Former CBP Chief: Biden's Unintended Legacy Lies in Exposing Border Weaknesses

President Joe Biden's handling of the border and unlawful immigration has been widely criticized, not only by the Republican party but also by moderate Democrats and border security experts. While his policies did not necessarily open up the borders, unprecedented levels of migrant encounters were recorded during his presidency, resulting in a key weakness for the Democratic in the 2024 election.

The Latin Times consulted border security expert Dr. Victor Manjarrez Jr. to evaluate President Biden's overall performance on border security. Dr. Manjarrez, a former CBP chief with over 20 years of experience at the Department of Homeland Security, acknowledged several "great initiatives" by the Biden administration, including investments in border technology and an emphasis on improving immigration services. However, he criticized the administration's failure to address the asylum process, which he identified as the root cause of the border crisis.

The now-university professor also addressed the record-breaking amount of migrant encounters reported during the last four years. According to him, the surge had a lot to do with the world's perception of the "perceived consequences" of crossing the border (or lack thereof).

"From my experience as a chief patrol agent, we would have congressional delegations offer us resources like helicopters, personnel, and technology. But the thing that had the biggest impact was what people perceived as a potential consequence of illegal entry," Manjarrez explained. "That is the biggest tool."

Hence, Manjarrez explained that Donald Trump's most effective border security tools are his zero-tolerance policies and the tough image he has cultivated on the issue. These were successfully utilized by his administration in the past to reduce migrant flows along the southern border, said Dr. Manjarrez, adding that he anticipates a refined "2.0 version" of this strategy being implemented during Trump's second term.

The Latin Times sat down with Dr. Manjarrez to discuss border security, Biden's achievements and shortcomings, as well as a preview of what Trump's border security plans could bring in the next four years.

Latin Times: What are the key accomplishments of the Biden administration regarding border security?

Dr. Victor Manjarrez Jr.: That obviously is debated quite often. I've never seen migrant flows like this. The volume is kind of not really comprehensible. The Biden Administration really helped highlight the vulnerabilities of the southern border, it showed us how vulnerable it could be, and I think that's undervalued.

That was never planned. But that's an indirect result of the massive flows that occurred during the administration. We've never seen these kinds of numbers. So I think that's certainly one. I think it helped highlight the issues of who could be on the border. History will show this moment in time and people will not see it as a good thing.

LT: What do you think caused these massive numbers?

VM: Well, perceptions matter. Migration has always been part of our history. So what's the difference now? Perception. It's what people outside the United States perceive.

From my experience as a chief patrol agent, we would have congressional delegations offer us resources like helicopters, personnel, and technology. But the thing that had the biggest impact was what people perceived as a potential consequence of illegal entry. That is the biggest tool.

During President Trump's first term, there wasn't much that was actually built in resources. They built the border wall. The personnel didn't go up. There wasn't much technology that came in. The resources were comparable to those used by the Obama administration. But yet, the numbers were lower.

Perceptions matter. It's how we project. It's the perceived consequences for illegal entry.

LT: In June, Biden implemented stricter border policies, which were followed by a significant decrease in migrant encounters. What are your thoughts on this?

VM: Well, they actually weren't record-low crossings. They were much lower from his previous years. When you start looking at June and July, the numbers are cut in half, but if you go all the way back to the last 20 years–you can actually find the apprehensions by month on CBP's website—they were still higher for every single June or July in the last 20 years, with exception of three years, I think.

So, yes, there was a significant drop from the previous year, but even with that drop, the numbers were still higher than most months in the last 20 years.

LT: What were the primary focuses of Biden's border security budget allocations?

VM: I would say he focused more on what I would define as services for people coming to the ports, seeking some kind of status.

There was also growth in terms of technology at ports of entry. The administration made some good investments on that. I think there are 351 ports of entry now in the northern and southern borders. We did see big time capital investments at the ports of entry, not so much between the ports of entry, but definitely at the ports of entry.

LT: When it comes to the balance between addressing humanitarian concerns while managing border security, how do you think Biden did?

VM: Not very well, just because of the overwhelming numbers.

LT: Do you have anything to add in regards to Biden's border security performance?

VM: No, and I hate to leave it that way, because I think he started off with some things that weren't completed that I think would have had real value. One of them is the idea of revisiting the asylum process.

They were going to look at the process and I had real big hopes. I said, man, someone finally is going to look at that process. And it was never completed. That had so much potential. It just wasn't finished.

LT: What changes do you think have to be implemented in the asylum process to improve border security?

VM: Our asylum laws haven't changed much from the end of World War II, but the world has changed a lot. Should asylum categories be expanded? Should the thresholds be different? Should we have intake centers in foreign countries that people can go apply for asylum?

So let's say someone leaves Venezuela because they're being persecuted. As soon as they left Venezuela and got to Panama, they evaded persecution, right? Because they're not in Venezuela anymore. The moment they start traveling to the United States, it's no longer persecution-based. It's an economic decision. That's what disqualifies them.

We wait till they come to the southern border to make that claim, you know. And we have embassies all over the world. It needs to be different.

LT: Do you think Trump will revisit the asylum process?

VM: That is my hope. Do I expect Trump to do so? No, especially not early on in his term, based on his campaign. Perhaps later in his term he'll look at the root of the issue and why it's occurring. But let's face it, he ran a campaign saying he's going to do certain things, and I think if he started looking at asylum first, it'd be a non-start for most of his supporters.

LT: Based on your observations, what are the main features of Trump's proposed border security plan?

VM: Removing the folks that came in that should not have come in. The secondary thing is the idea of not so much proposing new laws, but simply enforcing existing regulations already in place.

Once there's a perceived consequence for illegal entry, it has a consequence of people not wanting to come. I think a great example of that was Trump's first term. If you look at the resources, there weren't really many resources applied out to the field.

There was enforcement of existing policy, existing regulations, and a lot of vocal chatter, right? This is what's going to happen. And it was amazing what perceived consequences did to the flow.

LT: The use of perceived consequences is actually very economically savvy, no?

VM: Well, yeah. I mean, you could look at it that way. You can also track speeches where he talks about immigration and border security. I used to look at graphs over a period of time and overlay them with arrests on the southern border. And you could see the arrests would go up and down, just like the public announcements would.

Even if President Trump comes in, the day he gets sworn in and says, you know what? We're going to put, I don't know, 15,000 new Border Patrol agents out in the field, right? 15,000 will never be hired in four years. It takes around seven years to hire 10,000 Border Patrol agents.

Promised resources never pose an immediate impact. But it's the announcements, it's the idea of 15,000 new agents.

LT: Do you think Trump will change his strategy during his second term? He's promising the largest deportation in history and that will definitely take more budget allocations than his first term border security projects.

VM: Oh, yeah. I expect that the budget's going to increase. However, when it comes to staffing, it takes a while to hire personnel. If you look at the number of CBT officers and Border Patrol agents that retired in the last four years, the new hires never kept up with the losses. He's going to have to spend money on that.

And that money's got to be set aside even before they're hired. It's already a cost to the American public.

A lot of money is also going to be for removal, because that's the big talk, right? The removal, enforcement of the existing rules and regulations, which require a detention space, transportation space, court space.

Also, anything that's administrative isn't under the Department of Homeland Security. It's under the Department of Justice. I predict some of that growth in the DOJ. I would also hope that he builds on the strides made under the Biden administration, particularly in advancing technology at ports of entry. Leveraging AI alongside surveillance systems could secure the border more effectively while offering greater efficiency for taxpayers.

LT: Do you think it is even possible to do that, to execute these plans logistically based on your experience?

VM: You know, the largest deportation in history was done in the 1950s, right. And it took a lot of resources. I think it was around a million people that were deported in an 18-month operation. Promising the largest deportation in history was not very smart because they're setting expectations at a very high level.

What I expect Tom Homan to do is to start with the most serious criminal aliens. The ones that are in prison or have been released from prison. I think everyone across the board would agree they need to go.

And then you start with that second level, then the third level, which is the hardest and biggest level. It's a group we refer to as economic migrants. They didn't qualify for asylum. They're here making a living. They're the poorest of the poor. They don't have a criminal record. And that's going to be a hard group to get, but that's down the line.

LT: From an operational perspective, which plans do you think are more sustainable, Biden's or Trump's?

VM: I wish I could get a combination of both, to be honest with you. If I had to vote for one or the other, I would always look at improving border security. And I think under Trump, the focus is on improving border security.

Both the president-elect and the current president have done some good things and they have their faults. I wish I could get some degree of combination.

LT: What do you think are Trump's biggest faults?

VM: I think his approach comes across as abrasive, right? But when you hear his comments about the foreign worker visas, it changes. He supports expanding these types of visas. I don't think he talks about that enough.

He's done it intentionally because he's developed a persona as being tough on immigration. But if you look at the business side, I think historically he's been very proactive with expanding these types of visas. I just wish he'd be more vocal about it.