All asylum claims deserve a hearing, even questionable ones

Central American asylum seekers walk to their legal counsel meetings in Tijuana.
(Guillermo Arias / AFP/Getty Images)

To the editor: I wonder how the letter writer from Santa Barbara who expressed support for President Trump’s new restrictions on asylum seekers would react if the mayor of Santa Barbara made it more difficult for all individuals who received parking tickets to dispute them because she believed that most didn’t have justifiable claims.

Regardless, self-serving arguments are fine for letters to the editor, but horrible (and ineffective) when used by the leader of a diverse country of more than 300 million people.

If unfounded asylum claims are presented, they should be rejected. If the system is overwhelmed, we should invest in it. We cannot, however, fix it by making it harder for people with legitimate claims to have those claims addressed. This only cultivates less trust in the system and causes more discord moving forward.

Or maybe the writer’s argument is that it should be harder to apply for asylum when it is not deserved, but easier to apply for it when it is? And they say liberals are “pie in the sky” types.

Brandon Hutchinson, Duarte