SUFFERING CONTINUES AT THE BORDER WALLS
The frenzy of attention over the ending of Title 42, the archaic public health order invoked by President Donald Trump in March 2020 that empowered Border Patrol agents to expel migrants without recognizing their legal right to asylum, was misplaced, and it often glossed over abhorrent human rights abuses visible to millions of TV viewers fixated on a fictional “surge” of migrants that never materialized.
On May 11, when Title 42 was scheduled to end, Border Patrol agents in San Diego held hundreds of asylum seekers between the two 30-foot border walls, with little access to water, one or two granola bars per day, no shade and a single unusable portable toilet. This open-air pre-processing area violated Customs and Border Protection’s national standards on how it should interact with people under its custody.
The conditions were so objectionable that the Southern Border Communities Coalition was compelled to submit a complaint to the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of
Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, in which I provided a declaration based on several months of monitoring the area.
In the days leading up to the ending of Title 42, more local, national and international media outlets pointed their cameras at the asylum seekers, some unaware that the area between the border barriers was U.S. soil. The New York Times attempted to clarify this point, but in doing so, indirectly excused the egregious treatment of those intending to seek asylum by calling the area between the border walls a “no man’s land.” Framing it this way absolves the Border Patrol from its obligations of meeting the basic humanitarian needs of migrants under its custody.
Instead, civil society organizations and local neighbors from both sides of the border fed asylum seekers, provided them warm clothing and blankets, charged their phones, and encouraged them as they waited for days, enduring the hot sun by day and the cold wind at night. By the middle of May, about a third of the people between the walls were children. I believe those who delivered the material aid saved lives.
What changed when Title 42 ended? For the migrants between the border walls, the suffering continued. Nothing changed for them once Title 42 was officially over at 9 p.m. Pacific time on May 11.
The Trump and Biden administrations expelled over 2.8 million people under Title 42 using the COVID-19 pandemic as a pretext, and now, increased asylum bans and expedited removals are part of the nefarious enforcement landscape meant to deter migrants from seeking asylum.
For decades, “prevention through deterrence” strategies have been the backbone of failed border policies that increasingly endanger the lives of migrants. The Biden administration is now extending that deadly strategy by undermining the promise of asylum — to keep people from facing harm until their cases have been resolved. Without prioritizing resources so that asylum seekers are welcomed with dignity, we will continue to see awful cases of mistreatment and neglect, as in the recent case of 8-year-old Anadith Tanay Reyes Alvarez, whose mother pleaded to Border Patrol agents for days for medical attention, but who died after being hospitalized.
What should change in a postTitle 42 world is for our governments to recommit to respecting asylum laws, to protecting those seeking safe harbor, and to increasing accountability and oversight measures so that suffering ends when interaction occurs with U.S. border agents.
By the middle of May, about a third of the people between the walls were children. Those who delivered aid saved lives.