Search

Begin New Search Topic Border Control Political Geography Mexico

11. Investing in the Neighborhood: Changing Mexico-U.S. Migration Patterns and Opportunities for Sustainable Cooperation

Author:
Andrew Selee, Silvia E. Giorguli-Saucedo, Ariel G. Ruiz Soto, and Claudia Masferrer
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Migration Policy Institute (MPI)
Abstract:
Current tensions between Mexico and the United States over migration—complete with divisive political rhetoric and unilateral U.S. actions affecting border communities—obscure an important reality: the migration challenges these two countries face are increasingly similar. Both are contending with large-scale mixed flows of humanitarian and other migrants from Central America, including many families and children travelling alone, and both have asylum systems struggling to keep up with a surge in requests for protection. They are also home to large numbers of each other’s nationals and grapple with similar policy questions when it comes to integrating these and other immigrants into local communities, schools, and economies. To build understanding of the changing migration landscape and begin to develop a shared vision for future cooperation, the Migration Policy Institute and El Colegio de México convened the Study Group on Mexico-U.S. Migration in late 2018 and early 2019. The group’s members include leading experts from government, academia, civil society, and the private sector. Informed by the study group’s discussions, this report begins with a snapshot of how migration patterns have changed—with the Mexican immigrant population in the United States shrinking since 2014, more Mexicans and their U.S.-born children moving from the United States to Mexico, and increasing numbers of Central Americans travelling to and applying for asylum in both countries. The report then explores policy options that could help Mexican and U.S. policymakers rethink key issues, including strategies for reforming asylum systems to enable timely and fair decision-making; and improving coordinated border management to facilitate the regular flow of goods and people, while preventing migrant smuggling, drug trafficking, and other illicit activities.
Topic:
Security, Science and Technology, Infrastructure, Border Control, Trafficking, Borders, and Smuggling
Political Geography:
North America, Mexico, and United States of America

12. Family Matters: Claiming Rights across the US-Mexico Migratory System

Author:
Jacqueline Maria Hagan, Ricardo Martinez-Schuldt, Alyssa Peavey, and Deborah Weissman
Publication Date:
01-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (INA) created an immigration system favoring the immigration of spouses, children, and parents of US citizens, thereby establishing family unity as the cornerstone of US immigration policy. Despite this historical emphasis on family unity, backlogs and limited visas for non-immediate relatives of US citizens and legal permanent residents, the militarization of the US-Mexico border, punitive measures for those who enter without inspection, such as the forced separation of children from their parents at the US border, and an aggressive policy of deportation have made it more difficult for members of Mexican binational families to unify. How do members of Mexican binational families manage the hardships that result from US immigration policies that prolong and force family separation? Immigrants and return migrants alike may not be aware of their rights and the legal remedies that exist to enforce them. Structural barriers such as poverty, legal status, fear of deportation, lack of proficiency in English, and lack of familiarity with government bureaucracies no doubt prevent many migrants in the United States and return migrants in Mexico from coming forward to request legal assistance and relief in the courts. Despite these barriers, when it comes to family matters, members of some Mexican binational families can and do assert their rights. In this article, we analyze an administrative database of the Department of Legal Protection of the Mexican consular network that documents migrant legal claims resulting from family separation, along with findings from 21 interviews with consular staff and community organizations in three consular jurisdictions — El Paso, Raleigh, and San Francisco — to investigate the sociolegal processes of claims. Our investigation centers on the mediating role the Mexican state — via its consular network — has developed to assist binational families as they attempt to assert their rights and resolve child support and child custody problems resulting from prolonged and forced family separation. We find that the resolution of binational family claims in part depends on the institutional infrastructure that has developed at local, state, and federal levels, along with the commitment and capacity of the receiving and sending states and the binational structures they establish. These binational structures transcend the limitations of national legal systems to achieve and implement family rights and obligations across borders.
Topic:
Military Strategy, Immigration, Border Control, and Family
Political Geography:
United States, North America, and Mexico

13. Separated Families: Barriers to Family Reunification After Deportation

Author:
Deborah Boehm
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
This paper outlines the complexities — and unlikelihood — of keeping families together when facing, or in the aftermath of deportation. After discussing the context that limits or prevents reunification among immigrant families more generally, I outline several of the particular ways that families are divided when a member is deported. Drawing on case studies from longitudinal ethnographic research in Mexico and the United States, I describe: 1) the difficulties in successfully canceling deportation orders, 2) the particular limitations to family reunification for US citizen children when a parent is deported, and 3) the legal barriers to authorized return to the United States after deportation. I argue that without comprehensive immigration reform and concrete possibilities for relief, mixed-status and transnational families will continue to be divided. Existing laws do not adequately address family life and the diverse needs of individuals as members of families, creating a humanitarian crisis both within and beyond the borders of the United States. The paper concludes with recommendations for immigration policy reform and suggestions for restructuring administrative processes that directly impact those who have been deported and their family members.
Topic:
Immigration, Border Control, and Refugees
Political Geography:
United States, Central America, North America, and Mexico

14. The “Right to Remain Here” as an Evolving Component of Global Refugee Protection: Current Initiatives and Critical Questions

Author:
Daniel Kanstroom
Publication Date:
01-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
This article considers the relationship between two human rights discourses (and two specific legal regimes): refugee and asylum protection and the evolving body of international law that regulates expulsions and deportations. Legal protections for refugees and asylum seekers are, of course, venerable, well-known, and in many respects still cherished, if challenged and perhaps a bit frail. Anti-deportation discourse is much newer, multifaceted, and evolving. It is in many respects a young work in progress. It has arisen in response to a rising tide of deportations, and the worrisome development of massive, harsh deportation machinery in the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Mexico, Australia, and South Africa, among others. This article’s main goal is to consider how these two discourses do and might relate to each other. More specifically, it suggests that the development of procedural and substantive rights against removal — as well as rights during and after removal — aids our understanding of the current state and possible future of the refugee protection regime. The article’s basic thesis is this: The global refugee regime, though challenged both theoretically and in practice, must be maintained and strengthened. Its historical focus on developing criteria for admission into safe states, on protections against expulsion (i.e., non-refoulement), and on regimes of temporary protection all remain critically important. However, a focus on other protections for all noncitizens facing deportation is equally important. Deportation has become a major international system that transcends the power of any single nation-state. Its methods have migrated from one regime to another; its size and scope are substantial and expanding; its costs are enormous; and its effects frequently constitute major human rights violations against millions who do not qualify as refugees. In recent years there has been increasing reliance by states on generally applicable deportation systems, led in large measure by the United States’ radical 25 year-plus experiment with large-scale deportation. Europe has also witnessed a rising tide of deportation, some of which has developed in reaction to European asylum practices. Deportation has been facilitated globally (e.g., in Australia) by well-funded, efficient (but relatively little known) intergovernmental idea sharing, training, and cooperation. This global expansion, standardization, and increasing intergovernmental cooperation on deportation has been met by powerful — if in some respects still nascent — human rights responses by activists, courts, some political actors, and scholars. It might seem counterintuitive to think that emerging ideas about deportation protections could help refugees and asylum seekers, as those people by definition often have greater rights protections both in admission and expulsion. However, the emerging anti-deportation discourses should be systematically studied by those interested in the global refugee regime for three basic reasons. First, what Matthew Gibney has described as “the deportation turn” has historically been deeply connected to anxiety about asylum seekers. Although we lack exact figures of the number of asylum seekers who have been subsequently expelled worldwide, there seems little doubt that it has been a significant phenomenon and will be an increasingly important challenge in the future. The two phenomena of refugee/asylum protections and deportation, in short, are now and have long been linked. What has sometimes been gained through the front door, so to speak, may be lost through the back door. Second, current deportation human rights discourses embody creative framing models that might aid constructive critique and reform of the existing refugee protection regime. They tend to be more functionally oriented, less definitional in terms of who warrants protection, and more fluid and transnational. Third, these discourses offer important specific rights protections that could strengthen the refugee and asylum regime, even as we continue to see weakening state support for the basic 1951/1967 protection regime. This is especially true in regard to the extraterritorial scope of the (deporting) state’s obligations post-deportation. This article particularly examines two initiatives in this emerging field: The International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Expulsion of Aliens and the draft Declaration on the Rights of Expelled and Deported Persons developed through the Boston College Post-Deportation Human Rights Project (of which the author is a co-director). It compares their provisions to the existing corpus of substantive and procedural protections for refugees relating to expulsion and removal. It concludes with consideration of how these discourses may strengthen protections for refugees while also helping to develop more capacious and protective systems in the future.
Topic:
Human Rights, International Cooperation, Border Control, Refugees, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Africa, United States, Europe, France, South Africa, Germany, Australia, Mexico, and Global Focus

15. Shared Border, Shared Future: A Blueprint to Regulate US-Mexico Labor Mobility

Author:
Carlos Gutierrez, Ernesto Zedillo, and Michael Clemens
Publication Date:
09-2016
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Global Development (CGD)
Abstract:
Mexico and the United States have lacked a bilateral agreement to regulate cross-border labor mobility since 1965. Since that time, unlawful migration from Mexico to the US has exploded. Almost half of the 11.7 million Mexican-born individuals living in the U.S. do not have legal authorization. This vast black market in labor has harmed both countries. These two neighboring countries, with an indisputably shared destiny, can come together to work out a better way. The time has come for a lasting, innovative, and cooperative solution. To address this challenge, the Center for Global Development assembled a group of leaders from both countries and with diverse political affiliations—from backgrounds in national security, labor unions, law, economics, business, and diplomacy—to recommend how to move forward. The result is a new blueprint for a bilateral agreement that is designed to end unlawful migration, promote the interests of U.S. and Mexican workers, and uphold the rule of law.
Topic:
International Political Economy, International Affairs, Labor Issues, and Border Control
Political Geography:
America and Mexico

16. In Harm’s Way: Family Separation, Immigration Enforcement Programs and Security on the US-Mexico Border

Author:
Jeremy Slack, Daniel E. Martinez, Scott Whiteford, and Emily Peiffer
Publication Date:
06-2015
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal on Migration and Human Security
Institution:
Center for Migration Studies of New York
Abstract:
The Consequence Delivery System (CDS) is a suite of border and immigration enforcement programs designed to increase the penalties associated with unauthorized migration in order to convince people not to return (Rosenblum 2013). Despite its inauguration in 2011, many aspects of the CDS are not new. CDS does however, mark a shift from the deterrent strategy that, in the 1990s that relied heavily on the dangers of the natural terrain to dissuade unauthorized border crossers, to one that actively punishes, incarcerates, and criminalizes them. This article presents findings from the Migrant Border Crossing Study, a random sample survey of 1,100 recently deported migrants in six cities in Mexico conducted between 2009 and 2012. It examines the demographics and family ties of deportees, their experiences with immigration enforcement practices and programs under the CDS, and how these programs have reshaped contemporary migration and deportation along the US-Mexico border. The article covers programs such as criminal prosecutions of illegal entries under Operation Streamline, and the Alien Transfer and Exit Program (ATEP) or lateral repatriation program which returns immigrants to different locations from where they illegally entered. In relationship to these programs, it considers issues of due process and treatment of deportees in US custody. It also examines interior enforcement under Secure Communities, which, during the study period, comprised part of the overarching border security plan, and screened virtually everybody arrested in the United States against immigration databases.
Topic:
Crime, Demographics, Immigration, Border Control, and Reform
Political Geography:
Mexico and United States of America

17. Beyond Borders

Author:
David A. Andelman
Publication Date:
03-2013
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
World Policy Journal
Institution:
World Policy Institute
Abstract:
Civilization marks its beginnings to the moment, more than 14,000 years ago, humans first gathered into settlements, leaving behind their days as nomadic hunters and gatherers. Known as sedentarization, this phenomenon likely debuted in the Fertile Crescent of the Levant, followed by the Yangtze and Yellow River basins two millennia later, and eventually in Mexico, South America, and finally the eastern shores of the United States. At each point sprang up villages, cities, and eventually, nations. Over thousands of years, fixed boundaries were codified and defended, often at great cost. Many borders have been drawn wisely, following natural formations like barriers of mountains or rivers. Many follow linguistic, ethnic, religious, or tribal boundaries. But others have been haphazardly imposed by outsiders with the stroke of a pen on some distant map. As empires fell and the speed of global trade and migration increased, boundaries became complex barriers to the free movement of people and ideas. Today, some provoke violent wars and revolutions, while others can be breached by brave individuals and new technologies—issues that World Policy Journal explores in our spring cover theme.
Topic:
Demographics, Development, Nationalism, International Affairs, Border Control, and Urbanization
Political Geography:
United States, South America, and Mexico

18. Unauthorized Migrants in the United States

Author:
Jeffrey Passel
Publication Date:
09-2007
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Abstract:
This report discusses methods of measuring unauthorized migration to the United States. The “residual method” involves comparing an analytic estimate of the legal foreign-born population with a survey-based measure of the total foreign-born population. The difference between the two population figures is a measure of the unauthorized migrant population in the survey; it can then be corrected for omissions to provide a measure of the total unauthorized population. The report includes a detailed description of the residual methods and the underlying data and assumptions as it has been applied to recent data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) and decennial censuses. The paper presents new results of estimates derived from the march 2006 CPS which show that the unauthorized population in the U.S. has reached 11.5 million; of these, 6.5 million or 57% are from Mexico. The report also presents derived data on a range of social and economic characteristics of the unauthorized population developed with an extension of the residual estimates. Finally, historical data on trends in unauthorized migration and several alternative estimation methods are presented and discussed.
Topic:
Migration, Labor Issues, Immigration, Border Control, and Socioeconomics
Political Geography:
United States, Central America, North America, and Mexico