Posted on 11/24/2018 6:07:53 AM PST by Beautiful_Gracious_Skies
Imagine Andres Obrador, who’s set to be sworn in as Mexico’s new president next Saturday, waking up yesterday and having this story shoved in front of him by an anxious aide.
What will we be offering our friends down south in exchange for them agreeing to host asylum applicants, assuming they’re willing to do so at all? Maybe we can let them off the hook for paying for the wall, which doesn’t exist and which they were never going to pay for in the first place.
The new plan is clever, though, in purporting to reframe the basic question of asylum cases, namely, does the applicant reasonably fear persecution in his or her home country? So long as they’re camped out in Mexico, Team Trump will argue, whether they fear persecution back home is irrelevant. The relevant question is whether they fear persecution in Mexico. If the answer’s no, well, then, they can wait in Mexico.
Central Americans who arrive at U.S. border crossings seeking asylum in the United States will have to wait in Mexico while their claims are processed under sweeping new measures the Trump administration is preparing to implement, according to internal planning documents and three DHS officials familiar with the initiative.
According to DHS memos obtained by The Washington Post on Wednesday, Central American asylum seekers who cannot establish a “reasonable fear” of persecution in Mexico will not be allowed to enter the US and would be turned around at the border.
The plan, called “Remain in Mexico,” amounts to a major break with current screening procedures, which generally allow those who establish a fear of return to their home countries to avoid immediate deportation and remain in the US until they can get a hearing with an immigration judge. Trump despises this system, which he calls “catch and release,” and has vowed to end it.
According to a Mexican official who spoke to WaPo, their law doesn’t allow people applying for asylum in another country to remain in Mexico. And processing mass requests for asylum in Mexico would be logistically difficult since the Mexican government has far fewer asylum officers than the U.S. does. The new president is also unlikely to be accommodating, as the last thing he’d want to do after being sworn in is to show his country that Trump can push him around. In fact, Obrador complained during the campaign that he was tired of Mexico doing America’s “dirty work” in catching immigrants before they crossed over into the U.S. He wants Washington to pony up more aid money to Central American countries (and southern Mexico), to help address the conditions that are supposedly driving people north to America.
Hostility from the incoming administration is one problem. Another problem is ....the caravan actually might soon face a reasonable fear of persecution in Mexico, assuming they don’t already. The mayor of Tijuana has declared a humanitarian crisis in his border city and says that he has asked the UN for aid....[snip]... he is not going to commit the city’s public resources to dealing with the situation.... Tijuana does not have the necessary infrastructure to adequately attend to the migrants. Some Tijuanans have complained of an “invasion” from the south.
Now Trump wants Obrador to tell them that the visitors might be there for months while they’re waiting to hear from the U.S. on asylum.
There’s another hiccup, per Politico. Here’s the relevant U.S. statute on asylum:
(i) Conduct by asylum officers.-An asylum officer shall conduct interviews of aliens referred under subparagraph (A)(ii), either at a port of entry or at such other place designated by the Attorney General.
(ii) Referral of certain aliens.-If the officer determines at the time of the interview that an alien has a credible fear of persecution (within the meaning of clause (v)), the alien shall be detained for further consideration of the application for asylum.
Typically when the word “shall” appears in federal law it means there’s no executive discretion in the matter. Trump’s proposing that asylum applicants not be detained after their initial interview but rather turned around and sent to Mexico to wait while their application is processed. The statute doesn’t seem to allow that. He’ll be sued lickety split once the new policy is in place, which it isn’t yet.
Back to the key question, though. What’s Trump’s leverage in getting Obrador to agree to this? I noticed this piece at Forbes earlier today pointing out that there’s just one week left in the 60-day review period for the new trade agreement between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. The formal signing was supposed to happen next Friday at the G20.
Is Trump thinking that he’ll hold U.S. support for the deal hostage unless and until Obrador agrees to host asylum applicants? That might be tricky, as Obrador may relish the opportunity to have his new administration renegotiate the deal. The standoff over asylum might end up as a dealbreaker for the trade agreement on both sides.
Viva La Mexico!!!
Some judge will be found to say that this imposes unnecessary burdens on Mexico, I’ll bet.
A plan with some common sense to it. Do it already. Then only allow 25 to 50 persons a day to apply for rntry and make sure they can be fully vetted before being allowed in for whatever reason.
Mexico already agreed to host the caravanners, by letting them into Mexico. We don’t have to offer Mexico anything, and shouldn’t. If the Mexican authorities decide to solve their problem by making it our problem, seal the entire border.
The 9th Circus court judge will quote “UN Authority.”
Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim needs to step up and show some $ loving.
They are on Mexican turf after Mexico opened their border door.
It’s their problem.
“Trump’s proposing that asylum applicants not be detained after their initial interview but rather turned around and sent to Mexico to wait while their application is processed. The statute doesn’t seem to allow that. He’ll be sued lickety split once the new policy is in place, which it isn’t yet.”
The last worthless Congress should have changed this
RemainS in meth-eek-O
Let Mexico, who allowed them in in the first place, bear the burden of their presence. It will sooner incentivize Mexico to knock it off with the wink and a nod invasion.
Oh, I agree it’s their problem as well as ours now. It used to only be ours, because of their and our combined policies.
They are used to migrant’s running through Mexico to the US like crap through a goose. Obama’s rules. And, they (Mexican workers, cartels, criminals, and government all) like the idea of a porous border.
This is a different story. They’ve gone too far for the golden goose (Orange Goose?) of the North, and consequently the immigration goose of the South is suffering from a painful blockage.
There is no statute that defines how many Shall be processed per day.
Likewise, the interview -”either at a port of entry or at such other place designated by the Attorney General.”
Mexico could be ‘that other place.’
Interview them in Mexico and the 90% that are typically rejected for a bogus claim can be on their merry way home in time for Christmas.
And give them free souvenir tee-shirts.
“I walked all the way to Tijuana and all I got is this lousy shirt.”
We will pay for it all anyway.
In the end a judge will block it and the SC has signaled it will not hear the plea. Roberts has spoken.
Sounds like 2 good loopholes to use ;)
Conduct the interview at the border. Our desk on our side, they stand on their side. Big red, white, & blue stripe down the middle between them.
Either that, or duct tape (h/t Les Nessman).
Whoever leaked to the Post should be prosecuted.
“Some judge will be found to say that this imposes unnecessary burdens on Mexico, I’ll bet.”
Probably.
But it’s high time we stop allowing these judges’ rulings extend beyond their own jurisdiction. It absolutely should not be.
I don’t see why the US doesn’t construct a bunch of circus tent sized structures at the border, completely wide open facing south and heavily fortified facing the US.
Whomever shows up gets their application taken and shown to one of these waiting areas. They’re welcome to wait for their hearing here (for as long as it takes). Because it’s open, they’re also free to leave any time they so choose - back the direction they came from.
No more catch & release.
Yes, that’s the answer.
Lickety split!
A term I have not heard in a coon’s age!
My father’s family used it, and I do not recall hearing it elsewhere.
A pleasant reminder of the old man.
Thank you.
If it's Mexican citizens, they are Mexico's problem, if they are OTM’s then Mexico shouldn't have let them in in the first place.
Mexico?!! Mexico is not our concern. Let Mexico deal with it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.