Asylum revamp won’t fix crisis

George Nethercutt and Richard Kuhling’s piece, “Asylum process should be revamped” (Aug. 13), is based on a misunderstanding of what an asylee is and the plight of asylees in general.

First, asylees make their claims under the same section of the Immigration and Nationality Act as refugees. INA§101(a)(42) defines a refugee as one outside one’s country of nationality who is unable or unwilling to avail oneself of the protection of that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. A dictionary definition is insufficient grounds for the authors’ case.

Second, allowing asylum seekers to make their claims at a U.S. embassy or consulate (they are technically U.S. soil) wouldn’t solve any problems and would create more. Asylees are fleeing for their lives. Remaining in their home countries while awaiting adjudication of their claims would be dangerous or even deadly.

By and large, however, I feel the authors miss the point entirely. Revamping the nation’s asylum policy isn’t going to solve the greater problems that created the crisis at the border in the first place.

Gregory Cunningham

Spokane