No sign of new migrant policy at the border

Despite Trump order, families still getting asylum in U.S.

Just over two weeks after the Trump administration announced a policy that would force asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their turns in U.S. immigration court, there is no sign yet at the border that it has been implemented.

Though the Department of Homeland Security said Dec. 20 that the change was “effective immediately,” advocacy groups all along the border continue to receive large numbers of migrant families who have been released from immigration custody into the U.S. Asylum seekers continue to move through the San Ysidro Port of Entry, which is, according to a recent study, the busiest port on the southwest border for asylum claims.

Homeland Security spokeswoman Katie Waldman said the change will happen. “We are in the process of beginning implementation,” she said. “We want to ensure an orderly, safe, and efficient process.”

Under the policy, asylum seekers who come either to ports of entry or cross the border illegally would go through preliminary processing before heading back across the border with documents showing their next court hearing dates in the U.S.

Mexico announced that it had decided to temporarily allow asylum seekers waiting for U.S. immigration court hearings to re-enter the country and that it would provide humanitarian visas to allow asylum seekers to work while they wait. However, the head of Mexico’s National Institute of Migration said Mexico would have to change its laws to comply with such a policy.

Since then, it has been unclear what will happen if and when the U.S. begins to implement the policy.

“It is not an agreement, but a unilateral measure by the U.S. government and, as such, the decision is entirely a domestic issue,” said a spokeswoman for the Mexican Embassy in Washington when asked about the delayed implementation. “As is its sovereign right, the government of Mexico will take appropriate measures in accordance with our legal framework.”

She said Mexican officials would ask the U.S. for more information about what it plans to do.

Besides the confusion in Mexico, the proposed change also brought logistical questions from immigration attorneys, advocates and others who work closely with the U.S. immigration system.

How would the migrants get from the border to immigration court? Would immigration courts along the border be responsible for hearing all of the new asylum cases? How would attorneys meet with their clients before their hearings, or how would migrants even find attorneys to take their cases?

Many expect a court challenge to the “Remain in Mexico” policy if and when it is implemented.

For Pedro Rios, director of the American Friends Service Committee’s U.S./ Mexico Border Program, the lack of implementation is a good thing.