US-Mexico border

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Fear, anger and hope as Texas border city mourns migrants killed by truck

      by

      A vigil in Brownsville mourning eight men killed when a car crashed into migrants waiting at a bus stop drew local residents and migrant families on Monday evening expressing a mix of grief, anger, hope and love in the shaken border city.“My son is my whole life, and that man may have taken it,” a Venezuelan mother, Marilín de los Ángeles Medero Piña, lamented, sobbing desperately into the microphone.As the heat of the day began to cool, about 300 people gathered at Linear Park in downtown Brownsville at the eastern end of the US-Mexico border.The day before, a local man with an extensive criminal history – whom witnesses said was shouting anti-immigrant insults – had smashed into a group of people when he drove an SUV through a red light near a migrant shelter, killing eight and injuring 10 more.Medero Piña’s son, Héctor David Medina, 24, is missing and his family is trying to establish if he is among those injured or killed.“Help us, please. I want to find my son,” Medero Piña appealed to the crowd. “One moment they tell me he’s alive and the next that he’s dead.”Many clustered around the stricken mother, offering prayers, hugs and donations. With her were her husband and three other children. All wept, recounting how local police couldn’t tell them whether Medina was dead or alive.George Alvarez, 34, was charged on Monday with manslaughter. Investigators are yet to determine whether the crash was intentional and are awaiting toxicology reports. Brownsville authorities have not yet been able to name those killed.Among the speakers at the vigil were two Venezuelan men who survived the attack on Sunday.“I know God exists because he gave me another chance to live,” said Luis Herrera, one of the survivors.Unable to hold back his tears, Herrera thanked the people of Brownsville for their kindness.“Not all people are bad,” Herrera said. “This is a beautiful community.”According to Herrera and other witnesses, Alvarez yelled anti-immigrant statements and asked why so many migrants were “invading” the city.“It’s because the country I longed for, and once had, doesn’t exist any more,” said Crismar García, 34, from the state of Táchira in crisis-gripped Venezuela, who has been in Brownsville for a year navigating her asylum process, during the vigil.The strong sense of grief pervading migrants in the community for the previous 24 hours was for some surpassed by fear.Ronny García, 35, and Jesús Moreno, 35, both from the state of Bolívar in Venezuela, worried they will encounter more tragedy in the near future, after witnessing Sunday’s events.“Honestly, we’re scared,” said García. “Anything could happen to us.”Moreno explained how they believe migrants have become “dirty business,” as they had been repeatedly taken advantage of and blackmailed in their months-long overland journey to the US.“Especially in this part of Texas, close to the border – migrants have become cannon fodder,” Moreno said.Police are investigating reports of a man with a gun turning up at the Ozanam Center migrant shelter near the crash site on Monday, according to a local news outlet.With Title 42, a Covid-era government restriction on immigration, set to expire at just before midnight on Thursday, residents are concerned there will be a fresh influx of migrants to the city that will be overwhelming, even though most are aiming just to pass through.Last week the city declared a state of emergency – as did El Paso, in west Texas, where an estimated 2,000 people are stuck on the streets after crossing the border seeking refuge, and shelters are full.Marisela Camarillo, 53, a retired school teacher and lifelong Brownsville resident present at the vigil, said she thought there was “absolutely no way” her city was ready for what may unfold on Thursday and Friday.“It’s not the fact that migrants are coming that’s concerning, it’s the fact that we’re not ready,” Camarillo said. “We don’t have the resources, we’re not equipped, and the federal government is not stepping up.”The Texas governor, Greg Abbott, announced on Monday the deployment of what his office calls a tactical border force, a new military unit of the Texas guard specifically assembled to “intercept, repel and to turn back” migrants at the border.“That’s not what the state guard should be used for,” Camarillo said. “We should have been preparing for this all this time.”However, Victor Maldonado, executive director of the Ozanam Center, said he was fully prepared with extra beds and resources. He also assured there would be collaboration with the local authorities, religious organizations, and non-profits to guarantee safety, he said.Sister Norma Pimentel, a well-known nun and immigrants’ advocate in the area, who is the executive director of Catholic Charities of the Rio Grande Valley, offered some words of encouragement at the vigil.“They’re people, and the only thing they want is an opportunity to live,” Pimentel said. “So let’s welcome them, and let’s love them.” More

    • 238 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      A migrant policy is set to end. What will it mean for US’s commitment as a land of refuge?

      by

      The right to seek asylum in the United States is in the balance as migrants fleeing violence and instability at home anxiously await a chance at safety – amid a major policy shift at the US’s southern border.The Title 42 public health order – which has allowed officials to quickly expel migrants without giving them access to asylum for years now – is expected to finally end on 11 May. What does this mean for the US’s historic commitment as a beacon for freedom from persecution?As government leaders brace for an anticipated uptick in migrants and asylum seekers trying to cross the border, the hardline policies they’re advancing to keep people out may spell potentially deadly consequences for some of the world’s most vulnerable.In Congress, an immigration and border security package that backs an enforcement-only approach is expected to receive a vote on the Republican-controlled House floor as soon as this week.If enacted, the proposed legislation would significantly curtail asylum, limit other humanitarian pathways, restart border wall construction, do away with safeguards for migrant kids, and otherwise rewrite the US’s laws to be far less welcoming to those in need of protection.Realistically, such draconian measures would be unlikely to move forward in the Democratic-controlled Senate, at least as drafted. But they still represent a vision of immigration policy that stands in sharp contrast to the US’s tradition of refuge, while hindering the federal government’s ability to effectively respond during national security events such as the US withdrawal from Afghanistan or Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.And meanwhile, the White House and its agencies are also exploring strategies that could chip away at the US’s humanitarian commitments , under a Democratic administration that campaigned on a promise to build “a fair and humane immigration system”.Since Joe Biden took office, he and his staff have been forced to balance those initial goals with intense and unyielding political pressure to respond to record levels of migration at the US-Mexico border. And, as lawmakers spend their time debating anti-immigrant policies instead of bipartisan immigration reform, the administration has reacted with a series of carrots and sticks that are more nuanced than the House’s proposals but still largely couched in mechanisms meant to deter would-be migrants.That trend continued last month, when the Departments of State and Homeland Security unveiled their own collective response to the anticipated increase in humanitarian migration at the US-Mexico border after the Title 42 policy is set to end.Notably, their announcement of new processing centers in Guatemala and Colombia will give migrants in the region a chance to see whether they’re good candidates for lawful immigration pathways not only to the US, but also to Canada and Spain, without ever having to pay smugglers for a dangerous trek north.But in contrast, the administration also has plans that could broadly box out migrants with legitimate claims from accessing protection.That proposal will be finalized by 11 May, Homeland security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said Friday. As it stands now, migrants at the southern border who passed through a third country on the way to the US would generally be ineligible for asylum – with a few caveats – unless they qualify for one of three exceptions, all with limitations and exclusions that could make it nearly impossible for many of the most vulnerable asylum seekers to find refuge.The first exception is the Biden administration’s existing programs for people from Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba and Haiti to come to the US with advance permission through a process called parole. These programs allow up to 30,000 individuals each month to reach the US and have coincided with a dip in irregular crossings at the southern border. But there is a high bar – eligibility is limited to those who can obtain a passport, secure a US-based sponsor to support them financially, and afford international commercial air travel.The second exception is for those who wait on the Mexican side of the border – potentially for weeks, months, or indefinitely – for one of the finite number of daily asylum appointments to enter the US through CBP One, a phone application from the federal government that’s been deluged with complaints.The final exception covers asylum seekers who applied for and were denied protection elsewhere en route to the US. But in such places, migrants are viewed by criminal organizations as easy targets for violence and extortion. More than 13,000 migrants have already been kidnapped, raped, tortured or otherwise attacked in Mexico after they were turned back at the US’s southern border since early 2021.Such a bleak situation has generated a great deal of outcry from immigration advocates. And now, these onerous restrictions are being coupled with efforts to fast-track initial asylum screenings and deportations in border facilities where attorneys aren’t allowed to visit in person, prompting more protest and fear that migrants not only won’t be able to exercise their rights but are exposed to unnecessary danger.Polls show that Americans continue to overwhelmingly support the US as a land of refuge and welcome.Contrary to the impression left by partisan squabbles, there are solutions. Ultimately, Congress has the power to be the most effective agent, by legislating new immigration pathways and making other long-awaited reforms that many argue benefit both migrants and US citizens.For example, lawmakers could create more vehicles for migrant workers to fill chronic labor shortages. And legislators could also fund more asylum officers, immigration judges, and other essential personnel, giving overstretched border officials a reprieve while tackling immigration-related backlogs that have undermined the whole system.With potential solutions like these that privilege human life over optics or politics, the US would not have to choose between a tradition of refuge and order at the border. It could do both, protecting the American people and future Americans who are turning to the US right now for help.
      Alexandra Villarreal is a policy and advocacy associate at the National Immigration Forum. More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Situation at US-Mexico border ahead of end of asylum limits ‘very challenging’

      by

      The US homeland security secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, said on Friday that immigration authorities faced “extremely challenging” circumstances along the border with Mexico days before the end of asylum restrictions implemented during the Covid-19 pandemic.A surge of Venezuelan migrants through south Texas, particularly in and around the border community of Brownsville, has occurred over the last two weeks for reasons that Mayorkas said were unclear. On Thursday, 4,000 of about 6,000 migrants in border patrol custody in Texas’s Rio Grande Valley were Venezuelan.Mayorkas noted that Mexico agreed this week to continue taking back Venezuelans who enter the US illegally after asylum restrictions end on 11 May, along with Cubans, Haitians and Nicaraguans. Migrants have been expelled from the US more than 2.8m times since March 2020 under the authority of what is known as Title 42.The secretary reaffirmed plans to finalize a new policy by Thursday that will make it extremely difficult for migrants to seek asylum if they pass through another country, like Mexico, on their way to the US border.“The situation at the border is a very serious one, a very challenging one and a very difficult one,” Mayorkas said.Illegal crossings tumbled after the Joe Biden White House announced asylum restrictions in January, but they have risen since mid-April. The president of the National Border Patrol Council, Brandon Judd, said this week they have been hovering at about 7,200 daily, up from about 5,200 in March.Border patrol chief Raul Ortiz said 1,500 active-duty troops are planning to be dispatched to El Paso, Texas, adding to 2,500 national guard troops already positioned across the border. Ortiz said El Paso was chosen because it has been a busy corridor for illegal crossings over the last six months. The troop deployment was announced this week but not the location.Mayorkas, on his second day of a visit to the Rio Grande Valley, said smugglers were deceiving migrants and luring them on a dangerous journey. “The border is not open, it has not been open, and it will not be open” after 11 May, he said.The Mexican foreign affairs secretary, Marcelo Ebrard, echoed Mayorkas’s sentiment about smugglers spreading misinformation.“We’re seeing a very significant flow (of migrants) in recent days on the basis of a hoax,” Ebrard said at a news conference. He said smugglers are saying: “Hurry up to get to the United States by crossing Mexico because … they’re going to end Title 42” on 11 May.“It’s a trick and they’re at risk,” Ebrard said.The Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador urged those who want to migrate to follow legal pathways, such as applying in US processing centers scheduled to open in Guatemala and Colombia. He said Mexico was not making special preparations for the end of Title 42 because he did not expect a surge.“A lot of people won’t let themselves be tricked,” the president said.Mayorkas touted new legal pathways, which include parole for up to 30,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans a month who apply online with a financial sponsor. But he said the Biden administration could only do so much without Congress.“We have a plan – we are executing on that plan,” Mayorkas said. “Fundamentally, however, we are working within a broken immigration system that for decades has been in dire need of reform.”US customs and border protection said on Friday that it is raising the number of people admitted to the country at land crossings with Mexico to 1,000 a day from 740 using a mobile app called CBP One that was extended in January to asylum-seekers. Demand has far outweighed available slots.The administration faced a setback, at least a temporary one, when Colombia said on Thursday it suspended deportation flights from the US due to “cruel and degrading” treatment of migrants. Colombia’s immigration agency said it canceled returns of 1,200 Colombians after complaints about conditions in US detention centers and on the flights. More

    • 188 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      US sends 1,500 troops to Mexico border as Covid-era asylum rule is set to expire

      by

      Joe Biden will send 1,500 troops to the US-Mexico border, the Pentagon said on Tuesday, in preparation for a possible rise in immigration when Covid-19 border restrictions lift later this month.The 90-day deployment of active-duty troops will supplement the work of the US border patrol but will not carry out law enforcement duties, said Brig Gen Pat Ryder, a Pentagon spokesperson, in a statement.The force will be in addition to an ongoing deployment of about 2,500 national guard troops.The deployment comes as the Title 42 restrictions, which allow US authorities to rapidly expel non-Mexican migrants to Mexico without the chance to seek asylum, are set to to end on 11 May. Donald Trump activated the policies during the pandemic and Biden had expanded the controversial public health measure, despite criticism from immigration advocates.Now officials are bracing for the Biden administration’s ending of Title 42 next week. El Paso, the Texas border city, has declared a state of emergency in preparation for a potential influx of more than 35,000 asylum seekers who are currently stuck in the Mexican sister city of Juárez.Biden has grappled with record numbers of migrants caught illegally crossing the US-Mexico border since he took office in 2021.Republicans have criticized Biden for rolling back the hardline policies of Donald Trump while some Democrats and immigration activists also have lambasted Biden for gradually toughening his approach to border security.Senator Bob Menendez, a Democrat and chair of the Senate foreign relations committee, said Biden’s decision to send troops was unacceptable.“Trying to score political points or intimidate migrants by sending the military to the border caters to the Republican party’s xenophobic attacks on our asylum system,” Menendez said in a statement.The 1,500 troops could arrive at the US-Mexico border by 10 May, Ryder said during a briefing. They will conduct ground-based monitoring, data entry and warehouse support to free up border agents and “fill critical capability gaps”, he said.The Pentagon is looking at ways to replace the active-duty personnel with those from the reserve force, he said.When asked about the troop deployment in a news conference, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, the Mexican president, said the US is a sovereign nation and that Mexico respects its decisions.The US has used military troops at the border during previous presidential administrations, including Republican George W Bush, Democrat Barack Obama and Trump, who deployed thousands of active-duty and national guard troops.The White House press secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, called such deployments “a common practice”.Pentagon leaders have long been frustrated about military deployments to the border, privately arguing that the mundane tasks are better suited for law enforcement agencies and can affect military readiness.Immigration advocates have criticized previous efforts to send troops to the border.“People seeking asylum should be met with humanitarian professionals, welcoming volunteers, and medical and mental health professionals. Not soldiers,” Bilal Askaryar, the interim campaign manager of the #WelcomeWithDignity Campaign, said on Twitter. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Bannon ally handed four-year prison term over Trump border-wall fraud

      by

      Brian Kolfage, a US air force veteran and former associate of the Trump ally and adviser Steve Bannon, was sentenced on Wednesday to more than four years in prison after admitting to conspiring to defraud donors to a campaign to build a wall along the US-Mexican border, as promised by the former president.Bannon, 69 and a former campaign chair and White House strategist for Trump, was also charged in the case but received a presidential pardon in the final hours of Trump’s term.Bannon remains a prominent presence in far-right media and politics. In September, he was indicted in New York state court in Manhattan on money laundering and conspiracy charges over the planned wall. He pleaded not guilty. Trump’s pardon of Bannon covered federal crimes but not alleged state crimes.Kolfage, 41, lost his legs and right hand in a rocket attack in Iraq. In the federal case, he pleaded guilty last year to misappropriating funds meant for the We Build the Wall campaign.On Wednesday a US district judge, Analisa Torres, announced the 51-month sentence at a hearing in federal court in Manhattan.Andrew Badolato, 58, another former Bannon associate, also pleaded guilty and was sentenced to three years in prison.“The fraud perpetrated by Mr Kolfage and Mr Badolato went well beyond ripping off individual donors,” Torres said. “They hurt us all by eroding the public’s faith in the political process.“Badolato and Kolfage led the fundraising push alongside Bannon, Trump’s former campaign chair and White House strategist.Federal prosecutors in Manhattan had recommended Kolfage spend 51 months in prison and Badolato 41.Kolfage was accused of taking more than $350,000 and spending it on boat payments, jewelry and cosmetic surgery. He also pleaded guilty to tax charges.Lawyers for Kolfage proposed he be sentenced to home detention, citing his medical needs. Badolato’s lawyers said three years of probation would have been sufficient for their client because he was less culpable.Another defendant, 52-year-old Timothy Shea, was convicted in October. He is set to be sentenced in June. More

    • 150 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden’s proposal denying asylum at border would cause ‘unnecessary suffering’, say critics

      by

      Biden’s proposal denying asylum at border would cause ‘unnecessary suffering’, say criticsProposal prompted comparisons to Trump’s policies to limit asylum for migrants, which Biden had pledged to reverseDemocrats and immigration advocates harshly criticized Joe Biden over a new proposal that could stop migrants claiming asylum when they arrive at the US-Mexico border. One advocate said the move would cause “unnecessary human suffering”.Biden unveils Trump-style plan to deter asylum seekers at Mexico borderRead moreThe pushback came after the Biden administration unveiled a proposal that would deny asylum to migrants who arrive without first seeking it in one of the countries they passed through.There are exceptions for children, people with medical emergencies and those facing imminent threats but if enacted the new proposal could stop tens of thousands of people claiming asylum in the US.The move prompted comparisons to Donald Trump’s attempts to limit asylum for migrants traveling through other countries, attempts repeatedly struck down by federal courts. As a presidential candidate, Biden pledged to reverse those policies.The proposal “represents a blatant embrace of hateful and illegal anti-asylum policies, which will lead to unnecessary human suffering”, said Marisa Limón Garza, executive director of Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center.“Time after time, President Biden has broken his campaign promises to end restrictions on asylum seekers traveling through other countries,” Limón Garza said in a statement.“These are mothers, fathers, aunts, uncles and thousands of children who are simply looking for a fair chance for their case to be heard. We urge the Biden administration to abandon policy initiatives that further the inhumane and ineffective agenda of the Trump administration.”The proposed rule was posted in the Federal Register this week, with 30 days for public comment.Mary Meg McCarthy, executive director of the National Justice Immigration Center, said the brief comment period “suggests that the president already knows that this policy is a betrayal of his campaign promises”.“The Biden administration’s proposed rule violates US obligations under international and US human rights law which ensures access to protection for people fleeing persecution,” she said.“United States federal law specifically states that the right to seek asylum is not contingent on a person’s status or the way they come to the United States. Yet with this rule, the Biden administration is creating new requirements that will result in harm and death to people who need protection and must flee their homes quickly.’”Sergio Gonzales, executive director of Immigration Hub, said the proposal “flies in the face of America’s moral leadership on the protection of refugees and President Biden’s campaign promise to rebuild a fair, humane and orderly immigration system. Instead, the proposal brings back a Trump-era ban that was declared unlawful by federal courts.”The Biden administration faces the loss of a pandemic-era rule that has been used to expel migrants. That rule, Title 42, will likely go away in May when the national Covid-19 emergency is set to end.Officials from the justice department have warned that unauthorized border crossing could increase to somewhere between 11,000 and 13,000 per day, up from 8,600 daily in mid-December, if no action is taken.Republicans have hammered Biden over his handling of the border and some have pushed for impeaching Alejandro Mayorkas, the secretary of homeland security.Biden has also drawn criticism from fellow Democrats on Capitol Hill, who urged him to abandon the idea.In a joint statement, the Democratic senators Robert Menendez, Cory Booker, Ben Ray Luján and Alex Padilla said: “Last month, when the Biden administration announced it would soon be issuing a proposed rule, which in effect would function as a ‘transit ban’ on asylum seekers who don’t first apply for asylum in a transit country, we urged the administration to abandon this idea.“We are deeply disappointed that the administration has chosen to move forward with publishing this proposed rule, which only perpetuates the harmful myth that asylum seekers are a threat to this nation. In reality, they are pursuing a legal pathway in the United States.”Jerry Nadler, the ranking Democrat on the House judiciary committee, also criticized the proposal.“We are deeply disappointed in the Biden administration’s proposal to limit access to asylum,” he said in a joint statement with Pramila Jayapal, a Washington state Democrat and leading congressional progressive.“The ability to seek asylum is a bedrock principle protected by federal law and should never be violated. We should not be restricting legal pathways to enter the United States, we should be expanding them.”Lee Gelernt, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney who challenged similar asylum restrictions under the Trump administration, said his organization would sue the Biden administration if the rule was adopted.“We successfully sued to block the Trump transit ban and will sue again if the Biden administration goes through with its plan,” he said.TopicsUS immigrationJoe BidenMexicoUS-Mexico borderUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Texas national guard soldier shoots and wounds migrant at Mexico border

      by

      Texas national guard soldier shoots and wounds migrant at Mexico borderInjuries not life-threatening after soldier fires at migrant in the shoulder as he was attempting to detain migrant A Texas national guard soldier has shot and wounded a migrant in the shoulder along the US-Mexico border.According to Texas military records reviewed by the Military Times and the Texas Tribune, the soldier fired at the migrant on 15 January as he was attempting to detain the migrant.The shooting is believed to be the first time that a national guard member deployed to the border as part of Texas’s border security mission Operation Lone Star has shot and injured a migrant.The incident occurred west of McAllen, Texas, at around 4.20am when two national guard soldiers and border patrol agents tracked several migrants to an abandoned house.Records reviewed by the Military Times and the Texas Tribune showed that upon the two soldiers entering the house, three of the migrants surrendered. A fourth migrant tried to escape from a window and one of the soldiers attempted to apprehend the migrant.The migrant was reported to have wrestled with the soldier and struck him with his fists and elbows. At one point, the soldier drew his M17 pistol, fired once and shot the migrant.Military records reviewed by the outlets does not indicate that the migrant had fired any weapons towards the soldier. It remains unclear whether the soldier intended to fire his gun.The soldier has been identified as specialist Angel Gallegos. Gallegos shot the migrant in his left shoulder who was then transported to McAllen Medical Center for evaluation and treatment, the outlets reported. The migrant’s injuries are not life-threatening.According to a federal law enforcement source who spoke to CNN, the migrant was from El Salvador.“Customs and bBorder protection’s office of professional responsibility is reviewing the incident,” US Customs and Border Protection spokesperson Rod Kise told CNN.TopicsUS-Mexico borderUS immigrationUS militaryUS politicsTexasnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump v Biden: how different are their policies on the US-Mexico border?

      by

      AnalysisTrump v Biden: how different are their policies on the US-Mexico border?Alexandra Villarreal in Austin Biden’s immigration promises fall short as some of Trump’s policies remain in place – here’s what’s similar and what’s differentUnder Donald Trump, Americans were confronted with a near-constant onslaught of racist, anti-immigrant rhetoric and policy, especially regarding the US-Mexico border, as the same man who led chants about building a wall there won the 2016 presidential election and took control of the Oval Office for the next four years.Vulnerable migrants were mounting “an invasion”, Trump said. The United States’ asylum system – a key commitment to its humanitarian values – was “ridiculous” and “insane”. Immigrants of color made headlines for supposedly coming here from “shithole” countries, and Mexican immigrants were called drug dealers, criminals and rapists.US turns back growing number of undocumented people after arduous sea journeysRead moreAfter such public vitriol and humanitarian scandals, Joe Biden billed himself as the anti-Trump candidate who would restore honor and decency to the presidency, partly by building a fair and humane immigration system. One of his campaign statements noted: “Most Americans can trace their family history back to a choice – a choice to leave behind everything that was familiar in search of new opportunities and a new life. Joe Biden understands that is an irrefutable source of our strength.”Initially, Biden delivered, with a flurry of executive actions and other first steps to undo Trump’s crackdown. But when the number of people crossing into the US from Mexico without authorization swiftly increased, his more tempered tactics became a political liability, giving Republicans fuel to spin false yet convincing – to some – narratives about an “open” and mismanaged border.Soon, Biden’s top political operatives started pushing him to adopt a more hardline approach, while some of his immigration experts jumped ship, unable to stomach enforcing some of the same Trump-era practices they loathed.Amid such an ideological quagmire, a reactive, confusing and often contradictory immigration agenda has emerged from this administration. And now, new policies are being admonished by advocates – and even some serving Democrats – for seemingly plagiarizing Trump’s very own playbook, without meaningful input from Congress or organizations on the ground.So is the Biden White House simply a more politically correct Trump 2.0 on immigration at the US-Mexico border? We compare and contrast.Enforcing deterrenceMuch of both Trump and Biden’s border strategies are predicated on the notion that if the US government erects enough barriers and gets rid of enough incentives, people will stop trying to come.Thus far, that theory hasn’t really panned out – the US has continued to experience record-breaking numbers of migrants and asylum seekers at its south-west boundary, despite decades of presidents pursuing this paradigm of prevention through deterrence. But, at a border that is already hyper-politicized, hyper-policed and hyper-surveilled, the last two administrations have still largely relied on the enforcement-focused infrastructures and blueprints inherited from their predecessors.Recently, the Biden administration announced it would step up expedited removal, despite having previously rescinded Trump’s own sweeping expansion of these fast-tracked deportations. Under the practice, migrants can be swiftly repatriated without ever seeing a judge.Biden officials have also said they will be proposing a new rule to further limit asylum eligibility, a move that has incited anger among advocates who already fought similar bans under Trump.Expelled to dangerThe most infamous through-line between Trump and Biden’s approaches to people arriving at the US-Mexico border today has been both administrations’ controversial use of a health law to deny millions of migrants and would-be asylum seekers the opportunity to ask for protection, seemingly in violation of their rights domestically and internationally.Many people subjected to this policy – often referred to by its shorthand, Title 42 – have been stranded in or expelled to dangerous conditions in Mexico, or else swiftly returned to the unstable and sometimes life-threatening realities at home that many of them risked life and limb to escape. Others die trying to circumvent closed-off points of entry.The Trump administration invoked Title 42 ostensibly as a public health measure during the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic and used it to quickly expel hundreds of thousands of people – including nearly 16,000 unaccompanied children.Biden stopped applying the aggressive policy to unaccompanied kids but has continued to expel individuals and families. Many stuck in Mexico because of Title 42 have subsequently been murdered, raped or kidnapped, with more than 13,480 reports of violent attacks during Biden’s presidency alone.Although the Biden administration eventually announced it was planning to end Title 42 restrictions last year, pending litigation has kept them in place for the foreseeable future. Meanwhile, even as officials publicly argue against reliance on the policy, they have expanded its use multiple times, abruptly, to target Venezuelans and now also Nicaraguans, Haitians and Cubans.Those policy changes have been accompanied by the creation of limited legal pathways, but their eligibility requirements demand a level of financial resources and international connections that the western hemisphere’s most vulnerable, forcibly displaced people likely cannot produce.“Do not just show up at the border,” Biden warned potential migrants. “Stay where you are and apply legally from there.”Families, still separatedPart of Trump’s enduring legacy is tied to being the president who separated families at the US-Mexico border and threw “kids in cages” for days or weeks, often with little communication or information provided to keep track of them.In 2018, Trump’s zero tolerance immigration policy shook liberals and conservatives alike as they learned about terrified children being ripped from the arms of parents who were now being prosecuted. Trump was eventually forced to end these hyper-visible family separations, but he continued to advance hardline practices that adversely affected children and families seeking help at the US’s south-west boundary, whether stranding young kids in US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) custody or in hazardous Mexican border towns.Biden, by contrast, has stopped holding migrant families in Ice detention, so far. He also resumed programs that allow some from the Caribbean and Central America to reunite with family members in the US, and a task force is still trying to reconnect families separated by the Trump administration.Yet even as Biden tries to clean up Trump’s mess, de facto family separations continue. Unaccompanied children are exempt from Title 42, so some parents make the difficult choice to send their kids across the border alone, even when that means indefinite time apart.Love across the border: a couple’s 13-year quest to be reunited in the USRead moreThe bottom lineSo are Biden’s border policies turning into a copy of Trump’s?The reality is more nuanced, with a long history of bad approaches to humanitarian migration across presidents and some positive moves toward solutions from Biden, bolstered by a different rhetoric, new alternative legal pathways and attempts at more efficient processing.Yet parallels exist. Most notably, both administrations have done devastating harm to millions of forcibly displaced people, who came here looking for safety and opportunity only to become victims of a system that has left them stranded and vulnerable.And with Biden now shifting to the center and immigration looming as a liability issue in the 2024 presidential election for Democrats – most of whom get sucked into the xenophobic right-wing narrative without figuring out how to defend the benefits of the American melting pot – progressives, advocates – and millions of migrants – should brace for a tough foreseeable future.TopicsUS immigrationUS-Mexico borderUS politicsBiden administrationTrump administrationNicaraguaHondurasanalysisReuse this content More