The Post editorial:

Protecting and encouraging Mexican journalists ought to be one of America’s primary policy goals.

American journalists might think they have it tough these days, what with all the allegations of “fake news” being thrown around, but they ought to look south. Mexico is downright dangerous for journalists.

Reporting on corruption in the Mexican government or military can get journalists threatened or killed. Same, of course, for reporting on the drug cartels and other criminal organizations that plague Mexican society.

The United States would benefit from a less corrupt, more stable Mexico in countless ways. A free, independent press — crucial to every functioning democracy — should be a cornerstone of getting there. Protecting and encouraging Mexican journalists, therefore, ought to be one of America’s primary policy goals in relation to its southern neighbor.

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Mexico is consistently one of the most dangerous places to work as a reporter. Last year, more journalists were killed in Mexico than in any other country outside of war zones. Since 1992, a staggering 81 percent of the killers of Mexican journalists either weren’t caught or went free.

Sometimes, at-risk journalists are forced to flee the country. Unfortunately, they are not finding much of a refuge in the United States — especially since Donald Trump became president.

Consider the case of Emilio Gutierrez Soto, who reported on military corruption in Mexico for a small regional newspaper. In 2008, a friend with military contacts warned him that a military officer had ordered his murder. Gutierrez fled to the United States with his teenage son and applied for amnesty. The process took years — and last July a judge rejected Gutierrez’s application.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement was on the verge of deporting him — officers had him handcuffed and were escorting him to the border — when the Board of Immigration Appeals agreed to reconsider his case.

Lucas Guttentag, a Stanford University law professor and former senior adviser at the Department of Homeland Security, told the Los Angeles Times that he worries denial rates for amnesty requests from Mexican citizens are high because judges don’t want to encourage more migration from Mexico.

“There’s a reluctance, an aversion even to recognizing an asylum claim from Mexico,” he told the Times. “I worry that it is unduly influenced by enforcement concerns rather than humanitarian concerns.”

The United States should do better if it wants Mexico to do better.

At a minimum, that should mean not tossing out journalists, like Gutierrez, who face credible threats if they return to Mexico.

It should also involve supporting Mexico’s own efforts to help threatened journalists. In 2012, the Mexican government began a program to shelter threatened journalists in government safe houses. Hundreds of journalists have used the program, which also provides security guards.

In addition, Mexico has created a special prosecutor’s office for crimes against freedom of expression. But press advocates say Mexico hasn’t done enough. Carlos Lauría of the Committee to Protect Journalists said the last three presidential administrations have recognized the importance of the issue, but lack the political will to really address it.

Mexico won’t solve its problems overnight. In the meantime, courageous reporters will continue to do their jobs, despite the risks. The United States should be more willing to offer amnesty when those risks become deadly. The members of The Denver Post’s editorial board are William Dean Singleton, chairman; Chuck Plunkett, editor of the editorial pages; Megan Schrader, editorial writer; and Cohen Peart, opinion editor.