In President Trump’s mind, there are only two approaches to policing the border — neither of them good.

“If you’re really, really pathetically weak, the country is going to be overrun with millions of people,” Trump asserted in a meeting before signing an executive order to stop family separations. “And if you’re strong, then you don’t have any heart. That’s a tough dilemma.”

Actually, it’s not a dilemma; it’s a false dichotomy — the kind of oversimplification the president masterfully employs to stoke fear and flatten complex, multilayered issues into misleading mantras as thick as cue cards.

Border enforcement is a serious issue that deserves careful study and problem-solving by people who actually want to solve problems. And of course, in Washington, crafting the right policy often isn’t key to electoral success. Republican primaries are won by screaming about “invasion!,” and Democrats can get their base motivated by keeping the fight alive.

But here in the real world, it’s time to take a deep breath and consider the facts. Despite what Trump may think, there are common-sense solutions somewhere between “open borders” and the Berlin Wall. It starts with providing enough judges and other resources to enforce current law as intended.

Despite what you may have heard, the United States is not being invaded by amassing hordes of foreigners who threaten our very way of life.

Apprehensions for illegal crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border are the lowest since the 1970s. Meanwhile, we admit fewer legal immigrants each year than Canada or European nations as a percent of population. In fact, more people today are moving to Mexico from the United States than the other way around.

The real challenge at our border has to do with a surge of migrants fleeing violence and chaos in Central America and earnestly pleading for asylum in the United States.

It is a challenge our nation should be well-equipped to handle if we had any real interest: This year, we’re on path to welcome the fewest number of refugees to our borders since the modern resettlement program began in 1980.

Don’t be fooled: There’s room in the inn.

The problem is that we don’t have an organized, efficient system for admitting people and adjudicating their asylum claims. So folks end up behind bars under suspicion of a misdemeanor crime. Children — who must be kept in the least restrictive facilities — get separated from their parents. The line in our immigration courts grows longer.

A question of policy becomes a partisan fight.

Between the cable news clips and shouts of protesters, however, you can hear a serious conversation happening in Washington. A Republican bill making its way through the Senate, the Keep Families Together and Enforce the Law Act, implements some targeted ideas intended to speed up the asylum process — notably, expanding the number of immigration judges and their support staff.

This is the sort of common-sense solution you hear pitched from all across the political spectrum — except, of course, from the president. Last week, Trump explicitly rejected efforts to hire more immigration judges and called congressional efforts to pass a bill, “a waste of time.”

If the Republicans who control Congress, like Texas’ own U.S. Sens. John Cornyn and Ted Cruz, want to pass a legislative fix, they’ll need to mute the president’s Twitter feed, tune out Freedom Caucus extremists who love to cry amnesty, and work with Democrats.

Yes, Mr. President, there’s an alternative to ham-fisted toughness. It’s called smart. Instead of building more detention facilities to house families, Congress should prioritize alternatives, such as providing attorneys and case managers and relying on ankle monitors. By the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency’s own numbers, 99.8 percent of participants in these alternative programs have shown up to their court hearings since November 2014.

These alternatives keep families together, spare children psychological trauma and reflect our nation’s constitutional promise of due process. They also save taxpayer dollars. Detaining a child in a temporary tent city costs $775 per night. At best, detaining an adult costs more than $100 per day. Alternatives to detention cost less than $20 per day.

Congress knows these policies can work. And if they don’t implement them, we’ve seen the results: Families will be held in 21st century internment camps. Kids will be forced to take psychotropic drugs. Sex criminals will be hired to oversee the most vulnerable among us.

Congress has the ability to deal with the current scenario of Central Americans seeking asylum at our border. It doesn’t have to be a crisis. The answer doesn’t have to be pathetic or heartless. It just has to be smart.