https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46147137 It's a fact that a great many asylum seekers enter the country in which they intend to claim refugee status illegally or arrive at the port to claim. It's the nature of desperation or economic migrancy. Now, having looking at the US law just a few days ago on the US internal distinction between refugee and "asylee", the only difference was that the latter was the term used for someone claiming refugee status who was already in US soil as opposed to applying outside. This is because under the Refugee Convention the US has undertaken an obligation under international law to hear these claims wherever they are made. This proposal would render a significant proportion of entrants to the US without a claim. You cannot say "no problem, they can leave and claim from outside" because often they will be in danger in their country of origin or they will not have permission to travel to and reside in a third country while a claim from outside is processed (plus they would not have fair access to the courts for the appeal process). To expect them to do so is an express breach of Article 31 of the Convention (a contracting nation shall not impose penalties on an illegal entrant refugee) and would give rise to a breach of Article 33 (a contracting nation shall not expelled a refugee to a territory where he may be at risk). It is also a potential breach of Article 16 (access to the courts). Now, the only way I see Trump getting away with this is if the US withdraws from the Refugee Convention completely. Something I don't think is impossible given that he pulled out of the UN's Migrant and Refugee Pact last December, has imposed what is effectively Muslim (which already severely inhibits nations on the ban list from seeking refugee status in the US0 ban and pulled out of Paris and JCPOA. Now, to put this in context, 144 countries are signed up to the Convention, including every first world nation. It was set up in the shadow of the Holocaust to prevent history from repeating itself. After nearly 7o years does the US really want to abandon basic values even more? No doubt @Paladin and his Trumpite friends are overjoyed they're getting their money's worth, considering they like to dehumanise and demonise people seeking refugee status. But is this not another warning sign as to how far American is slipping away from it's own basic historical values (particularly given it is a nation of immigrants)?