> He DID NOT come in legally. So here we have what I think is some of the nonsense of the current laws. My understanding is that how you generally apply for a

> He DID NOT come in legally. So here we have what I think is some of the nonsense of the current laws. My understanding is that how you generally apply for asylum is: 1. Show up in the country one way or another 2. Apply for asylum So, is #1 "illegal", since he didn't have an official reason to be here long-term when he came into the country? Or is #1 "legal", since the laws for step 2 seem to be written in a way that step 1 is necessary? If you know more about how asylum actually works, feel free to enlighten me.