Migrants in ‘Remain in Mexico’ bemoan confusing process

EL PASO — Chaos, confusion and disillusionment marked the experience of many of the first asylum-seekers to be enrolled in the Biden administration’s revised “Remain in Mexico” program, saying they understood little about what was happening or why they were selected.

The Trump-era program — formally known as Migrant Protection Protocols — returns border-crossers to Mexico to await the outcomes of their asylum claims and resumed earlier this month under court order. Although the Biden administration said it has made changes to the program that make it more humane, several of the first enrollees interviewed by the

Washington Post said they did not understand documents they were asked to sign, did not have access to lawyers and were puzzled about why they were released along with their compatriots.

Three men — two from Nicaragua and one from Venezuela — who were among the more than 160 migrants enrolled so far, said they had been robbed or extorted before crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. The men, who were fleeing political persecution, said they hoped for relief in the United States but instead felt as if they had won a ra±e they never entered.

“I told the asylum officer I’d rather be in a U.S. detention center than be sent back to Mexico,” said Pedro, a 27-year-old asylum-seeker from Nicaragua. “It’s dangerous for us.”

The Washington Post is identifying the men only by their first names because they fear they might jeopardize their cases by speaking publicly.

Biden’s Department of Homeland Security is still trying to terminate MPP, even though it was ordered to reimplement it by a federal judge. The administration lost an appeal of the ruling this week after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in Louisiana upheld the lower court decision. The circuit court order said the Biden administration erred when it issued a memo earlier this year terminating the program, “affecting billions of dollars and countless people.” The program, which is in effect in one border community and accepting only men, will soon expand to six more communities and could soon include families.

Advocates say that MPP subjects migrants to a policy as hazardous to their lives as the reasons that prompted them to flee to the United States for protection. They say the revised version of the program is as flawed as it was under the Trump administration, when the New York-based nonprofit Human Rights First tracked more than 1,500 “violent attacks” against migrants.

“The Biden administration’s revamped ‘Remain in Mexico’ is already presenting security and due process concerns we saw under the Trump administration,” said Julia Neusner, who interviewed 16 MPP enrollees for Human Rights First. “I anticipate this process will deny people their due process rights and accessing counsel. This policy is inherently dangerous, and I expect it to cause tremendous suffering as the rollout expands.”

The enrollees interviewed by the Post were Nicaraguans who had participated in political protests against the ruling party, making them targets for a president who labeled them “terrorists,” according to news reports. A Venezuelan interviewed left his country a year ago, fleeing the socialist government.

Boris, 29, ran across the muddy riverbed of the Rio Grande on Dec. 3 from Ciudad Juárez to El Paso. Border Patrol agents, he said, told the Nicaraguan asylum seeker he could stop running. He hadn’t realized he was in the United States when agents asked why he ran.

“Because they are chasing me,” Boris recalled responding as he recounted how men in Mexico tried to restrain and rob him. “I was so relieved I had touched U.S. soil. I fell to pieces when I learned I was going back.”

Six days after crossing on Dec. 4, Alex, 29, said he was in U.S. Customs and Border Protection custody but was not allowed call his family. His family thought he was dead, he said. The Venezuelan refused to sign any papers because they were in English. When officials asked him and the other 24 men put in MPP with him if they feared returning to Mexico, all but two said yes.

Alex said no one explained the process to him. He said he had no idea who was asking questions on the other end of the speakerphone when he was placed in a small room. It was an asylum officer conducting a credible fear interview — a screening process to determine if they face the possibility of persecution if returned. But he said he didn’t understand that until later.

“I didn’t know who I was talking to, so I was afraid to tell the whole story. I held some details back,” he said. “We begged for explanations, but communication was impossible. All we got were jeers saying ‘Mexico is safe’ and ‘Why did you leave your country?’ ”