Goldman Agrees With Trump That Biden's Executive Order To Stop The Invasion Is BS

Last week was quite surreal, even by senile Joe's standards.

Shortly after confirming that the president who is now imploding in the polls could, in fact, act on border security and the illegal alien invasion on the southern border without Congress, something which he claimed as recently as January 2024 he can't possibly do...

... when he signed an executive order to allegedly stem the flood of illegals into the US, President Ron Burgundy read what is perhaps the most audacious attempt to trick Americans into believing the exact opposite of reality - namely, that he didn't cause the border crisis, Republicans are the reason it isn't fixed, and he's here to save the day.

Worse, Biden pretended that his executive action would actually do something to change the current status quo which sees several hundred thousand illegals pour into the US in a panicked scramble by Democrats to import both future voters and cheap illegal labor (as even Wall Street now admits) to depress Biden's one true accomplishment: galloping inflation.

While it wasn't exactly rocket surgery to call out this particularly stark episode of Joe's senile dementia, Trump did just that when he responded last week to this attempted sleight of hand, saying that "The truth is that Crooked Joe Biden’s Executive Order won’t stop the invasion…it will actually make the invasion worse."

Then this weekend, Trump took it up a notch when during a rally Trump said that Biden's executive orders is "pro invasion, pro child trafficking, pro drug dealer... it's bullshit what he signed."

And, as happens ever so often, Trump was once again correct because in a note from Goldman's chief economist Jan Hatzius, the apolitical bank writes that soon after net immigration soared to a record 2.5 million...

... even though "President Biden announced changes on June 4 that would restrict a channel that might otherwise account for around 700k potential immigrants annually at current unauthorized migration rates" the Goldman strategist concludes that "the ultimate effect would be a fraction of this as most affected immigrants would likely attempt other modes of entry. Legal challenges to the new rules might even block implementation altogether." Here are the details:

The new asylum restrictions announced on June 4 are likely to face legal challenges and logistical constraints but could lower net unauthorized immigration and limit the potential for upside immigration surprises this year.

The policy would set a limit of 2.5k unauthorized migrants encountered per day (over a 7-day average) at the border outside of official ports of entry. Once the 2.5k limit is reached—this is likely to happen immediately as the daily rate was reported to be 3.5k in May—US authorities would expel apprehended migrants back across the border, rather than releasing many of them into the US to await a court date.

At a pace of 3.5k per day, this would in theory affect as many as 1.3 million immigrants per year. However, nearly half of these are detained when apprehended and are not allowed into the US. The remainder—around 700k at an annual rate in May—are released into the US to await a court hearing and the new program would mainly affect this segment. While this could result in a meaningful decline in immigration if implemented, the actual effect is likely to be a fraction of this, for three reasons.

• First, several groups are excluded from this policy, such as unaccompanied children—which account for roughly a quarter of these border crossings—as well as victims of severe trafficking and other vulnerable migrants. Those who express a fear of persecution in their home country would also still be eligible for asylum through an expedited process with a higher standard.
• Second, the policy does not apply to asylum seekers at official ports of entry, where around half of asylum-seekers also pass initial screenings and enter the US. It seems likely that many of those affected by the new policy will likely seek asylum at official ports of entry instead.
• Third, the effect could also be partly offset by an increase in other unauthorized inflows, such as those who cross the border and are not intercepted

In other words, Goldman also calls "bullshit" on Biden's executive order.

Hardly a shock. What may come as a surprise, however, is Goldman's analysis of how illegal migration would look like under a second Trump administration.

According to the bank, when Trump wins, "immigration rules would likely tighten further in 2025, but the range of outcomes is wide."

• First, it is not clear how far a Trump administration could go in restricting asylum claims, as courts blocked changes in 2018 and the Biden plan also faces challenges.
• Second, while the president has clearer authority to restrict other immigration categories, these inflows could simply shift to asylum claims if courts block major changes in that area.
• Third, the impact of potential deportations is very uncertain.

In other words, while Trump may be raging against the flood launched by his predecessor - and understandably so - his own hands may be tied by the judicial system, even if Republicans manage to sweep Congress.

Indeed, according to Goldman's calculations, under a second Trump administration, the high end of the range of immigration outcomes would likely be around 1.5 million in 2025 —still well above trend— if courts block major asylum changes and deportations are limited.

That's the bad news; the good news is that at the low end of the potential range, in which a Trump White House mostly cuts off asylum claims and humanitarian parole and implements a more substantial deportation program, annual net immigration would likely fall below CBO’s 2017-2019 annual average of 700k and could approach zero temporarily. That said, it seems unlikely that net immigration would be negative on an annual basis even in that scenario.

In short, the system is now set up in such a way that no matter who is in control, the illegal alien flood will remain on autopilot indefinitely, just as the neoliberal globalist elite intended.

More in the full Goldman note available to pro subs.