The Southern Border: A Humanitarian Crisis
In January of this year, U.S. Customs and Border Protection impounded 254 pounds of fentanyl—the largest seizure of the drug at any port of entry—at the Nogales Commercial Facility in Arizona. This amount of fentanyl is lethal enough to kill 57 million Americans. A few weeks later, President Trump declared a national emergency on the southern border in response to the “invasion of drugs and criminals coming into our country.” The Washington Post’s editorial board in response to Mr. Trump’s declaration said, “So let’s stick to one big basic truth: There is no crisis at the southern border.”
Under the Nation Emergencies Act, the president is empowered with wide-reaching privileges. The powers granted include, but are not limited to, the capability to authorize and construct military construction projects using any existing military defense appropriations, and to draft any retired Coast Guard officers or enlisted members into active duty.
An opposing judgement to this declaration claims that this is an attempt by the Trump Administration to circumvent the Democrats’ aversion and Trump’s failure to strike a $5 billion deal with Congress to build a border wall. Many claim that this is an unconstitutional order and that a political dispute about border security has now devolved into a dispute over the separation of powers. However, media outlets that Mr. Trump critiques as “fake news”, such as CNN and the Huffington Post, may now be readjusting previously-held scrutinies. Kevin K. McAleenan, commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, has said that the border is at a “breaking point”.[su_pullquote align=”right”]Kevin K. McAleenan, commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, has said that the border is at a “breaking point.”[/su_pullquote]
At the moment of the commissioner’s announcement, Customs and Border Protection reported that more than 76,000 migrants are being directly released into the country. These migrants are not being turned over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, do not have electronic ankle monitors, and are simply given a notice to appear in court at a later date. The detention system cannot adequately house the overflow of migrant families. According to the commissioner, processing centers are “well beyond capacity” with facilities lacking sufficient resources and border agents having difficulty addressing medical needs.
A typical opposition to the necessity for greater border security is that drug tariffing is effectively handled by seizures at ports of entry. For the fiscal year of 2018, 432,000 pounds of drugs were attempted to be crossed but seized on the southern border at point of entry, and 476,000 pounds at non-points of entry.[su_pullquote align=”right”]The initial Democratic response, to reject the legitimacy of this emergency, reveals not only the divisiveness of bipartisan extremism, but also an attribution of racial politics to this issue by both sides.[/su_pullquote]
The southern border is a humanitarian issue. There is a national emergency as it comes to the thousands of migrant families and the lack of resources to deal with them. There is a national emergency with regards to the plentitudes of Americans that could be affected by the illegal trafficking of drugs. The initial Democratic response, to reject the legitimacy of this emergency, reveals not only the divisiveness of bipartisan extremism, but also an attribution of racial politics to this issue by both sides.[su_pullquote]There is a national emergency as it comes to the thousands of migrant families and the lack of resources to deal with them. There is a national emergency with regards to the plentitudes of Americans that could be affected by the illegal trafficking of drugs.[/su_pullquote]
Mr. Trump launched his 2016 presidential campaign with a provocative speech where he described immigrants from Mexico as, “bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume are good people.” This statement was frank and lacked the curtesy of political correctness that is usually afforded with candidates. This rhetoric is crass, but the normalization of publicly and irresponsibly labelling figures as racists negatively impacts political discussion as well.
Social hysteria surrounding illegalities such as illicit drug usage has been defined by racial associations stemming from President Nixon’s “war on drugs,” and then the Reagan Administration’s doubling down on this policy. John Ehrlichman, once Chief Domestic Advisor for Mr. Nixon, later disclosed that the Administration’s two most competitive social adversaries, Black Americans and the antiwar left. The allegedly devised remedy to the situation was to influence the American public to associate the social identities generally categorized as “hippies” with marijuana and Black Americans with heroin, and then implementing codification to heavily criminalize both. Cannabis was even designated temporarily in the most restrictive category of drugs, Schedule One.
The emergency at the southern border is considered to be a partisan issue—but it is not. Though racial identity and drug usage are associated in our nation’s history, this does not mean that the Trump Administration’s declaration for policy action is rooted in this prejudice agenda. The southern border needs to be observed as a bipartisan issue and a humanitarian issue, where a lack of address could lead to damaging, if not fatal, societal consequences.
Ryan Martirano ‘21 studies in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be reached at rtmartirano@wustl.edu.