President Joe Biden's executive order regarding immigration has sparked widespread criticism. The order, aimed at controlling migrant entries, is said to allow high migrant inflow despite the pressing border issues.

The order establishes new regulations for handling asylum claims at U.S. Ports of Entry, mandating a weekly limit of 17,500 asylum claimants.

PJ Media criticized President Biden's executive order as insufficient in curbing the escalating border crisis.

New Authority Granted To DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas

DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas now holds the authority to only accept migrants who claim asylum at established Ports of Entry.

Critics, however, argue that this measure continues to enable a substantial number of migrant entries via a large-scale parole pipeline.

Under this new framework, two tens of thousands of migrants apply for parole weekly and, upon approval, are released into the U.S. with work authorization.

Concerns Over Job Market Impact and Migrant Encounters

A report as of February highlights that out of the 2.9 million jobs added, immigrants have filled six out of ten, many presumed to be non-citizens. This influx is being viewed as competition for American workers, potentially skewing job market balances.

The executive order also sets a high threshold, tolerating up to 900,000 migrant encounters annually before the Department of Homeland Security intervenes to restrict asylum claims at non-port entries.

Such high numbers have stirred further debates about national policy and security.

Over 800,000 Migrants Entered U.S. In One Year

Statistics over the past year show that more than 800,000 migrants have entered the U.S. through the parole pipeline created under this executive program.

Comparatively, this number correlates nearly with the number of U.S.-born babies, suggesting a significant demographic shift.

Moreover, unaccounted migrants, known as 'getaways', are estimated at around 600,000 annually, intensifying the scrutiny on border control and immigration policies.

Sen. Roger Marshall Critiques The Executive Strategy

Senator Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) criticized the executive order for its high tolerance of migrant entries and potential loopholes. Sen. Marshall stated.:

It will not stop up to 30,000 migrants from flying directly into the USA and being released under Biden’s mass parole program each month. This action does not address the millions of unvetted ‘getaways’ entering our country, and the asylum 'ban' is filled with exemptions including unaccompanied minors, playing right into the cartels’ hands, and child trafficking operations at the border.

Replacement Theory Fuels Political Debate

Another dimension to the debate is the unquoted concern highlighting that the rate of migrant entries could equate to replacing one migrant for every two U.S.-born infants.

Critics argue that this could be a strategic move by the Democrats for political gain, an assertion causing significant controversy and discussion in political circles.

An anonymous criticism stating President Biden’s new executive order "isn’t a solution to the border crisis; it just perpetuates the crisis" also hinted at perceived ulterior motives behind the policy decisions, framing them as part of a broader demographic and political strategy.

An Ongoing Challenge at U.S. Borders

With the Biden administration projected to see nearly two million migrants entering the U.S. annually, the figures loom comparable to the nation's birth rates, deepening the complexity of the immigration dialogue in the United States.

The interplay of asylum rules, parole systems, and migrant entries presents a multifaceted dilemma. As the administration navigates these turbulent waters, the outcomes of these policies will likely influence the nation's social, economic, and political landscapes extensively.

In conclusion, Biden's executive order on immigration, marked by both complexity and controversy, sets a significant number of migrant admissions potentially impacting demographic dynamics in the U.S. Critics argue it adds to the crisis rather than solves it, with substantial implications for national policy and security.