With this series of weekly updates, WOLA seeks to cover the most important developments at the U.S.-Mexico border. See past weekly updates here.

Support ad-free, paywall-free Weekly Border Updates. Your donation to WOLA is crucial to sustain this effort. Please contribute now and support our work.

THIS WEEK IN BRIEF:

• Border communities and migrants brace for another Trump administration

Donald Trump’s election points to a return, and likely intensification, of ultra-hardline border and migration policies at the U.S.-Mexico border and elsewhere. We can expect a suspension or curtailment of most legal migration pathways, from CBP One to asylum access to humanitarian parole. We can expect a “mass deportation” campaign in the U.S. interior. This section lists and explains some of the president-elect’s promised and likely initiatives, and what they mean for U.S.-Mexico relations.

• Possibility of a jump in migration ahead of Inauguration Day

Trump’s victory creates an incentive for some migrants to try to reach U.S. soil before Inauguration Day, January 20, rather than await CBP One appointments. In Mexico, “caravans” are already forming, while migrants in shelters along the route voice anxiety about their future.

• Soldiers kill migrants, again, in Mexico

Members of Mexico’s National Guard, a recently created force made up mostly of transferred soldiers, opened fire on a vehicle carrying migrants along the border east of Tijuana. Two Colombian people were killed. It is the second such incident since October 1, when Mexican Army soldiers killed six migrants in Chiapas. In both incidents, military leadership claims that the soldiers were returning fire, or thought that they were; witnesses dispute that.

• Darién Gap notes

Migration through the Darién Gap jungle region straddling Colombia and Panama appears to have dropped modestly from September to October. However, reports are pointing to an increase in people entering Colombia from Venezuela. Since August, Panama has operated 25 deportation flights, with U.S. support, to Colombia, Ecuador, and India.

THE FULL UPDATE:

Border communities and migrants brace for another Trump administration

“America has given us an unprecedented and powerful mandate,” said Donald Trump, as U.S. voters elected him to the presidency with a majority of the electoral and probably the popular votes, while giving the Republican Party a majority of the U.S. Senate and the possibility of a majority in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“We’re going to have to seal up those borders and we’re going to have to let people come into our country,” the president-elect said in his acceptance remarks’ only substantive reference to the U.S.-Mexico border. “We want people to come back in, but we have to, we have to let them come back in, but they have to come in legally.”

Trump’s election “sets the stage for a sharp turn in immigration and border policy that could upend millions of lives and recast the U.S. economy and labor force,” wrote longtime Washington Post border and immigration reporters Maria Sacchetti and Nick Miroff.

Chad Wolf, who headed the Department of Homeland Security during the last Trump administration, told the Post that U.S. public opinion is more favorable now for Trump’s hardline policies: “You’ll see a different mindset, and over time it’ll be possible to remove large numbers of people.” Lee Gelernt of the ACLU said, “We anticipate it will be much worse this time and are particularly concerned about the use of the military to round up immigrants.”

Art Del Cueto, vice president of the National Border Patrol Council, the union representing a large majority of Border Patrol agents, told Newsweek, “We consider today’s victory for President Trump not just a victory for himself, but a victory for the entire country.” The union endorsed Trump in every election since the 2016 primaries.

Based on statements of the president-elect and his surrogates, the list of policies, programs, and migration pathways that a second Trump administration would be likely to end, curtail, or sharply reduce include:

• Ending use of the CBP One smartphone app to schedule appointments at U.S.-Mexico border ports of entry.

Asylum seekers awaiting CBP One appointments in Tijuana voiced a fear that this opportunity will disappear on Inauguration Day. Casa del Migrante shelter director Pat Murphy told Milenio that dangerous irregular migration will increase if the CBP One pathway disappears: “People are going to keep trying to cross and there will be more deaths at the border.”

On the eve of the U.S. election, CBS News spoke with migrants awaiting CBP One appointments at shelters in Nogales, Sonora. They also feared that a Donald Trump victory would end the CBP One program. “They’re very scared. They think that the asylum system is going to close,” said immigration attorney Alba Jaramillo.

Reporting from just north of Mexico City, the Los Angeles Times Patrick McDonnell spoke with migrants determined to come to the United States regardless of who is elected. “If you’re a migrant, you’re going to suffer whoever is president,” a Honduran man said.

The app is very far from a perfect solution in the first place. San Diego-based iNewSource reported from Tijuana where large numbers of migrants, including Mexican citizens fleeing violence in their own country, are enduring long waits for appointments. While they wait, children are showing signs of regression and trauma, while parents struggle with emotional distress. One family interviewed by reporter Sofía Mejías-Pascoe has waited over a year for a CBP One appointment. “Asylum isn’t something you can schedule,” said Christina Asencio of Human Rights First.

• Ending nearly all access to asylum between ports of entry (which would largely continue a Biden administration policy dating back to early June 2024).

“The president has a lot of discretion when it comes to the refugee program,” said Mark Hetfield, the CEO of HIAS, one of several advocates and service providers interviewed by Voice of America. “And for asylum, [he’s] going to make it impossible to apply at the border as he did with Title 42 and his Remain in Mexico policies.”

• Ending the Biden administration’s humanitarian parole program for citizens of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, which Republican state governors tried unsucessfully to stop via a lawsuit.
• Canceling Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), an Obama-era policy that protects from deportation hundreds of thousands of undocumented people who were brought to the United States as children. Challenges to DACA remain before a federal court.
• Refusing to continue Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for citizens of 16 countries, including El Salvador, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.
• Curbing other pathways including family reunification programs and the Central American Minors Program.
• Closing the “Safe Mobility Offices” program offering access to migration pathways for a limited number of some countries’ migrants in Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, and Guatemala.
• Cutting assistance to UNHCR, IOM, and humanitarian non-profits helping to integrate migrants in other countries in the Americas, and to provide urgent assistance to those in transit.
• Zeroing out the FEMA Shelter and Services Program (SSP), which supports municipalities and non-profits, including shelters receiving released migrants.
• Halting Justice Department challenges to Texas’s border and migration crackdowns, including the S.B. 4 law making unauthorized border crossings a state crime.
• Seeking to end birthright citizenship, the guarantee of citizenship to people born in U.S. territory, though it is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

Initiatives that may be coming after Trump’s January 20 inauguration may include the following policies, or attempts to implement policies:

• A campaign of “mass deportation” that could eject millions from the United States via sweeps and raids, internment in staging camps, and large-scale removals, possibly employing military personnel.

The Associated Press noted that Trump’s plans to massively deport as many as 11 million undocumented immigrants lack any detail. However, Trump and advisors have referred to using the National Guard or the military and invoking the 1798 Alien Enemies Act. “We all have to have our eyes wide open to the fact that this isn’t 2016,” Heidi Altman of the National Immigration Law Center’s Immigrant Justice Fund told the AP. “Trump and Stephen Miller learned a lot from their first administration. The courts look very different than they did four years ago.”

The Dallas Morning News recalled that Trump advisor Stephen Miller said last year that mass deportation could involve detention camps built “on open land in Texas near the border.”

At USA Today, Nick Penzenstadler and Lauren Villagrán examined how much the federal government might have to pay to carry out Trump’s plan, and how handsomely its private contractors would profit.

At Palabra, Dianne Solís reflected on the United States’ history of migrant deportations, which Donald Trump proposes to step up massively. For asylum seekers, “Their deportation could be a death sentence,” Jenifer Williams of Dallas-based Migrant Emotional Health told Solís. “They live with a lot of anxiety, usually in the form of PTSD.”

Melissa López, director of Estrella del Paso (formerly known as Diocesan Migrant and Refugee Services), told Border Report that her organization is urging migrants in the United States “to be getting legal advice as soon as possible so they can find out where they stand” before Trump is inaugurated.

At the Progressive, Jeff Abbott examined the harm that a “mass deportation” campaign would do to economic and political stability in Central America. Sending millions of Central American migrants back to impoverished countries, thus halting remittance flows, “would be the worst catastrophe that could possibly occur. It would be worse than a major earthquake,” said a former president of El Salvador’s central bank.

• A renewed “Remain in Mexico” program, if the Mexican government is compelled to agree with it.
• A possible attempt to use a prevalent disease of non-pandemic proportions as a pretext to revive the “Title 42” policy of expelling asylum seekers. If it happens, it would come with a reversal of the Biden administration’s reluctance to expel unaccompanied minors.
• Expanded use of detention facilities managed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), often through private contractors, likely including family detention.
• A possible renewal of family separations, perhaps on “national security” grounds. Neither Donald Trump nor his surrogates have ruled out separating families, some have implicitly encouraged U.S. citizens to self-deport with their undocumented relatives.

A Politico article by Myah Ward told the story of Angelina and her father Teodoro, a Guatemalan migrant family separated for seven months by the Trump administration’s family separation policy in 2017, when Angelina was eight. Both continue to suffer trauma symptoms. “It will happen again if Trump is the president,” Angelina said. “He will do much worse than he did to us.”

• A “lawfare” campaign, similar to what the Republican attorney-general of Texas has been carrying out, seeking to shut down, punish, and otherwise block the work of shelters, legal aid groups, and other service providers assisting migrants.
• Renewed border wall construction.

In Laredo, Texas, a border city whose voters have opposed having a border wall built along its riverfront, local leaders worry about such construction happening if Donald Trump wins the election, the Laredo Morning Times reported.

• More National Guard and perhaps regular military deployments to the U.S.-Mexico border.
• Weaker oversight of Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Border Patrol in human rights abuse cases.
• Invoking the Constitution’s “invasion” clause to justify hardline policies, essentially classifying migrants and asylum seekers as the equivalent of an invading army.
• A more aggressive stance toward the Mexican government, especially on blocking migrants and stopping fentanyl. This may include threats of tariffs on Mexican goods if the Mexican government does not comply with hardline policies, like “Remain in Mexico,” that require its cooperation. Some close to Trump have proposed using drones or Special Forces teams to attack organized crime targets inside Mexico without the Mexican government’s consent.

Mexico

Mexico’s government is bracing for threats, including Trump’s campaign promise to impose tariffs, the Los Angeles Times reported. On November 4, the final day before Election Day, Trump vowed, if elected, to impose a 25 percent tariff on Mexican goods, escalating to 100 percent, if Mexico’s government does not act to stop migrants and fentanyl from crossing its northern border. He said that if he wins the election, his first call will be to Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum to convey this threat.

“There’s no reason to be worried,” Sheinbaum told a morning press conference on November 6. “There’s going to be dialogue.” Trade between Mexico and the United States exceeded $800 billion in 2023.

“Mexico gave in to the pressures back then [during Trump’s last term, when Mexico agreed to take back 72,000 non-Mexican asylum seekers under Remain in Mexico and over 450,000 Title 42 expulsions], and the question is whether Mexico will give in again,” Tonatiuh Guillén, a migration scholar who headed Mexico’s migration agency at the beginning of Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s term in 2018-19, told the New York Times. “I think the likelihood it will is high.”

The Times analysis noted that massively deporting people back to Mexico would severely damage the country’s economy by increasing the unemployed population and slashing remittances. “We’re going to see deportees who are harder to reintegrate,” said Eunice Rendón of the advocacy coalition Migrant Agenda.

Border Report’s Julián Resendiz talked to political and economic leaders in Ciudad Juárez, including Mayor Cruz Pérez Cuellar, before the U.S. voting began. They worry about Trump’s tariff threats, Mexico’s ability to absorb millions of forcibly deported people, threats to “close” the border, and rhetoric bullying Mexico. A finance sector leader doubted Mexico’s ability to meet Trump’s demands to secure its northern border, since the country has been unable to get a handle on its own public security challenges. Mayor Pérez Cuéllar concluded, however, that “the level of interdependence between the two countries is so large that it is practically impossible” to break.

In Guatemala, analysts and former officials interviewed by Prensa Libre expect a big increase in U.S. pressure to halt migration and accept more deportees after Donald Trump moves into the White House. The same newspaper noted that hopes for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Guatemalan citizens in the United States have evaporated.

Local election results

Even as Trump and the Republican Party made sharp Election Day gains in border counties, especially in Texas, incumbents won all races in House of Representatives districts along the border. Among the narrowest victories are those of Reps. Vicente González (D) in Texas’s Rio Grande Valley, Gabe Vásquez (D) in New Mexico, and Juan Ciscomani (R) in southeast Arizona. Ciscomani won by about 1,600 votes over Democratic challenger Kirsten Engel; a Green Party candidate won 6,600.

The Republican Party made historic gains in south Texas’s Rio Grande Valley border region, until recently a solidly Democratic area. Rep. Mónica de la Cruz (R), the first Republican elected in the region in many years, won re-election. Rep. Henry Cuéllar (D), who is under indictment on bribery charges, won re-election by a narrower margin than ever. No call has been made in Rep. Vicente González’s (D) re-election bid.

Arizona’s Prop 314

In Arizona, 63 percent of voters approved Proposition 314, a ballot measure that makes unauthorized border crossing a state crime. It appears to have won more than 60 percent of the vote. The measure is similar to Texas’s S.B. 4, a law passed in late 2023 that remains on hold pending legal challenges, including from the Biden Justice Department.

Opponents of these laws point to the chaos that could result if states adopt and carry out different immigration policies, and the likelihood that the law might empower local and state police to stop people who look like they are of Latino descent merely on suspicion of having crossed the border illegally.

The Arizona Daily Star’s Howard Fischer noted that Prop 314 passed “without organized campaign support. But the measure, put on the ballot by Republican state lawmakers, could have benefited from years of headlines and videos about people entering the country illegally.”

Speaking with Cronkite News before the vote, border-area political and law-enforcement leaders voiced reluctance to finding themselves having to use scarce resources to enforce immigration laws, a mission for which they are not trained, if Proposition 314 passes.

Hardening of U.S. attitudes on migration

The New York Times talked to Democratic-leaning voters who voted for Donald Trump because they disapproved of the Biden administration’s handling of the border and migration. “There is no constituency left in this country that favors large-scale immigration,” Muzaffar Chishti of the Migration Policy Institute told the Times’s Miriam Jordan.

Still, exit polls from CNN and NBC News showed that immigration dropped on voters’ list of priority issues, well behind the economy. “There has also been growing unease among voters about deporting those who have been in the country for several years,” noted a Newsweek analysis of poll data.

Possibility of a jump in migration ahead of Inauguration Day

Fearing an end to CBP One, asylum access, and other migration pathways after Trump’s January 20 inauguration, approximately 2,500 to 3,000 people formed a “caravan” in Mexico’s southern border zone city of Tapachula on November 5. Participants voiced concern to Reuters that Donald Trump’s election may end their hopes of seeking asylum or protection in the United States.

While a few turned back to Tapachula, the daily Milenio reported that others may be trying to pick up their pace to reach the U.S. border before Trump takes office.

We can expect an increase in migration over the next few months as people seek to get to U.S. soil before the new administration starts closing down existing legal pathways. Three unnamed U.S. officials told CBS News that migration to the U.S.-Mexico border could “spike” if Donald Trump wins tomorrow’s presidential election, as migrants race to get to U.S. soil before Inauguration Day.

NBC News reported that the Biden administration’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is making contingency plans ahead of a possible increase in migration as people attempt to reach U.S. soil before Inauguration Day. “A common theme emerged among multiple users: The time to come to the U.S. is now,” NBC said of WhatsApp groups used by migrants.

Soldiers kill migrants, again, in Mexico

For the second time since October 1, Mexican soldiers have shot and killed migrants. Members of Mexico’s recently created National Guard, much of whose personnel were transferred from the Army, opened fire on a vehicle near Tecate, Baja California, along the border east of Tijuana. Two Colombian migrants were killed in the November 2 incident, and four others were wounded.

Mexico’s Defense Secretariat (SEDENA, the Army and Air Force) contended that the soldiers fired their weapons in self-defense after alleged smugglers fired on them. Witnesses dispute that: “We had no weapons, we are not criminals, they were never shot at,” a survivor told the Tijuana-based investigative publication Zeta. Witnesses say that, before aiding the wounded, the guard members spent a few minutes cleaning up their spent ammunition cartridges, which, if true, would constitute altering a crime scene.

Three guard members who opened fire have been taken off duty while investigations proceed.

On October 1, soldiers opened fire on a vehicle carrying migrants, killing six. In that case, too, SEDENA claimed that the soldiers responded after hearing “detonations,” though witnesses disputed that.

Darién Gap notes

• On October 31, Panamanian President José Raúl Mulino said that the number of migrants transiting the treacherous Darién Gap would likely be “a little more than 21,542.” That would be a modest drop in Darién Gap migration from 25,111 in September. Citizens of Venezuela remain by far the number-one nationality.
• The president, who took office in July, reiterated the terms of an October 25 decree instituting steep fines for people, like Darién border-crossers, who enter the country without authorization.
• At one of the busiest official border crossings between Colombia and Venezuela, authorities are measuring an increase in the number of Venezuelan citizens departing the country. “What is undeniable is that the exodus is still latent along this border and has increased after the electoral process of July 28,” reported the Venezuelan daily La Nación. The paper referred to presidential elections almost certainly won by the political opposition, followed by a wave of repression carried out by the current regime, which denies that result.
• Reporting from coastal Ecuador, Elliot Spagat of the Associated Press documented the spike in organized crime-violence that has made many communities unlivable and populations desperate, spurring an increase in migration that made Ecuador the number-seven nationality of migrants encountered at the U.S.-Mexico border, and the number-three nationality in the Darién Gap, in 2024.
• Although the number of people migrating through the Darién Gap has declined in 2024, the number of minors migrating unaccompanied has increased, according to a Panama-based UNICEF official. Last year, about 3,300 children walked through the Darién jungles unaccompanied. During the first nine months of 2024, 3,800 children have done so. Most are Venezuelan.
• A story at the independent Nicaraguan website Confidencial made clear that after emerging from the Darién Gap jungles, migrants’ road through Central America is little, if at all, easier. What is loosely called a “humanitarian corridor” through Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and Honduras is more of an effort “to ‘pass the buck’ and get rid of them as soon as possible.” Among those countries, Nicaragua is a “black hole” without a transportation policy, where officials often demand bribes to allow migrants to pass through.
• Thomas Cartwright at Witness at the Border published his latest monthly report on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deportation flights. The agency removed migrants on an average of 5.3 flights per weekday in October, up slightly from September but down from over 6.0 per weekday during the summer. Fewer migrant apprehensions at the border are the likeliest reason for the drop. The top removal destination countries were Guatemala (37 flights in October), Honduras (20), Mexico (20), El Salvador (11), Colombia (9), and Ecuador (9). The report noted that Panama operated 25 deportation flights between August 1 and November 2, with 989 people—about 1.5 percent of Darién Gap migration—taken to Colombia (19), Ecuador (5), and India (1).
• The Gulf Clan, the organized crime group that dominates Colombia’s entrance to the Darién Gap, called on the U.S. and Colombian governments to “join a constructive dialogue” about migration, drugs, and deforestation. The group charges roughly $50 to $80 or more per person to allow migrants to enter the Darién and manages “guides” and other services on the Colombian side of the trail. Colombian President Gustavo Petro’s government is conducting informal talks with the Gulf Clan about its potential demobilization.
• A Colombian government report counted “261,975 detections of migrants in irregular transit to the north of the continent” leaving the country in the first 7 months of 2024. That is a slower pace than in 2023 when Colombia counted 539,959 people over the entire year. Of January-July “detections,” 70.8 percent were citizens of Venezuela.

Other news

• Citing “preliminary figures,” Reuters reported that Border Patrol apprehended about 54,000 migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border in October. That is almost identical to September’s apprehension number (53,858) and very similar to July’s (56,400) and August’s (58,009). Dual crackdowns—Mexico’s stepped-up blocking and southward busing of migrants, and the Biden administration’s June asylum restrictions—continue to keep apprehensions at their lowest level since September 2020. However, the number stopped declining months ago.
• A New York Times analysis concluded that the Biden administration failed to leave behind any lasting solution to the U.S. government’s “fundamentally broken” immigration system. Biden’s reform goals, the Times noted, “were stymied by the need to confront a worldwide surge of displaced people fleeing their homes and a determined Republican opposition.” NPR, too, noted the Biden administration’s turn away from reform and toward “enforcement, restrictions, and punishments – a strategy at times indistinguishable from the Trump administration.”
• At ProPublica, Emily Green reported on rampant kidnappings of migrants near Ciudad Hidalgo, Chiapas, on Mexico’s southern border en route to Tapachula. With only modest pressure from authorities, criminals are holding hundreds of migrants in livestock pens until they pay a ransom of about $75 per person. “The kidnapping is so widespread and open that migrants walk around Tapachula with stamps of a bird on their forearms as a sign that they paid the ransom.” Green noted that the situation is worsened by Mexico’s vigorous busing of migrants to Tapachula and other southern Mexican destinations after apprehending them elsewhere in the country. Last week, the Associated Press, too, reported on this suddenly worsening kidnapping wave at Mexico’s southern border.
• About 200 families participated in the annual “Hugs Not Walls” event organized by the Border Network for Human Rights in El Paso. For a few minutes, people living in El Paso shared a moment in person with loved ones living on the Ciudad Juárez side of the border.
• As migrant smuggling organizations have become wealthier and more sophisticated, U.S. law enforcement agencies are struggling to catch up, facing resource, judicial, and intelligence gaps, concluded a Washington Post investigation, focusing on a case in Guatemala, by Mexico-Central America correspondent Mary Beth Sheridan. U.S. agencies are also hampered by decades of focus specifically on drug trafficking instead of human smuggling, and by partner nations’ official corruption.
• The Washington Post’s Arelis Hernández followed the journey of the Orasma family from Azure, Venezuela, to the United States, illustrating the political and logistical obstacles thrown in asylum seekers’ way. The family, once solidly middle class, underwent a harrowing trip through the Darién Gap and atop Mexico’s “La Bestia” cargo train, forced by Mexico’s crackdown to turn to exploitative smugglers. They documented the trip with photos and videos. The Orasmas are now in New York, struggling amid delays in obtaining a work permit.
• The U.S. government sent a deportation flight to Haiti on October 31 with 77 people aboard, even as a gang offensive is intensifying, the Miami Herald reported. On October 26, a gang coalition called Viv Ansanm looted and burned a Missionaries of Charity convent and hospital in Port-au-Prince, which Mother Teresa had inaugurated in 1979.
• Speaking to advocates and experts from Mexico’s northern and southern borders, an Al Jazeera video program looked at the Mexican government’s undeclared but vigorous 2024 policy of blocking migrants and busing them to the country’s south.
• Five organizations, including border-area service providers, released a report about climate-related migration, finding that the expected increase in people fleeing climate change is now happening. The report provides data on responses from over 3,600 migrants whom Al Otro Lado, Haitian Bridge Alliance, International Refugee Assistance Project, and Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center have served, including over 3,000 from the Americas. Of those from the Americas, 43 percent “reported experiencing environmental disasters such as hurricanes, droughts, extreme heat, and floods in their home countries.” The report recommends expanding legal immigration pathways for climate refugees and victims.
• “As of June 2024, around 86% of asylum-seekers, refugees, and stateless people in the Americas lived in countries highly vulnerable to climate disruptions, where limited capacity hinders effective responses and mitigation efforts,” read a UNHCR fact sheet on “Americas Climate Action.”
• At the Border Chronicle, Melissa del Bosque interviewed Nicole Ramos of the Tijuana and San Diego-based assistance and advocacy group Al Otro Lado. The organization is named in a lawsuit that brought an end to CBP’s policy of “metering” asylum seekers (blocking all but a few from approaching ports of entry). Still, Ramos observed, “Anytime an organization like Al Otro Lado, ACLU, or Raices gets a win on asylum access, the U.S. government creates another policy to evade their obligations under that decision.”
• The Associated Press profiled Sam Schultz, a 69-year-old volunteer who shuns politics and doggedly provides daily assistance to migrants waiting to be processed for asylum in the cold, rugged hills near the border around Jacumba Springs, California.
• Along the border wall in Tijuana, the Casa del Migrante migrant shelter and the coalition Pro Defensa de los Migrantes installed an altar to commemorate migrants who have died trying to reach the United States. “In the last six years, at least 225 people have lost their lives at the border [in the area], either because of extreme weather conditions or because of the violence that stalks them,” said Father Pat Murphy of the Casa del Migrante.
• At The Conversation, Ragini Shah gave a brief overview of the history of the U.S. Border Patrol, concluding that the agency’s culture continues to be “rough” and soft on human rights abusers within the ranks. “Giving the Border Patrol ever more money, agents and higher-tech equipment only spurs more violence and lawlessness,” Shah concluded.
• The International Refugee Assistance Project issued a “practice advisory” clarifying that Cuban, Haitian, Nicaraguan, and Venezuelan recipients of two years’ humanitarian parole, under a Biden administration initiative that has helped reduce border apprehensions from those nationalities, still have the right to apply for a renewal of their parole status. Many descriptions of an early October Biden administration policy change have erroneously interpreted it as refusing parole renewals; the change, in fact, specifies that while there is no “re-parole process,” it remains true that “any individual parolee may apply to renew their parole.”
• ProPublica and the Texas Tribune profiled Joe Frank Martinez, a Democrat who is the first Latino sheriff of Val Verde County, which includes the border town of Del Rio. Martínez has come under political fire for perceived leniency toward migrants, as local political opinion has grown more hostile to them, even though border management is not part of the sheriff’s job.
• At InsightCrime, Steven Dudley and Parker Asmann highlighted the sharp contrasts between two Arizona border-zone sheriffs. Mark Dannels of Cochise County is an outspoken border and migration hardliner who often appears on Fox News and as a Republican congressional hearing witness. David Hathaway, from neighboring Santa Cruz County (which includes Nogales), favors a more humanitarian approach that prevents harm to migrants.