>> to watch this and all winning entries, visit our website. >> suicide risk and mental health treatment was a topic of a recent house hearing. you can see it tonight on c-span or watch full coverage on c-span now, our new video app. c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand. all it your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal and find scheduling information. plus a variety of compelling podcasts.

c-span now is available at the apple store and will play. downloaded for free today. is an immigration attorney and president of the american immigration lawyers association, here with us to talk about the immigration process and the administration's decision on title 42. welcome. guest: thank you for having me. host: tell us about your position as an immigration attorney. what kind of cases do you deal with? guest: in my private practice, i deal with a lot of employer compliance issues, in addition to that, i help -- study for a degree in business or help companies make sure they have the appropriate paperwork. on a larger scale and lower

level, i also give political advice, policy strategy advice and ways to suggest solutions to the horrible backlog of immigration cases we have right now so that they can get the workers they need to move the economy forward. host: the american immigration lawyers association, you are the president. what does your group focus on? guest: we focus on immigration and we are having a big celebration this year. we have 16,000 plus lawyers that focus on equity and a just immigration system. that is our goal and our mission. host: a historical question for you. how long have attorneys been part of the american immigration experience, and getting people to citizenship? guest: the birth of our organization speaks to that.

a lot of people working for the government saw a need to help because influx was so large. so many individuals shifted over. we helped people work to the system because it was easier to be here. before you could walk in and get a staff, which is different, then today. host: let's begin talking about current events and immigration. the current issue is title 42 implemented initially by the trump administration. the press release from the american immigration lawyers association, " ending title 42 on the horizon, the anti-immigrant policy of using title 42 to expel vulnerable

asylum-seekers is long overdue. the thousands upon thousands of migrants from babies to grandmothers who were expelled before given a chance to point protection under our laws merit an acknowledgment that the u.s. got it wrong." tell us about this title 42. what did it do and why is the administration rescinding it? guest: title 42 is something that has nothing to do with immigration and border control. it was to address a health need. the former administration pulled in regulation from 1942 and as we think of the history of regulations in 1942 and how we have grown as a nation and technology rise, it should not be used anymore.

title 42 was used as a tool. it did not belong to all of our parts of entry. only to the southern border. it was only applied to brown and black migrants who were coming to apply for asylum. every other class of individual could come through the port. students, truckers, all other visas were able to be processed. like many of our other things from that time period. it was used specifically to stop --time period, it was used specifically to stop certain types of immigrants. this conversation about title 42 and border control do not belong together. during that time. what that country did was tell

individuals they did not have a right to come apply for asylum in this country. congress passed asylum along time ago. we said this would never happen again and what we have said is violate international law. it is not that we did not allow everyone to apply for asylum, it was a certain group. it was a mismanagement problem and it became a political tool. when the biden administration took over, -- many people had multiple attempts, which made the numbers look larger. many of these people -- host: alan war is president of the lawyers association.

we will talk more about title 42. we would love to hear from you. lines to colin, republicans, that is (202) 748-8001. democrats, that is (202) 748-8000. and independents, your number is (202) 748-8002. you mentioned the backlog of cases to be gone through of people who are already in our country, but let me read you the comments of alejandra mayorkas about title 42. he said once title 42 is no longer in place, dhs will process people at the border pursuant to title eight. we have put in place a comprehensive whole of government strategy to manage a possible increase of migrants encountered at our border.

we are evaluating asylum requests and will quickly remove people who do not -- we have already redeployed more than 600 law enforcement officers to the border. are you concerned that all of this adds to that big backlog you are talking about? guest: i think about it sending the wrong message for people who are looking for humanitarian relief. a police officer is not the first thing they need to see. poland, a very strong nation, -- small nation speaks to the humanity of what the situation is. the polish people know who they are, opening their homes and their spaces. the american people have the same opportunity to say " we will not arrest people fleeing for their lives."

we have to ask ourselves why? why do we see individuals fleeing for their lives as someone who is a threat who needs to be held in a detention center? vetting is important, but the vetting problem with 9/11 was not in regards to the immigrants themselves. now we have the department of homeland security. criminalizing this rebuff people who are coming here for humanitarian need sends the wrong message. no one i know who is coming here -- they basically greet them with the food and the humanity they deserve. the may orca's talk is a political stance -- the

mayorkas talk is a political stance. you never hear anyone say " we need to close down atlanta, so many people are arriving at our international port!" we are the united states. if we wanted to address the need, we could. with the appropriate type of personnel, which means caseworkers, asylum officers, whatever the case may be. the biden administration has taken a holistic approach to this. having millions of dollars flow back to address the drug flow, the conditions that are already underlying that, the holistic approach. it has been a democratic and a republican failure to address these issues. host: what does that mean to apply for asylum at a border or u.s. embassy? who is eligible to do that?

guest: there is no applying for asylum at a u.s. embassy. if you are applying for asylum, it is because you are in the country and you are here. those are related, but it is not like you can go to and embassy and say " i want to apply for asylum," and that is how it works. we have said " we will take 100,000 ukrainian refugees," we should take 400,000 refugees from where they are. there is no value in race or class for a refugee. that is why we set up the international refugee association. there are tons of refugees who have been waiting for years to get to the united states so now we are going to take another level of refugees. those things are very different.

the former administration stopped processing. the biden administration has restarted this program that allows certain processing. the main concept that sends is something we do not tell anyone else. we are able to process anyone else coming into the country so why does this specific group of people seem to be a threat. other people were allowed to apply for asylum. host: let's hear from our first call. we go to jason in arlington, virginia. caller: you just spoke to my, what i was about to ask, which is specific to -- depending on what newspaper you read and what channel you watch, we are going to have 200,000 afghans coming 2

america, which is to my point of view, a very moral thing to do. we may have up to half a million maybe ukrainians, may be more coming in. how does that affect, from your point of view, -- right now we are at hyper employment. our unemployment rate is something like 3.4%. 4% or less is full employment. how do you and the people you work with see that playing out? guest: we see it as an opportunity we can address and meet the needs of the labor market. one of the challenges we have is

that there is no vocational visa. there is a high-end phd lottery for a doctorate degree, but there is nothing for an everyday job without we need to address. we can meet that need as well as our moral obligation. the other concept underlying something is that we are full. poland has accepted 2 million people in 45 days, processed them, given them work authorization and health care. if poland, a smaller country than we are, can do this, we can do the same thing. the concept that people will come because they want to be a part of us should not scare us. it should make us feel like what we have always felt -- exceptionalism.

host: we touched on this a little bit -- headline from the pbs newshour says this, " new rules came to decide u.s. asylum cases more quickly, given the budget restraints of the current budget and the proposed 2023 budget, do you think common security is capable of doing that? guest: we are optimistic about how it will be ministered. there is a job shortage. i recognize that. we can solve for that as well. i do not believe it is a money problem. it is a resource allocation and management problem. we can solve these issues. after 9/11, we veered to the side of over-vetting.

there are lines of people in their parts at tsa -- airports at tsa who do not need to go through tsa. everyone who shows about the border is not here for always. that is another level of emigration we need to fix, something that happened before. if someone is here for any period of time undocumented for 6 months are borrowed -- barred. it creates a hamper. when people start talking about the immigration process and processing delays, we throw a ton of money into detention, border control, and building walls. that money could be better used to process cases. we could use those individuals

to be processing applications. that is a choice that we are making, and perhaps we are making the wrong choice. host: let's hear from randy in michigan on the democrats' line. caller: good morning, peter. the title 42 was in 1942 that we made this law. it was in 1941 we made marijuana legal because we didn't want mexico making money off of marijuana when we only sold hemp here in the state. the reason we don't do a hair sample drug test is we do not let round and black people in our country. we only test low income people to piss in a cup.

why don't we make -- host: all right. any response there? guest: one of the important things is i want to remove the concern that immigrants bring drugs and crime. that does not bear out in the research from cato, the immigration counsel. i think the criminalization of emigration is a consortium -- immigration is a concern. to say that they are the problem rather than address the problem within ourselves -- we have found emigration to be the scapegoat for the previous administrations -- we have found immigration to be the scapegoat for previous administrations. immigration did not become a political tool or token until

the last couple of administrations. prior to that many republicans stepped up and said " this is the right thing to do." reagan famously stepped forward and said " this is the right thing to do." the fact that we talk about crime and drugs in the same sentence is a problem to me. host: shortly after the administration made the major announcement, senator richard burr wrote the cdc and asked " what is the science behind this?" his concerns were about covid rates in central and southern american countries. does he have a valid point there? guest: no. we supplied many vaccines throughout the world to different continents. getting someone a vaccine is just a wall to stand behind.

the inhumanity in that to say -- the humanity is to say " we can meet that need by giving these individuals whatever protection they need." we said we would do that because we were the leader in making the vaccine. most importantly, if you are not applying it to all the ports equally the same way, then you cannot apply it to the southern part of entry in that way. host: we will hear from charlie and umphrey's, virginia -- cheryl in dumb freeze, virginia-- cheryl in dum fries, virginia. caller: i'm thinking once they let all these people in, then they will turn around and put us

back on lockdown after they let all these people in. secondly, what did they have to do in order to become american citizens? do they have to learn english? do they have to know about our history? what are we doing to make sure that we are not just inviting all these people into our country? host: you talked on the covid issue a moment ago, but any further comments there? guest: that is not a real issue. letting all these people in is a concept -- it is not " all these people." people come in through airport of entry it -- our poty of entry -- our port of entry every day. each person goes through the

same process of matriculation. it is easier to get a green card than it is to get matriculated and be able to vote. all of that time they pay taxes and work in their communities so i don't think there is anything that needs to change to allow people to be more part of the united states. i understand that english is important but we have accepted that spanish is a language. in miami it is a primary language. when we look globally, we find other countries that have a vocabulary that includes the languages of other key countries. we need to open up ourselves to that. that is not necessarily a

requirement, but i think individuals -- that shouldn't necessarily be a problem. host: in the course of your career as an immigration lawyer, has the process from application to entry to becoming a citizen gotten longer? guest: yes. everything after 9/11 shifted. there were the challenges of taking money and giving it to the border wall. our immigration system is very complex and it takes time. it is very 1980's technology. we are processing cases by papers so we need to modernize our system and takes an investment. the people in-place renaud are

trying to move it forward. we dug a very deep hole that we are constantly -- the people in place right now are trying to move it forward. we dug a very deep holdout we are constantly trying -- we dug a very deep hole that we are constantly trying to dig out of. host: let's hear from david in west virginia on the independent line. caller: don't we have thousands of people in the united states citizens who could qualify for amnesty or for persecution and crime? isn't the real problem that selective law enforcement or no enforcement on immigration laws is the problem? what is your real view? what is a perfect immigration

system that you and other attorneys are shooting for? thank you. guest: thank you for the question. i think the answer to that -- if i can get my passport or a driver's license in a short amount of time, someone should be able to get their workers authorization in the same amount of time. it should not take six to eight months because of vetting. it shall be online. the issue you raise to that i think is important is that every year congress passes a budget and in the budget and includes the ability to remove 400,000 individuals. they have never removed 400,000 individuals. congress recognizes that there are 11 million people here who are undocumented.

the disconnection in policy is not meeting the situation. " let's make sure they have a pathway to citizenship" -- they cannot even do that the lowest hanging fruit, the daca population, they cannot say " we agree these people are blameless. they have no fault." instead we use all of these political tools and that rests at the foot of congress. both parties have failed us in moving this forward. host: what is the status of most of the so-called " dreamers"? guest: they are in turmoil. i cannot express to you enough -- i found the right way to think about it last night. if you were in college and you were trying to graduate from college and every year you went to that college, they said " you

need this class or that class" -- exasperating. that is how docket kids feel right now. there-- that is how daca kids feel right now. they are on the whims of future administrations. one day you can renew your status, one day you cannot. if congress stepped in and gave a final solution to address the issue, make it what the majority of the american people want, it would be at a better place. they are still in turmoil. we are waiting to see what it will be for a program started almost a decade ago under the obama administration. host: we go to earl in

nashville, georgia. caller: i was just sending this to y'all. i pulled it up on my computer. public health and welfare status this in active 1944. if we want to talk about the border, let's talk about how many -- back over that water. they took them back overseas while 9/11 was taking place. c-span, why don't you -- see what he is talking about. host: we will go to dan in

youngstown, ohio, republican line. caller: the problem with immigration at the southern border that this guy does not want to admit is that the border is being flooded. there are not enough people there from the united states to greet these people and to handle each one of them. the border is being flooded and people are getting away. they are coming from, not just a couple of countries, but from 153 countries from around the world. do you think if i was a terrorist i would know that i could go there and get across the border and get away and thousands of them -- they are not going up and turning themselves in. they are escaping. this guy is not being honest with the american people. the democrats do not want to admit there are a lot of people sneaking across the border who

are not being encountered and are escaping into the population. we do not know who these people are. host: dan in ohio. guest: thanks for the conversation. i'm alan. you can call me alan, not " this guy." some people are traveling in between ports of entry and not able to turn themselves in. that happens. i agree. statistics don't bear out the conversation you're having a people are flooding the border. there have been more apprehensions at the biden administration than before. they are stopping people. there is not an open border. in addition, all of the costs involved with putting these people in detention then expelling them from the united

states back to mexico or haiti is a problem. beyond those issues, it is not what congress intended for outlaws. that is a fundamental argument from the legal side. if they have a right to apply, they should be able to apply. if congress does not want them to apply, congress should pass a bill to say " people at the southern border cannot apply for asylum." they would rather hide behind title 42. i have no stake or any ability of saying how many people will appear. i have a stake in the american system because as a lawyer and went to make sure we follow the constitution for everybody. we should not revert to some -- so we say we do not have enough people engaged. that could be true, but we can

change that. that is a decision that we make in how we decide to manage the border. we could have more parts there. that is not a " can't thing it is a " will" thing. one party is using the border as a scare tactic to a imply that it is open and horace and everyone wants. to come in i need there to be a border >> c-span's washington journal. every day we take your calls live on the air and discuss policy issues that impact you. thursday morning we will talk about a report that compares

different economic and health policy responses across the states to the covid pandemic with freedom works senior economist and former trump economic advisor stephen moore. and talking about the russian invasion in ukraine and u.s. national security. watch washington journal live at 7:00 eastern thursday morning on c-span or on c-span now, our mobile app. join the discussion with your calls, facebook comments, text and tweets. ♪ >> all this month, watch the top 21 winning videos from our c-span studentcam video documentary competition. we will air one of our winners whose documentary told us how the federal government impacted their lives. to watch all of them anytime online, at studentcam.org. >> during his press