Reason Article RatingFederal Court Rules Against Biden Policy Severely Restricting Asylum
- Bias Rating
50% Medium Conservative
- Reliability
60% ReliableFair
- Policy Leaning
54% Very Conservative
- Politician Portrayal
N/A
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative
Continue For Free
Create your free account to see the in-depth bias analytics and more.
Continue
Continue
By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy, and subscribe to email updates. Already a member: Log inBias Score Analysis
The A.I. bias rating includes policy and politician portrayal leanings based on the author’s tone found in the article using machine learning. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.
Sentiments
Overall Sentiment
N/A
- Liberal
- Conservative
| Sentence | Sentiment | Bias |
|---|---|---|
| "Asylum can potentially be denied if the migrant had a safe option for refuge in another country." | Positive | 4% Conservative |
| "As written, the Rule imposes a presumption of ineligibility on asylum seekers who did not apply for or were granted asylum in a transit country regardless of whether that country is a safe option." | Positive | 0% Conservative |
| "The Rule is also contrary to law because it presumes ineligible for asylum noncitizens who fail to apply for protection in a transit country, despite Congress's clear intent that such a factor should only limit access to asylum where the transit country actually presents a safe option." | Negative | -10% Liberal |
| "Asylum can then be granted if the migrant in question is unable or unwilling to return to his or her home county 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." | Negative | -12% Liberal |
| "The Biden policy, like Trump's before it, violates the plain text of the Refugee Act of 1980, which as Judge Tigar notes, provides that any noncitizen who arrives in the United States, 'whether or not at a designated port of arrival' and 'irrespective of [their] status, may apply for asylum.'" | Negative | -20% Liberal |
| "In my view, the better approach to border management is not to preemptively bar asylum-seekers fleeing terrible conditions, but to make legal migration easier -- thereby obviating the need for many migrants to come to the border at all, and enabling others to quickly move on to their final destinations in the interior." | Negative | -20% Liberal |
| "The Court concludes that the Rule is contrary to law because it presumes ineligible for asylum noncitizens who enter between ports of entry, using a maer of entry that Congress expressly intended should not affect access to asylum." | Negative | -22% Liberal |
| "[U]nder the Rule, noncitizens other than Mexican nationals who cross the southern border are presumed ineligible for asylum unless they (1) have received advance permission to travel to the U.S. to apply for parole; (2) present at a port of entry for a pre-scheduled appointment (or without an appointment, if they can demonstrate an ongoing and serious obstacle that precluded pre-scheduling); or (3) have already sought and been denied asylum or other protection in another country en route to the U.S." | Negative | -26% Liberal |
| "In May, the Biden administration instituted what I have called a Trump-lite asylum policy, severely restricting asylum applications by migrants crossing the southern border." | Negative | -34% Liberal |
| "Many migrants potentially eligible for asylum caot take advantage of the various exceptions because they are not from the CNVH nations, have no safe opportunity to apply for asylum elsewhere, and caot effectively use the often clunky app appointment system." | Negative | -36% Liberal |
| "By contrast, under the new Biden policy, non-Mexican migrants who cross the southern border are presumptively barred from applying for asylum unless they fall within certain specified exceptions:" | Negative | -58% Liberal |
| "It is indeed true that iovations such as the CNVH parole policy for migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Venezuela and the possibility of making an appointment using an electronic app, make the Biden rule less onerous than Trump's was." | Positive | 2% Conservative |
| "It is indeed true that iovations such as the CNVH parole policy for migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, and Venezuela and the possibility of making an appointment using an electronic app, make the Biden rule less onerous than Trump's was." | Positive | 2% Conservative |
| "Some of the Biden administration's other policies effectively demonstrate this point." | Negative | -8% Liberal |
| "The decision is unsurprising, given that the same judge had previously issued a ruling against a similar Trump policy in 2019 (it was upheld on appeal)." | Negative | -12% Liberal |
| "But unless the Ninth Circuit overrules its decision striking down the Trump asylum policy, it seems likely Judge Tigar's ruling will be upheld." | Negative | -12% Liberal |
| "The Biden policy, like Trump's before it, violates the plain text of the Refugee Act of 1980, which as Judge Tigar notes, provides that any noncitizen who arrives in the United States, 'whether or not at a designated port of arrival' and 'irrespective of [their] status, may apply for asylum.'" | Positive | 4% Conservative |
| "The Biden policy, like Trump's before it, violates the plain text of the Refugee Act of 1980, which as Judge Tigar notes, provides that any noncitizen who arrives in the United States, 'whether or not at a designated port of arrival' and 'irrespective of [their] status, may apply for asylum.'" | Positive | 4% Conservative |
| "The Biden Administration argues that these exceptions distinguish the policy from the previously invalidated Trump rule, which was more restrictive." | Negative | -20% Liberal |
| "Today, in a lawsuit brought by the ACLU and other immigrant rights organizations, federal district Judge Jon Tigar of the Northern District of California issued a ruling holding that Biden's new asylum restrictions are illegal." | Negative | -32% Liberal |
| "In May, the Biden administration instituted what I have called a Trump-lite asylum policy, severely restricting asylum applications by migrants crossing the southern border." | Negative | -22% Liberal |
| "The policy came into effect after the White House finally ended Title 42 public health expulsions of migrants, which both Trump and Biden had perpetuated long after it became clear that the policy was not effective in its ostensible purpose the spread of Covid to the United States." | Positive | 0% Conservative |
| "The policy came into effect after the White House finally ended Title 42 public health expulsions of migrants, which both Trump and Biden had perpetuated long after it became clear that the policy was not effective in its ostensible purpose the spread of Covid to the United States." | Positive | 0% Conservative |
| "Regardless, Biden, like Trump before him has tried to bar asylum seekers in a way that blatantly violates the text of the law." | Negative | -2% Liberal |
| "Regardless, Biden, like Trump before him has tried to bar asylum seekers in a way that blatantly violates the text of the law." | Negative | -2% Liberal |
| "By contrast, under the new Biden policy, non-Mexican migrants who cross the southern border are presumptively barred from applying for asylum unless they fall within certain specified exceptions:" | Negative | -22% Liberal |
| "Regardless, Biden's policy here, like Trump's seems clearly contrary to the text of the Refugee Act." | Positive | 0% Conservative |
| "Regardless, Biden's policy here, like Trump's seems clearly contrary to the text of the Refugee Act." | Positive | 0% Conservative |
Bias Meter
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative
Contributing sentiments towards policy:
52% : Asylum can potentially be denied if the migrant had a "safe option" for refuge in another country.50% : As written, the Rule imposes a presumption of ineligibility on asylum seekers who did not apply for or were granted asylum in a transit country regardless of whether that country is a safe option.
45% : The Rule is also contrary to law because it presumes ineligible for asylum noncitizens who fail to apply for protection in a transit country, despite Congress's clear intent that such a factor should only limit access to asylum where the transit country actually presents a safe option.
44% : Asylum can then be granted if the migrant in question is ""unable or unwilling to return to" his or her home county "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."
40% : The Biden policy, like Trump's before it, violates the plain text of the Refugee Act of 1980, which as Judge Tigar notes, "provides that any noncitizen who arrives in the United States, 'whether or not at a designated port of arrival' and 'irrespective of [their] status, may apply for asylum.'"
40% : In my view, the better approach to border management is not to preemptively bar asylum-seekers fleeing terrible conditions, but to make legal migration easier -- thereby obviating the need for many migrants to come to the border at all, and enabling others to quickly move on to their final destinations in the interior.
39% : The Court concludes that the Rule is contrary to law because it presumes ineligible for asylum noncitizens who enter between ports of entry, using a manner of entry that Congress expressly intended should not affect access to asylum.
37% : [U]nder the Rule, noncitizens other than Mexican nationals who cross the southern border are presumed ineligible for asylum unless they (1) have received advance permission to travel to the U.S. to apply for parole; (2) present at a port of entry for a pre-scheduled appointment (or without an appointment, if they can demonstrate an "ongoing and serious obstacle" that precluded pre-scheduling); or (3) have already sought and been denied asylum or other protection in another country en route to the U.S.
33% : In May, the Biden administration instituted what I have called a "Trump-lite" asylum policy, severely restricting asylum applications by migrants crossing the southern border.
32% : Many migrants potentially eligible for asylum cannot take advantage of the various exceptions because they are not from the CNVH nations, have no safe opportunity to apply for asylum elsewhere, and cannot effectively use the often clunky app appointment system.
21% : By contrast, under the new Biden policy, non-Mexican migrants who cross the southern border are presumptively barred from applying for asylum unless they fall within certain specified exceptions:
*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.