GOP Senator Says Biden's Border is Better Than Trump's. Guess Someone Has Been Brainwashed

In a move that has sent shockwaves through Washington, Republican Senator James Lankford of Oklahoma has suggested that President Joe Biden’s 2024 border bill would have been a more effective solution to the nation’s immigration crisis than the policies championed by former President Donald Trump.

This surprising statement has put Lankford at odds with many of his conservative colleagues, who have steadfastly supported Trump’s mass deportation agenda, and is fueling a heated debate over how best to tackle the country’s growing immigration challenges.

The comments came during a CBS News interview in which Lankford, who will not be up for reelection until 2028, acknowledged that while the bill was not perfect, it contained provisions that would have helped address longstanding issues with the U.S. immigration system.

"One of the challenges we have is our asylum laws include a lot of loopholes in them that cartels have exploited for years," Lankford said. "They’ve become experts in exploiting our laws because it’s become billions of dollars of income to them when they can find those loopholes and gaps."

Lankford’s remarks were aimed at Biden’s proposed bill, which he argued would have closed several loopholes that critics say have allowed illegal immigration to flourish.

Under the proposal, the U.S. would have been able to limit asylum requests by blocking new claims if the daily number of illegal crossings exceeded an average of 5,000 for at least one week.

The bill also sought to restrict the use of humanitarian parole, a mechanism that allows migrants to enter the U.S. while awaiting court dates that could stretch for years.

The proposal, however, was met with fierce opposition from Republicans, including Trump, who encouraged his fellow party members to vote against it. Despite gaining some support from moderate Republicans and Democrats, the bill ultimately failed to pass the Senate, leaving Lankford and other proponents of immigration reform frustrated with the political gridlock.

The debate over immigration reform has intensified as the U.S. grapples with an ongoing surge in illegal border crossings. According to recent data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the southern border saw more than 2 million encounters with migrants in the past year alone, marking a historic high.

The overwhelming majority of these migrants are seeking asylum, with many coming from Central American countries, but others hail from as far away as Africa and Asia.

The influx of migrants has placed immense strain on border facilities, as well as on local communities that have been left to absorb the financial and logistical challenges of housing and caring for those entering the country.

Republican lawmakers have been vocal in their criticism of the Biden administration’s handling of the crisis, arguing that its policies, including the halting of Trump-era border wall construction and the easing of deportation policies, have encouraged more illegal crossings.

Trump, for his part, has argued that the best way to address the border crisis is through a strict, no-nonsense approach that includes mass deportations and a crackdown on sanctuary cities.

His "Big Beautiful Bill," signed into law last week, reflects this hardline approach. The bill is a sweeping piece of immigration legislation that provides billions of dollars in new funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other immigration enforcement agencies.

ICE, for example, is set to receive $170 billion, a figure that will allow the agency to hire an additional 10,000 officers and boost its deportation capacity.

The Trump administration’s focus on enforcement, coupled with its border wall plans, has garnered significant support from his political base, who view it as a necessary step to protect American sovereignty and public safety.

However, critics argue that Trump’s approach has been cruel and inhumane, leading to family separations, overcrowded detention facilities, and a lack of due process for asylum seekers.

Senator Lankford’s comments about Biden’s border bill are notable not only because they diverge from the party line but also because they signal a potential shift in Republican thinking on immigration.

While Lankford has been a consistent critic of the Biden administration’s immigration policies, he has also acknowledged the need for reform that takes into account both border security and humanitarian concerns.

In his CBS interview, Lankford seemed to imply that a more balanced approach—one that includes enforcement measures along with provisions for legal immigration and asylum—is necessary for long-term solutions.

Biden’s 2024 bill, which was introduced in response to the growing number of migrant crossings, would have granted the president the authority to impose a daily threshold on asylum requests.

This provision, which would allow the government to temporarily close the border to new asylum claims if the daily number of illegal crossings surpassed 5,000, was seen as a necessary step to prevent cartels from exploiting the system.

The bill also aimed to limit the use of humanitarian parole, which critics argue has been used by some migrants to enter the country without proper documentation, further complicating the immigration process.

Despite its failure to pass, Lankford praised the bill for its focus on closing loopholes that have made it easier for cartels to profit from human smuggling and other criminal activities.

"Many of the areas that we need to close the loopholes were in that bill, and some form of that we will eventually get done," Lankford added, signaling that immigration reform—though a politically charged issue—was still a priority for him.

Lankford’s support for Biden’s bill is likely to cause political waves within the Republican Party, as the issue of immigration remains one of the most divisive topics in U.S. politics.

While Trump and many of his allies advocate for an uncompromising approach to illegal immigration, Lankford’s position reflects a growing divide within the GOP on how best to address the border crisis.

For many Republicans, the idea of cooperating with Biden on immigration reform is anathema, especially given the political stakes. The GOP has long used the issue of illegal immigration to galvanize its base, portraying Democrats as soft on crime and national security.

Trump’s own rhetoric—branding migrants as "criminals" and calling for mass deportations—has been a central tenet of his political identity. The former president’s influence within the party has made it difficult for Republicans to break from his tough stance on immigration, even if it means passing a bill that could provide a more practical solution to the crisis.

On the other hand, Lankford’s comments may reflect a realization that a more pragmatic, bipartisan approach to immigration reform may be necessary to achieve lasting change.

While the Trump administration’s focus on mass deportations and border security has been effective in deterring some illegal crossings, it has also led to a humanitarian crisis at the southern border, with overcrowded detention centers and the separation of families becoming flashpoints in the national conversation.

Lankford’s endorsement of Biden’s bill, even if tempered with caveats, suggests that he may be open to finding common ground with Democrats on certain aspects of immigration reform.

Biden’s 2024 border bill, which failed to pass in the Senate, was seen by many as a comprehensive attempt to address the various issues plaguing the U.S. immigration system.

While it included provisions for border security and asylum reform, it also sought to address the root causes of migration, such as poverty and violence in Central America.

The bill aimed to provide a pathway to citizenship for millions of undocumented immigrants already in the U.S., a provision that was particularly contentious among Republicans.

The failure of Biden’s bill was a bitter blow for immigration reform advocates, who saw it as an opportunity to address a long-standing issue that has divided the country for decades.

However, some critics argue that the bill was not comprehensive enough and did not do enough to address enforcement concerns, particularly when it came to securing the southern border.

With the current political climate in Washington, it is unclear whether any comprehensive immigration reform will be able to garner enough support from both parties to pass.

As the debate over immigration reform continues to unfold, the role of both parties in shaping the future of U.S. immigration policy remains uncertain. Lankford’s comments represent a potential shift within the Republican Party, as some members recognize the need for a more balanced approach that includes both enforcement and humanitarian concerns.

However, the growing divide within the GOP, coupled with the polarization of the issue in Congress, makes it unclear whether any meaningful immigration reform will be possible in the near future.

The next few years will be critical in determining the future of U.S. immigration policy. With the Biden administration focused on addressing the challenges of asylum seekers and border security, and the Republican Party grappling with internal divisions, the path forward for immigration reform remains fraught with uncertainty.

As the 2024 elections approach, immigration is likely to remain a key issue for both parties, with each side presenting vastly different visions for how to handle the crisis at the border.

In the end, Lankford’s comments serve as a reminder that even within the Republican Party, there is room for differing opinions on how best to approach immigration reform.

While the divide between Trump’s hardline policies and Lankford’s more moderate stance may be significant, it is clear that the immigration debate is far from over, and that a solution that balances security, compassion, and fairness may still be within reach—if the political will exists to find it.