The Wall Street Journal editorial page this week expressed bewilderment that Republicans appear eager to torpedo a bipartisan immigration deal that is far more conservative than anything they imagined possible just months ago.
The bill, which was hammered out by Sens. James Lankford (R-OK), Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ), and Chris Murphy (D-CT), completely forgoes a longtime demand from Democratic lawmakers for a pathway to citizenship to undocumented immigrants who were brought to America as children and who have spent the vast majority of their lives in the United States.
Instead, the bill deals almost entirely with border security and contains multiple policy changes Republicans have been demanding for years.
"Republicans demanded border measures last year as the price for passing military aid for Ukraine, Israel and Pacific allies," the editors wrote. "Democrats resisted at first but later agreed to negotiate and have made concessions that are infuriating the open-borders left. Will Republicans now abandon what they claimed to want?"
READ MORE: Can you deprogram your Trump cultist friends and family?
The WSJ then argued that Republicans are dropping the deal in order to help former President Donald Trump's political prospects with the belief that outrage over border crossings could help propel him to the White House again.
The editors warned, however, that things might not work out the way that Republicans planned them.
"If Republicans reject this bill, they will hand Democrats an argument that the GOP wants border chaos that they can exploit as a campaign issue," the editorial concludes. "The chaos will continue for at least another year. Republicans may think they can write a better law if Mr. Trump wins in November, but don’t count on it. Democrats will again demand much more in return. If Republicans pass up this rare chance at border reform, they may not get a better one."
