Washington, D.C. – The White House has increased pressure on members of the US Congress as they seek a deal that could lead to approval of aid to Ukraine in exchange for possible asylum restrictions.

Ornela Medom, a 28-year-old who fled war-torn Cameroon, is currently among those seeking asylum in the United States. At a “Save Asylum” demonstration outside the Capitol, she told Al Jazeera she was appalled at what a new immigration deal could bring.

“I am so sad and so scared,” Medom said Thursday, just a day after Republican and Democratic senators said a vote on a deal could be imminent.

Also on Wednesday, Speaker Mike Johnson suggested that House Republicans could take an even tougher line on access to the U.S.-Mexico border.

“Our lives depend on these ongoing secret negotiations,” said Medom, who entered the U.S. across the southern border in April. “I ask them to think of us.”

A number of progressive and Hispanic lawmakers also attended Thursday’s news conference and called on Democrats not to accept major changes to U.S. border law as part of a deal.

The White House has been looking for months Continued aid to UkraineShe is pushing for a $110 billion package that would also include military money for Israel and Taiwan and other security spending.

But Republicans are pinning further aid for Ukraine on changes to stem the flow of migrants and asylum seekers at the southern border. Democratic leaders like President Joe Biden and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer have signaled a willingness to compromise.

Biden “really wants to make meaningful changes at the border,” Schumer said Wednesday.

But asylum rights advocates have described a possible deal as “blackmail” and “hostage-taking.”

“Republicans are holding foreign aid hostage to impose extreme immigration measures that will not solve the problem,” Rep. Nanette Diaz Barragan, a Democrat and chairwoman of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, told reporters on Thursday.

The terms of the contract have not yet been published. But Diaz Barragan said they would likely include “expanded enforcement actions, deportations, changes to make it more difficult to apply for asylum and possibly a limitation on the president’s parole powers.”

“It destroys asylum and terrorizes our communities.”

Negotiations are ongoing

On Wednesday, Biden convened a group of Democratic and Republican congressmen at the White House in hopes of bringing negotiations closer to a conclusion. He told those gathered that they needed to “send a strong signal of U.S. resolve” toward Ukraine, a White House statement said.

“He made clear: Congress’s continued inaction endangers the national security of the United States, the NATO alliance and the rest of the free world,” the statement said.

Schumer told reporters afterwards: “I’m more optimistic than ever that we’ll reach an agreement.”

Referring to the expected deal, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said he expects it to be “on the horizon next week.”

Meanwhile, Speaker Johnson stressed that House Republicans, who hold a majority in the lower chamber, would not support any deal unless it contained “meaningful” new border restrictions.

He pointed to a hard-line immigration bill passed by the House in May that included a ban on asylum for those who cross the border irregularly and the resumption of a policy that forces asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their claims to be processed.

“I told the president what I’ve been saying for many months, which is that we need change at the border, a substantial change in policy,” Johnson told reporters. “We must insist – must insist – that the border is a top priority.”

On Thursday, Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal, chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said the entire premise of the deal must be rejected. She warned that the bipartisan effort could herald historically “cruel, unworkable and permanent changes to immigration policy.”

“It is important to be clear to my Senate colleagues and the White House that these are policies so extreme that if passed, they would be the most exclusionary and restrictive immigration legislation since the racial quota laws of the 1920s and would be a literal about-face “The clock would mean 100 years,” she said, pointing to laws that had set immigration quotas based on nationality and excluded some altogether.

“What will Republicans demand next time?”

Immigration laws are rarely passed at the federal level in the United States, where migration and asylum issues remain a political third rail.

Instead, recent immigration policies have been set by presidential administrations through executive actions and rules. These are more vulnerable to legal challenges than measures passed as law.

That’s why there’s a lot at stake in a congressional agreement. US media have reported that Senate and White House negotiators largely agreed on several guidelines in closed sessions you remember those enacted under former President Donald Trump.

These include higher eligibility requirements for people seeking asylum after entering the U.S. irregularly, expanding the categories of arrivals who can be detained and monitored, and making it easier to expel migrants and asylum seekers.

The Associated Press also reported that a proposal currently being discussed would have simplified the process for nationwide deportation of migrants who have been in the U.S. for less than two years. However, it is unclear whether this measure is still on the table.

A key sticking point, meanwhile, has been attempts to restrict the White House’s ability to issue humanitarian parole conditions that can be used to grant access to migrants in an emergency. This power has been a cornerstone of the Biden administration latest Border strategy that limits the ability to seek asylum at the southern border while expanding some legal avenues.

“Probation has a truly long and bipartisan history and is used to help Vietnamese allies who worked with the U.S. government, Soviet Jewish refugees, Cambodians fleeing the Khmer Rouge, Cuban political prisoners and Haitians after the devastating earthquake of 2010 to provide security. to our Afghan allies, to the Ukrainians who fled the Russian invasion, and more,” Jayapal said.

“What are we going to be intimidated into next?” she asked. “What will Republicans ask for the next time we need more funding for Ukraine or another emergency?”

What’s next?

Critics say foreign aid is not the only consideration for lawmakers considering the deal.

Border crossings take place regularly Record highs reached since Biden took office. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, for example, recorded a record 2,475,669 irregular “encounters” in fiscal year 2023.

Republicans have used these numbers to criticize the Biden administration. But pressure is also coming from within the Democratic Party: Politicians like New York Mayor Eric Adams have criticized Biden for not doing more to combat irregular immigration.

This comes as recent polls show support for Democrats’ handling of immigration has waned.

A CBS News poll released in early January found that Biden’s approval rating on the issue was at an all-time low. Only 21 percent of poll respondents said Biden “handled things the right way.”

“Let’s be honest: The only reason we’re even having these negotiations is because there are too many Democratic politicians who have seen the poll numbers,” Ro Khanna, a Democratic representative, said at Thursday’s news conference.

He called the deal a “colossal mistake” that would “further alienate the base of this party and endanger the soul of this party.”

For the asylum seeker Medom, it goes far beyond the upcoming elections.

She recounted how she was arrested, beaten and sexually abused by authorities in Cameroon – an event that ultimately motivated her to flee. It was a near-impossible decision that meant she had to leave her five-year-old daughter with her family.

“My life and those of thousands of asylum seekers are in your hands,” she said in a message to U.S. lawmakers. “Asylum has a tradition. Asylum is a value. Asylum is a right.”