A lot of people are condemning Bernie Sanders (the real one) for arguing that many people in the caravan do not have legitimate asylum claims. I am going to do a rare thing for me and (sorta) defend Bernie.
He's right, just as a matter of fact. A lot of those people will inevitably not meet the statutory definition for asylum claims. That's just true.
He's factually correct, but he's morally wrong. He's morally wrong because it shouldn't matter whether an immigrant meets the statutory definition of an asylee. It should only matter that they are a person and they want to immigrate.
This is the precise corner that "I support immigrants but I also support immigration restrictions" liberals/progressives constantly paint themselves into.
If you, like Bernie, want a "humane, compassionate" immigration policy but you also, like Bernie, think full respect for immigration rights is a right wing plot to destroy America, then I don't see any way out of this logical knot.
If you want special consideration for people who meet some standard of humanitarian urgency, then by definition some immigrants will not meet that standard and will have to be forcibly kept from the country.
Believe me, I'm heartened by all the criticism of Bernie's comments, I just want to be sure that people understand exactly what the problem is. It's not that Bernie is wrong about the factual claim that some asylum seekers don't meet the standard. It's that Bernie thinks there should be an exclusive standard in the first place.