No. of Recommendations: 8
Are we talking past each other. I am saying the 60% that are eligible for parole but ultimately are ineligible for asylum are evidence of the inadequacy of the vetting process at the border.
How? The "vetting" takes place at the trial. People are entitled to a hearing on their asylum claims, in front of a judge. Not in front of a Border Patrol agent. The initial review isn't intended to be a final adjudication of their claims, just whether they're presenting enough of a claim to warrant actually going to the trial.
Honestly, with a success rate of 40% by the time you get to trial, it's probably evidence that the initial vetting is too strict, rather than too lose. If claimants are winning nearly half the time when they get to court, it means that the claimant population in general has pretty strong arguments for asylum.
