This upcoming Thursday, the nation’s executive officer, President Joe Biden, has decided to embark upon a journey to Brownsville, a border town located in Texas.
The intention behind this visit is to demonstrate to the citizens of the United States that he’s actively engaged regarding the tense situation at the southern border, a situation that critics assert originated from his own policies. Yet, an important voice in the matter, Brandon Judd, the leader of the Border Patrol, expressed his disappointment on Fox News concerning the visit, mainly due to the fact that no invitation had been extended to him or to the members of his patrol who devote their time daily to maintain the border’s security.
President Biden’s forthcoming visit to Brownsville is set against an interesting backdrop, as there has been a recent downturn in border crossings, especially in the Rio Grande Sector. Observers largely credit this decline to actions initiated by the Mexican government in the region. The volume of arrests which usually serves as an indicator of border activity, fell to 7,340 in January, a figure that mirrors those of June 2020 during former President Trump’s administration when policy initiative Title 42 was in operation.
.@BPUnion President Brandon Judd on being snubbed from Biden’s border visit: “He’s not going to listen to voices of reason. He’s not going to listen to people that are going to tell him what he actually needs to secure the border…He doesn’t want to hear any of that.” pic.twitter.com/S1Frny9PeP
— MAGA War Room (@MAGAIncWarRoom) February 29, 2024
While the Rio Grande Valley has been experiencing less border tension due to a reduction in crossings, the opposite scenario is unfolding in both California and Arizona territories, where a significant escalation in border crossings has been reported. Critics, including Brandon Judd, suggest that President Biden’s choice to visit an area of the border that isn’t in chaos is less about bearing direct witness to the crisis and more about controlling the optics of the situation.
In a separate location, Eagle Pass, Texas, the 45th American President, Donald Trump, accompanies the aforementioned Brandon Judd on a parallel and intended to be contrasting visit. During a discussion on Fox News, Judd expressed his belief that the current President is unresponsive to the advice and feedback from the officers in the field.
Judd articulated his point, saying that the President has turned deaf ears to logical discourse or any expert advice that would help secure the border. In Judd’s opinion, the leader of the free world doesn’t seem interested in hearing insights about critical programs, operations, and policies which directly impact border security.
Judd further explained that the change in administration from President Donald Trump to President Joe Biden had brought about comprehensive changes in how they effectively patrol the border. These changes are seen in the procedures they follow, the ways potential entrants are vetted, and the processes through which people are ushered into the system. He lamented that all the operational methods have undergone significant alteration under this new leadership.
“WE’RE ALL SICK OF IT”: @BPUnion head Brandon Judd says “everything changed” when Biden took office.
“It’s not about enforcement — it’s about getting people into this country as quickly as they possibly can.” pic.twitter.com/AppDmXI1mL
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) February 29, 2024
In subsequent interviews, Judd stated that the enforcement aspect is no longer the focus of their operations. Instead, according to him, the present directive seems to be more about expediting people’s entry into the country. Judd suggested that under President Biden’s administration, the border patrol has become remarkably proficient at swift processing and ushering of migrants, a shift that he and others find troublesome.
Judd also insisted that he and his colleagues are growing frustrated due to the changes being implemented. He explained that their role, which they see as critical to national security, has shifted in a direction they perceive as inherently negative, raising concern among them.
Adding to the list of concerns, Judd pointed out the adverse consequences within American society allegedly produced by the current administration’s approach. Specifically, he addressed the rising number of fatalities in the United States, attributing some of them indirectly to the administration’s current stand on border controls.
Among the incidents that deeply concern him, Judd mentioned the case of Laken Riley, without elaborating on the specifics. He implied that proper procedures and policies, had they been in place, might have averted such tragedies.
Moreover, Judd criticized the administration for not doing enough to combat the wave of fentanyl-related emergencies sweeping across American communities. He emphasized that if they had an appropriate policy, they could curb the spread of such incidents.
In his final statements, Judd expressed his distress over the administration’s seeming reluctance to deal firmly with these issues. According to him, the current administration has chosen to placate the advocates of open-border policies, therefore compromising the security and well-being of American citizens.
In summary, Brandon Judd’s message was clear: He wants the government not only to listen to the agents on the ground but also to prioritize the enforcement of border security over facilitating rapid entry. He also suggested a correlation between these border policies and the challenges facing American society, such as drug overdoses and immigration-related fatalities.
This tension between the perceptions and expectations of border security enforcement and its actual implementation underscores the fundamental questions: What should border policy look like, and how can it best serve the interests of American citizens? These are issues that will continue to draw intense debate and attention in the coming days and months.
As the discourse around border policy continues, interested parties from all sides eagerly await the outcome of these planned and contrasting border visits. Their outcomes will undoubtably be critical in shaping the future narratives and decisions surrounding U.S. immigration policy and border control.
