False choices. Unreasonable demands. Our elected officials failed the more than 1 million undocumented youths whose lives are in limbo. Despite overwhelming support by the American public for a solution for DACA recipients, politics ruled the Senate last week. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell Addison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellMomentum growing among Republicans for Supreme Court vote before Election Day Trump expects to nominate woman to replace Ginsburg next week Video of Lindsey Graham arguing against nominating a Supreme Court justice in an election year goes viral MORE gave President Trump Donald John TrumpUS reimposes UN sanctions on Iran amid increasing tensions Jeff Flake: Republicans 'should hold the same position' on SCOTUS vacancy as 2016 Trump supporters chant 'Fill that seat' at North Carolina rally MORE a vote on his white nativist bill that would have devastated immigrant communities and families, documented and undocumented alike. Democrats and pro-Dreamer Republicans gave into Trump’s demands for a border wall, in an attempt to protect Dreamers. Nothing reached 60 votes except for opposition to the president’s bill, which may be the only silver lining.

In consultation with our undocumented youth partners and our partners who represent border communities, Asian Americans Advancing Justice-AAJC felt compelled to oppose the bipartisan compromise offered by Sens. Mike Rounds Marion (Mike) Michael RoundsChamber of Commerce endorses McSally for reelection Senate GOP eyes early exit Senate Republicans signal openness to working with Biden MORE (R-S.D.) and Angus King Angus KingShakespeare Theatre Company goes virtual for 'Will on the Hill...or Won't They?' On The Trail: How Nancy Pelosi could improbably become president Angus King: Ending election security briefings 'looks like a pre-cover-up' MORE (I-Maine). The choices presented were extremely hard for us, and even more difficult for our undocumented youth partners. They are navigating the uncertainty of losing jobs, financial aid and drivers’ licenses, worrying about how to support elderly parents, or simply not being able to plan ahead in their lives.

ADVERTISEMENT

They have been clear with us about not trading on the lives of immigrants who have lived and worked in the United States for decades. We won’t accept the pitting of parents, family members and other immigrant communities against the people we seek to protect.

People do not think of border security as an Asian-American issue. The $25 billion wall for border security would result in more deportations and harm to border communities and the environment. It is wasteful and bad policy. I refuse to believe that the senators who voted for the Rounds-King proposal truly believe that it is sound policy to give the president $25 billion for a wall and militarization of the border. Only three Democratic senators voted against the Round-King proposal — Tom Udall Thomas (Tom) Stewart UdallLWCF modernization: Restoring the promise OVERNIGHT ENERGY: House Democrats tee up vote on climate-focused energy bill next week | EPA reappoints controversial leader to air quality advisory committee | Coronavirus creates delay in Pentagon research for alternative to 'forever chemicals' Senate Democrats demand White House fire controversial head of public lands agency MORE and Martin Heinrich Martin Trevor HeinrichSenate Democrats demand White House fire controversial head of public lands agency Senate Democrats seek removal of controversial public lands head after nomination withdrawal Five takeaways from final Senate Intel Russia report MORE of New Mexico and Kamala Harris Kamala HarrisHarris honors Ginsburg, visits Supreme Court The Hill's Campaign Report: Trump and Biden vie for Minnesota | Early voting begins in four states | Blue state GOP governors back Susan Collins Kamala Harris: Black Americans have been 'disproportionately harmed' by Trump MORE of California. They did the right thing as representatives of border communities.

The Rounds-King proposal would have cut family immigration by ending one category of sponsorship. The amendment also imposed restrictions on sponsoring the parents of undocumented youths for permanent residency. In addition, the proposal would not offer a path to citizenship for all the undocumented immigrants who would be covered by a clean DREAM Act, which also has had bipartisan support — again, not because the senators who wrote it believe this is good policy, but because they needed to give the president a talking point to try to get protections for Dreamers.

We know that these choices were hard for the senators who wrote the compromise bill and those who voted for it. We know that they truly care about the futures of undocumented youths. Unfortunately, they put their names on bad policy that has no hope of becoming law.

Let me be clear: one person is primarily responsible for the situation that DACA recipients face and that’s the president. President Trump ended DACA and refuses to engage seriously in a solution. We view his plan as one that seeks to hold undocumented youths hostage to a white nativist agenda.

The White House proposal authored by Sen. Chuck Grassley Charles (Chuck) Ernest GrassleySenate Republicans face tough decision on replacing Ginsburg What Senate Republicans have said about election-year Supreme Court vacancies Biden says Ginsburg successor should be picked by candidate who wins on Nov. 3 MORE (R-Iowa) would cut the number of immigrants to the United States in half and to end our family reunification system and the diversity visa program. It would ramp up mass deportations.

For Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders, these attacks are personal — 92 percent of adult Asian-Americans are immigrants or the children of immigrants. Two-thirds of them came here through the family reunification system. In addition, Asian immigrants make up 11 percent of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States.

Thirty percent of diversity visas are given to Asians from less-represented countries, and it is the primary way that African immigrants enter the United States. Cuts to the family-based immigration system are unnecessary, but more importantly, would rob our country of new ideas, cultural experiences and innovation.

We all rely on our families. Immigrant families use the family-based system to reunite with loved ones and lean on their support for everyday needs such as caring for children or grandparents, buying homes, or starting small or family-owned businesses — businesses that create jobs.

We view the White House plan to terminate family-based immigration and build a border wall in exchange for legalizing undocumented youths as racist and xenophobic. The clear rejection of the administration’s proposal should demonstrate that the president’s attempt to give ultimatums is a failing proposition.

The White House rhetoric on immigrants and Muslims is all too reminiscent of what brought about shameful moments in history such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 or Japanese incarceration during World War II. The country should not revert to a time when immigration laws favored only Western European immigrants at the exclusion of all others. With a small number of loud activists on the far right, Congress has moved away from a conversation around facts and good policy.

We continue to inch closer to the March 5 deadline that President Trump imposed for a solution to this crisis. Congress can — and should — get back to work immediately to protect our Dreamers.

John C. Yang is president and executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice-AAJC, an organization created to advance civil and human rights for Asian-Americans and a fair and equitable society for all.