Listen to this story.Enjoy more audio and podcasts on iOS or Android.
Your browser does not support the <audio> element.
SO YOU WANT to come to America. Venezuela, your home country, is suffering under Nicolás Maduro’s violent kleptocracy. What to do? Good luck getting a green card: employers won’t bother sponsoring a low-skilled worker like you, and you have no immediate family in America to vouch for you. Your WhatsApp is filled with news of friends who have crossed America’s southern border. You decide to follow them and, after a hellish trip, make it to the Rio Grande. You could try to slip across undetected—about 600,000 “gotaways” managed it last year. Or you can tell the border agents who intercept you that you want asylum. Odds are that they will release you with a court date scheduled in several months’ time, kickstarting a process that may take years. Welcome to America.
In November 2023 nearly 250,000 migrants crossed the southern border. The surge—and the perception that America’s borders are open—is a giant political liability for President Joe Biden. Just 27% of Americans tell pollsters that they approve of his handling of the border. More than twice as many trust Donald Trump on the issue. The fact that surging migration over the southern border could cost Mr Biden the election in November has made the problem trickier to solve. Wrangling over a deal to fund Ukraine in exchange for tighter border security and asylum limits has dragged on for months. Although Senate leaders say an agreement is close, some Republicans—reportedly including Mr Trump—seem to want the border chaos to fester, to better beat Mr Biden over the head with it during the election campaign.
Several factors explain the surge: violence and instability around the globe; plentiful job openings in America; the accurate perception that Mr Biden is more welcoming than his predecessor; and cumbersome, limited pathways to come legally. An overwhelmed border apparatus also invites more crossings, notes David Bier of the Cato Institute, a think-tank. When people hear that they are unlikely to be detained and deported, more try their luck.
Decades of neglect and partisan rancour have crippled America’s immigration system and created a situation where immigrants view asylum-seeking as the surest way to get into the country, rather than a long-shot attempt. Congress last made meaningful reform to immigration law in 1990. Comprehensive, bipartisan reform has seemed close several times since, only to fall apart in the end. In 2006, 2007 and 2013 bipartisan Senate bills included a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, more visas for workers and stricter enforcement at the border. In recent years Democrats have largely been animated by the desire to protect daca recipients, immigrants who were brought to America as children, from deportation.
Mr Trump’s candidacy upended the politics of immigration. When he launched his campaign in 2015, the number of migrants apprehended nationwide was at its lowest level since 1971. That fact did not, of course, stop Mr Trump from declaring that migrants threatened the American way of life. (“They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”) In 2019 irregular entries at the southern border jumped. Mr Trump saw detention as a means of deterrence and made some migrants with pending asylum claims wait in Mexico. At one time during his presidency nearly 57,000 people were detained. The surge was so great that even Mr Trump released a quarter of migrants into the country immediately with a notice to appear (NTA) in immigration court.
Borderline, personalities, disorder
Mr Biden reduced detentions—the number in custody today is around 38,000—and scrapped the requirement to remain in Mexico. He has tried less effective deterrents. His administration wants to steer migrants towards ports of entry where they arrive for appointments made via a smartphone app. Most are admitted with permission to stay for a year or two. By contrast people caught crossing illegally are presumed ineligible for asylum, with a few narrow exceptions, and quickly deported.
Chart: The Economist
At least that is how it is supposed to work. In reality most migrants who cross illegally are still being released into the country, and irregular arrivals far exceed those at official crossings. Once on American soil a migrant can request asylum, which involves a screening with an asylum officer. Because of Mr Biden’s reluctance to pursue detention and an insufficient number of asylum officers, in November seven in ten were handed an NTA and sent on their way.
Last year the Biden administration also began granting parole to up to 30,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans each month, if applicants identified a financial sponsor in America. Again the goal was to make flows more orderly and decrease illegal arrivals. Permission to stay lasts two years but can be revoked at any time. Illegal crossings by Haitians, Nicaraguans and Cubans plummeted. But Venezuelans, who are less likely to have social ties to America, continue to enter illegally. “Most of the Venezuelans arriving now don’t have family, friends, relatives,” says Theresa Cardinal Brown, who served in the Department for Homeland Security in the Bush and Obama administrations.
Once across the border, migrants head to cities. Shelter systems in New York City, Chicago and Denver are overwhelmed and their mayors want Mr Biden’s help. This is partly the doing of Greg Abbott, the Republican governor of Texas, who is busing migrants to Democratic-run cities. But big cities are also natural magnets for migrants.
With an NTA in hand, new arrivals enter the court system, where the backlog is growing faster than judges can keep up. Cases in immigration court surpassed 3m in November. It takes more than four years on average just to get an initial asylum hearing. Doubling the number of judges would clear the backlog—but only by 2032, according to an estimate from the Congressional Research Service.
Half of asylum cases are denied, and decisions are inconsistent. One judge in Houston denied 95% of her asylum cases last year; another in San Francisco denied just 1% of hers. But the immense wait, low chance of detention and the prospect of work in America encourage migrants with a weak claim to cross the border. Prioritising the most recent arrivals’ cases would reduce this incentive, notes Stephen Yale-Loehr of Cornell Law School. A long journey seems less worth it if the reward is deportation rather than an NTA.
The looming election, Mr Trump’s perceived strength on border issues and Mr Biden’s desire to arm Ukraine mean that the president wants to make a deal. His openness to tougher border enforcement is also no doubt fuelled by Americans’ rightward turn on immigration. Polling from YouGov suggests that more Americans favour building a southern border wall than don’t. Even 32% of Democrats now say they support the idea, up from 20% in 2022.
Whether the House and the Senate can agree on reform is questionable. A deal may include funding for more Border Patrol agents, the ability to shut down migrant intake if encounters reach a certain level, a higher bar for migrants to pass their interview—so that they are not released into the country unless they are likely to actually receive asylum—and limits on parole. Any changes to asylum rules will almost certainly be challenged in the courts.
But House Republicans have waffled, often insisting that they would accept nothing other than HR2, a hardline immigration bill passed along party lines last year that would be dead on arrival in the Senate. On the left, progressives do not want to tighten access to asylum. Both groups should beware. A new poll from The Economist and YouGov suggests that a plurality of Americans want Congress to pass a bill that both funds Ukraine and restricts asylum. The politicians should not ignore their voters. ■
Stay on top of American politics with Checks and Balance, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter, which examines the state of American democracy and the issues that matter to voters.
Job growth was stronger than expected in March, providing at least temporary reassurance that the labor market is stable, the Labor Department reported Friday.
Nonfarm payrolls increased 228,000 for the month, up from the revised 117,000 in February and better than the Dow Jones estimate for 140,000, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
However, the unemployment rate moved up to 4.2%, higher than the 4.1% forecast as the labor force participation rate also increased.
Though the headline number beat estimates, the report comes against a highly uncertain backdrop after President Donald Trump’s tariff announcement this week that has intensified fears of a global trade war that could damage economic growth.
Stocks reacted little to the report, with futures tied to the Dow Jones Industrial Average off their lows still down by more than 900 points while Treasury yields held sharply negative.
“Today’s better than expected jobs report will help ease fears of an immediate softening in the US labor market,” said Lindsay Rosner, head of multi-sector fixed income investing at Goldman Sachs Asset Management. “However, this number has become a side dish with the market just focusing on the entrée: tariffs.”
Trump announced a flat duty of 10% against all trading partners along with a wide menu of so-called reciprocal tariffs that already have provoked retaliation from China and others. Wall Street has been in aggressively sell-off mode for the past two days, with stocks tumbling and investors flocking to the safety of fixed income.
Previous indicators showed the labor market holding up, but the tariff moves raise the possibility that companies will hold back on hiring as they assess just what the new trade landscape will look like.
The March numbers, though, pointed to a still-strong labor market, though the January and February counts saw substantial downward revisions. In addition to the cut of 34,000 from the initial count for February, January’s growth is now at just 111,000, down 14,000 from the previous estimate.
Average hourly earnings increased 0.3% on the month, in line with the forecast, while the annual rate of 3.8% was 0.1 percentage point below the estimate and the lowest level since July 2024. The average work week was unchanged at 34.2 hours.
For March, health care was the leading growth area, consistent with prior months. The industry added 54,000 jobs, almost exactly in line with its 12-month average. Other growth areas included social assistance and retail, which both added 24,000, while transportation and warehousing showed a 23,000 increase.
Federal government positions declined by just 4,000, despite the Elon Musk-led efforts, though the Department of Government Efficiency, to pare the federal workforce. However, the BLS noted that workers on severance or paid leave are counted as employed. A report Thursday from consultancy firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas indicated that DOGE-related layoffs have totaled more than 275,000 so far.
“While Friday’s jobs report showed that the economy is still adding jobs even with the tariff uncertainty and Federal job cuts, the data is backward looking and doesn’t say anything about how employers might fare over the coming months,” said Glen Smith, chief investment officer at GDS Wealth Management.
A broader unemployment indicator that includes those not looking for work as well as workers holding part-time jobs for economic reasons — the underemployed — edged lower to 7.9%.
The survey of households, which is used to determine the unemployment rate, was closely in line with the establishment payroll count, as it showed a gain of 201,000 workers.
Get Your Ticket to Pro LIVE
Join us at the New York Stock Exchange! Uncertain markets? Gain an edge with CNBC Pro LIVE, an exclusive, inaugural event at the historic New York Stock Exchange.
In today’s dynamic financial landscape, access to expert insights is paramount. As a CNBC Pro subscriber, we invite you to join us for our first exclusive, in-person CNBC Pro LIVE event at the iconic NYSE on Thursday, June 12.
Join interactive Pro clinics led by our Pros Carter Worth, Dan Niles, and Dan Ives, with a special edition of Pro Talks with Tom Lee. You’ll also get the opportunity to network with CNBC experts, talent and other Pro subscribers during an exciting cocktail hour on the legendary trading floor. Tickets are limited!
Chinese and U.S. flags flutter near The Bund, before U.S. trade delegation meet their Chinese counterparts for talks in Shanghai, China July 30, 2019.
Aly Song | Reuters
China’s finance ministry on Friday said it will impose a 34% tariff on all goods imported from the U.S. starting on April 10, following duties imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration earlier this week.
“China urges the United States to immediately cancel its unilateral tariff measures and resolve trade differences through consultation in an equal, respectful and mutually beneficial manner,” the ministry said, according to a Google translation.
It further criticized Washington’s decision to impose 34% of additional reciprocal levies on China — bringing total U.S. tariffs against the country to 54% — as “inconsistent with international trade rules” and “seriously” undermining Chinese interests, as well as endangering “global economic development and the stability of the production and supply chain,” according to a Google-translated report from Chinese state news outlet Xinhua.
Separately, China also added 11 U.S. firms to the “unreliable entities list” that the Beijing administration says have violated market rules or contractual commitments. China’s ministry of commerce also added 16 U.S. entities to its export control list and said it would implement export controls on seven types of rare-earth related items, including samarium, gadolinium and terbium.
CNBC has reached out to the White House for comment.
Beijing, which also entertained a tenuous trade relationship with Washington under Trump’s first term, had warned that it would take “resolute counter-measures” to safeguard its own interests after the White House disclosed its latest sweeping tariffs on Wednesday.
Other U.S. trading partners had held off from announcing retaliatory tariffs amid hopes of further negotiations, with the European Union nevertheless voicing a readiness to respond.
Analysts expect the U.S.’ protectionist trade policies to steer China toward other trading partners and see it implement further stimulus measures in an effort to galvanize the economy. China has been battling a property crisis and weak consumer and business sentiment since the end of the Covid-19 pandemic.
China’s retaliatory tariffs announced Friday exacerbated declines in global markets which had already been thrust into turmoil by fears of inflationary, recessionary and global economic growth risks following the White House’s tariffs.
The conservative counter-revolution began with a secret memo, at least as the tale is often told on America’s political left, with the mix of fear and envy characteristic of the conspiracy-minded. In the summer of 1971 Lewis Powell was an eminent corporate lawyer, soon to be nominated and confirmed for the Supreme Court, when he drafted a confidential proposal for the US Chamber of Commerce. Powell laid out a costly, co-ordinated, years-long programme to counter the left’s influence in the media, the courts, the boardroom and, above all, universities. “There is reason to believe that the campus is the single most dynamic source” of an intensifying assault on free enterprise, he warned.