which depicts “America’s Pastor” holding an open Bible.

Our question: Who was immortalized in North Carolina’s new statue?

Send your answers to [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) or tweet using #PoliticsTrivia. The first correct answers will earn a shout-out next week.

Last week, we asked: What is the present-day name of the agency first created to enforce the tariffs of the U.S. government?

The answer: The U.S. Coast Guard ([link removed]) . The agency’s roots date back to 1790 when President George Washington signed the Tariff Act. The modern-day Coast Guard was created after Congress merged the Revenue Cutter Service with the Life-Saving Service in 1915.

Congratulations to our winners: Crystal Warlitner and Brenda Radford!

Thank you all for reading and watching. We’ll drop into your inbox next week.
[link removed]
Want more news and analysis in your inbox?
Explore all of the PBS NewsHour's newsletters ([link removed]) .
[link removed]
[link removed]

============================================================
Copyright © 2024 WETA, All rights reserved.

Our mailing address is:
3620 South 27th Street
Arlington, VA 22206

** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
** update subscription preferences ([link removed])