Tech, Politics, and the Future of Asylum: Challenges and Opportunities in the U.S. System - Refugee & Law Series (5)

Introduction

The U.S. asylum system is undergoing substantial transformations due to political divisions, emerging technologies, and complex global immigration patterns. Recently, there have been significant shifts in enforcement and the adoption of contentious digital tools. As the U.S. handles the increasing volume of asylum claims, it confronts a crucial question: Can technological and policy adjustments develop a system that is both efficient and compassionate?

This article explores the relationship between technology, politics, and asylum law in the U.S., along with the changes since the Trump administration. It briefly examines the impact of artificial intelligence and automation, as well as their future implications.

The Political Landscape: From Trump to Biden and Beyond

The Trump administration fundamentally altered the U.S. asylum landscape with policies focusing on deterrence rather than protection. These included:

• The "Remain in Mexico" policy (Migrant Protection Protocols)

  
  

• Expels asylum seekers without hearings

  
  

• Attempts to raise the "credible fear" standard

  
  

• The creation of third-country asylum bans

Although the Biden administration has rolled back many of these measures, it has also faced criticism from advocates for preserving aspects of deterrence, including limited access at ports of entry, the use of CBP One for appointment-only processing, and new asylum bans for individuals who do not first apply in transit countries.

When the second Trump administration term starts, immigration enforcement will be reinvigorated. His administration has:

• Expanded funding for ICE operations to a historic $178 billion

  
  

• Reopened the use of Guantánamo Bay for high-risk immigration detainees

  
  

• Resurrected asylum bans tied to Title 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act

  
  

• Fast-tracked detention and deportation procedures, often without full hearings

These changes have caused concerns about due process, mass detention, and the erosion of humanitarian protections.

Technology in Asylum Processing: Hope or Hazard?

AI and Automation in Adjudication

Certain immigration courts have experimented with digital decision-support tools to identify specific risk or fraud factors in asylum cases. Advocates of digital methods claim these systems can minimize "refugee roulette," which refers to inconsistent outcomes due to differences in location and judges. On the other hand, critics argue that these systems could heighten the risk of automating bias, as they might replicate structural discrimination present in historical data, and algorithms might favor certain nationalities or patterns of asylum claims.

CBP One: A Digital Gateway with Barriers

The CBP One app, initiated by the Biden administration, provides a structured system for asylum seekers to schedule appointments at ports of entry. It is reported that the app has faced several problems, including limited availability and random selection, which frustrate users, technical glitches, and language barriers.

The app is also criticized for functioning as a barrier itself, denying access to urgent asylum seekers without smartphones or internet access. The app was briefly suspended and later revived in 2025 to facilitate both entry appointments and fast-track deportations, raising concerns about digital tools being repurposed for enforcement rather than protection.

Backlogs and Bureaucracy: A Human Toll

Under the USCIS report, the current average wait time for an asylum hearing is 4.5 years. This delay leaves families in limbo and vulnerable to exploitation, strains local support systems, and reduces the credibility of the asylum process.  

At the same time, expanded ICE enforcement has led to increased courthouse arrests, with immigrants reporting fear of attending even routine hearings. Combined with digital tools, these delays and enforcement policies create a climate of uncertainty that undermines the integrity of the asylum system.

Legal Pushback and Civil Society Response

Many advocacy groups and civil liberties organizations are contesting these policies:

• The ACLU and Human Rights First have initiated legal actions against the reinstated asylum prohibitions and CBP One limitations.

  
  

• Federal courts have recently invalidated significant parts of asylum bans from the Biden era for breaching the Refugee Act and international law.

  
  

• Nonprofits and legal clinics are developing community-based monitoring systems to observe technological failures and ensure accountability.

Meanwhile, researchers and technologists are proposing "ethics-first" models of AI for immigration, emphasizing:

• Transparent algorithm design

  
  

• Independent oversight

  
  

• Inclusion of human judgment in all final decisions

Conclusion

The asylum system in the U.S. is at a crossroads—shaped by unprecedented backlogs, powerful technologies, and polarizing politics. If the U.S. continues down a path of expediency over justice, it risks abandoning its legacy as a sanctuary for the persecuted. But if it embraces fairness, transparency, and technological responsibility, it can rebuild a system that honors both its legal obligations and moral commitments.

As we move forward, one principle must remain non-negotiable: Asylum is a right, not a privilege. Technology should strengthen that right, not undermine it.

Bibliography

American Immigration Council. "A Guide to Title 42 Expulsions at the Border." Updated June 2023. https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org

The Washington Post. "What a $178 Billion Gift Means for the Immigration Police State." July 8, 2025. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/07/08/immigration-ice-trump-big-beautiful-bill/

Reuters. "ACLU Sues Over Trump Ban on Asylum at US–Mexico Border." February 3, 2025. https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/aclu-sues-over-trump-ban-asylum-us-mexico-border-2025-02-03/