Government Abandoned Its Duty
When Government Abandoned Its Duty: Immigration, Accountability, and the Constitution
We, the American people, had grown increasingly troubled by credible reports that members of the Democratic Party, while serving in office, had traveled abroad using taxpayer funds to counsel foreign nationals on how best to present claims for asylum in the United States. Such actions, if confirmed, threatened to misuse federal resources to coach individuals toward exploiting gaps in our immigration and asylum systems.During the Biden administration, these concerns intensified. Enforcement at the southern border had reportedly been scaled back, and authorities appeared to have dropped longstanding mechanisms that had once helped manage and control entry. In Fiscal Year 2021, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) recorded the highest number of Southwest border encounters in two decades.ⁱ These numbers included both single adults and family units, and reflected dramatic increases in crossings from countries such as Venezuela, Nicaragua, Ecuador, and Haiti compared to averages from 2014-2019.ⁱ
These developments raised serious questions about whether the executive branch had neglected its constitutional and statutory duties.
Constitutional and statutory duties ignored
The U.S. Constitution imposes solemn obligations on the federal government. Article IV, Section 4 requires that the United States “guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government,” and protect each of them “against Invasion.” Although historically interpreted in contexts of military threat, many citizens believed that permitting vast uncontrolled entry without enforcement of immigration law undermined that guarantee in spirit, if not text.
Statutorily, Congress had established clear mandates:
-
Under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), all “applicants for admission” who were not subject to expedited removal must be detained for proceedings under section 240 of the Immigration & Nationality Act.ⁱⁱ
-
Under 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a), it was unlawful to knowingly assist or facilitate the entry of persons who had entered the United States in violation of law.
-
And while rarely invoked, 18 U.S.C. § 2381 (Treason) provided that anyone “owing allegiance to the United States” who adhered to its enemies or aided those giving aid or comfort to enemies was guilty of treason — punishable by death or imprisonment and incapable of holding office.
These statutes, together with constitutional duties, imposed obligations the government was expected to follow. Yet many felt the administration had fallen far short.
Failures in enforcement and accountability
In FY 2021, CBP reported record-high numbers of encounters at the Southwest border—numbers that few predicted and many warned would strain processing, detention, and removal systems.ⁱ The escalation from FY 2014-2019 averages to FY 2021 for many countries was measured in the thousands of percent.ⁱ
Despite that, critics argued that the government had abandoned or weakened core enforcement tools:
-
Detention mandates under section 1225(b)(2)(A) had, in practice, often been bypassed or delayed.
-
The credible fear process, which is supposed to screen asylum claims, was argued by some to have been managed so leniently that it became less effective in distinguishing between legitimate and non-legitimate claims.
-
Oversight by Congress was sparse; many legislative proposals to strengthen enforcement were stalled, modified, or never brought to a vote. The courts, likewise, were seen by some as reluctant or slow to adjudicate the legality of executive decisions regarding immigration enforcement.
Meanwhile, anecdotal and media reports claimed that among those entering the U.S. without interception or formal removal were violent gang members, human traffickers, and drug traffickers. While some of these reports remained unverified or disputed, their prevalence heightened the perception that lax border control had imperiled safety and sovereignty.
The constitutional cost
By failing to enforce laws passed by Congress, the executive branch arguably overstepped its proper bounds. The separation of powers required that Congress legislate and the executive enforce; when the executive neglected to enforce, or appeared to facilitate evasion of, statutory mandates, it undermined that constitutional framework.
Citizens had come to believe that their leaders had violated their oath to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Government accountability seemed to have eroded, with few consequences for policy failures, even as the burdens—on states, local governments, law enforcement, schools, hospitals—had emerged with magnitude.
In Short
What was once policy debate and legislative discretion had, in many eyes, become abdication. Immigration reform should have been debated openly and implemented lawfully, within the frame of statutes, constitutional requirements, and proper oversight. Instead, in the view of many citizens, governing had slipped into neglect — shortage of enforcement, absence of accountability, and disregard for constitutional duty.
If our leaders had recommitted to enforcing the law, honoring statutes, and answering to the people through both Congress and the Judiciary, much of the border crisis might have been prevented. We deserved better, and history will judge how we responded.
Footnotes & Sources
ⁱ “Fiscal Year 2021 Southwest Border Enforcement Report,” Office of Homeland Security Statistics, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. FY 2021 marked the highest number of Southwest Border encounters in 20 years. https://ohss.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/2022_0818_plcy_southwest_border_enforcement_report_fy_2021_0.pdf Office of Homeland Security Statistics
ⁱⁱ Matter of YAJURE HURTADO, 29 I&N Dec. 216, Board of Immigration Appeals (2025) — confirming that under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A), “applicants for admission” were required to be detained during section 240 proceedings. Department of Justice
ⁱⁱⁱ U.S. Code, Title 8, § 1225(b)(1)(B), (b)(2)(A) – Inspection by immigration officers; expedited removal; credible fear interviews; mandatory detention for certain applicants for admission. Legal Information Institute+1
ⁱⁱⁱⁱ CBP Enforcement Statistics, FY 2021 — summary of apprehensions, inadmissibles, arrests of individuals with criminal convictions, etc. https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/cbp-enforcement-statistics-fy2021 U.S. Customs and Border Protection
ⁱⁱⁱ⁵ Rising Border Encounters in 2021: An Overview and Analysis, American Immigration Council. Details on deaths in crossings and volume of expulsions in FY 2021. https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/fact-sheet/rising-border-encounters-in-2021/
Comments