The Memo: Nonexistent ‘border surge’ scrambles immigration politics 

The politics of immigration are being scrambled in a way that virtually no one expected. 

The ending of Title 42 late last week was forecast to spark a major surge of migrants across the southern border. President Biden’s administration and his fiercest opponents were at least united in predicting that outcome. 

There were real fears that a human tsunami would overwhelm immigration authorities. 

But none of it happened — at least so far. 

According to the most recent figures released Monday, the number of encounters at the border fell by about 50 percent in the first three days after Title 42 was abandoned 

Whereas the daily number of such encounters had been predicted to reach somewhere in the ballpark of 13,000, it instead came in around 5,000. There were few scenes of disorder or chaos. 

The unexpectedly positive development makes the knotty politics of the issue even more complicated. 

Immigration has long been one of President Biden’s weakest issues, according to polls. Many independents, as well as Republicans, were dissatisfied as encounters between unauthorized migrants and border agents reached an all-time high of around 250,000 in December.  

On the flip side, some on the left were unhappy with the White House for, as they saw it, not repudiating the kind of policies favored by former President Trump forcefully enough. 

In a Reuters/Ipsos poll earlier this month, a mere 26 percent of Americans approved of Biden’s performance on immigration. Sixty percent disapproved. 

Now the president, who seemed to be facing real peril last Thursday in Title 42’s final hours, is in a better position than expected. But, even so, those polling numbers are not about to suddenly reverse in his favor. 

He can hardly claim a triumph when there are still thousands of crossings every day — and when some of the measures he took to contain the crisis angered parts of his base. 

Those measures included the increased use of expedited removal and a rule summarized by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as presuming “that those who do not use lawful pathways to enter the United States are ineligible for asylum.” 

The complexity of the picture renders many Democrats cautious. 

“I just don’t think this issue lends itself to creating a lot of advantages,” said Democratic strategist Joel Payne. “Even if it is handled right, you are still going to piss off a lot of people. 

“There is no winning on this, where everyone has a different perspective on it.” 

Biden, for his part, has proceeded with caution in the days since Title 42 fell. The regulation, deployed during the Trump era, allowed immigration authorities to swiftly turn back migrants, including asylum-seekers. 

The rationale for using that mechanism — that it was necessary to protect public health during the COVID-19 pandemic — had come to seem highly questionable for many months before it was ended. 

Biden, asked by reporters Sunday how he thought things were going at the border, replied, “Much better than you all expected.” 

Asked if he had plans to visit the border, Biden responded, “Not in the near term, no. … It would just be disruptive, not anything else.” 

Republicans, for their part, believe immigration will continue to be a political vulnerability for the president, surge or not. 

“As long as you are having these kinds of numbers cross the border, it is going to continue to be a major problem for Democrats across the board,” said GOP strategist Ron Bonjean. 

The numbers crossing the border even before the ending of Title 42, Bonjean argued, left Americans with the perception “that we have a broken dam and that the flows of illegal immigrants are just coming through without a lot of pushback, without an organized effort to stop them.” 

More hardline Republicans simply refuse to accept the characterizations of what has taken place in the past few days. 

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) on Monday took exception to a CNN graphic that said there was “still no surge.” 

“How stupid do they think the American people are?” Boebert asked. 

But there are hard questions being asked of the media from the opposite ideological direction, too. 

The projections of imminent catastrophe, and the fact they have so far proven unfounded, have led some experts to criticize right-leaning media, in particular, for hyperbole and scaremongering. 

Some of the stories prior to the ending of Title 42 were “absolutely wrong and irresponsible and disconnected from the reality that exists on the ground,” said Jorge Loweree, the managing director of programs at the American Immigration Council. 

“There is absolutely need for change at the border. We need to reform our system and create something that is fair but also fast,” Loweree added. “But the media narrative about chaos and the supposed lack of preparation has not been productive. It hasn’t helped.” 

Loweree also claimed the downsides of Title 42 had not been fully appreciated. Although the rule allowed authorities to quickly turn back migrants, it also did little to discourage repeated attempted crossings. 

Title 42 “was a failed public health measure but also a failed border management measure,” he contended. 

The debate over the rights and wrongs of Title 42 will continue for years. 

But, right now, its ending — and what has followed — has left just about everyone scratching their heads.