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.
Due to an extended period of staff travel and commitments, this will be the last Weekly Border Update until July 26; we look forward to resuming a regular publication schedule on that date.
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.
As of 12:01 AM on June 5, migrants who enter U.S. custody between U.S.-Mexico border ports of entry, with few exceptions, may no longer apply for asylum. The Biden administration made this long-signaled change with a proclamation and an “interim final rule” on June 4. Asylum access is “shut down” until daily migrant encounters at the border drop to a very low average of less than 1,500 per day. The ACLU, which challenged a similar asylum ban during the Trump era, plans to sue. It is not clear whether, with its current resources, the administration will be able to deport or detain a significantly larger number of asylum seekers than it already is.
Mexico’s refugee agency, COMAR, reported receiving 36,860 requests for asylum during the first five months of 2024. That is 42 percent fewer than during the same period in 2023. As in recent years, Honduras, Cuba, and Haiti are the top three nationalities of asylum seekers in Mexico’s system, and most applications are filed in Tapachula and Mexico City. This year’s drop in applications is unexpected, as Mexico’s government reports stopping or encountering over 480,000 migrants between January and April alone.
The Biden administration’s new proclamation and rule curtailing asylum access at the U.S.-Mexico border, which it calls “Securing the Border,” went into effect at 12:01 AM on Wednesday, June 5. A leaked ICE implementation guidance is also available.
This was a front-page story in the United States; WOLA shared a list of links to news coverage in a June 6 update. For explanations of the new rule’s provisions, implementation, and likely outcomes, see analyses from WOLA, the American Immigration Council, Human Rights Watch, the American Immigration Lawyers’ Association, the Cato Institute, and a coalition of legal and human rights groups. The American Immigration Council also published an in-depth explainer.
The legal right to asylum is now suspended for migrants who cross the border between ports of entry, fail to specifically ask for protection (known as the “shout test”), or cannot prove a very high standard of fear of return, until the daily border-wide average of Border Patrol migrant apprehensions drops below 1,500.
As WOLA’s analysis noted, the border has not seen a daily migrant apprehension average that low since July 2020, during the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic. In fact, 172 of the 296 months since fiscal 2000 (58%) have measured daily averages above 1,500.
The “shutdown” does not apply to unaccompanied minors, victims of “severe” human trafficking, or people who have made appointments at ports of entry using the CBP One smartphone app. CBP did not increase the number of available border-wide appointments over the current level of 1,450 per day. Wait times inside Mexico for such appointments now routinely take months.
Should the daily average ever drop below 1,500, the rule would suspend the asylum restriction until the average once again climbs above 2,500, when it would restart. That daily average is frequently breached: it has happened in 110 of this century’s 296 months (37%).
Reporters from the New York Times and CBS News tweeted that Border Patrol apprehended about 4,300 people on Tuesday June 4 and about 4,000 on Wednesday June 5. The daily average in May, one of the Biden administration’s lightest months, was about 3,800. The Washington Post cited internal DHS projections expecting an average of 3,900 to 6,700 apprehensions per day between July and September.
The new measures add to the Biden administration’s May 2023 “Circumvention of Lawful Pathways” asylum ban, which has already denied asylum to non-Mexican citizens who crossed between ports of entry, cannot prove a higher standard of fear, and did not have an asylum application turned down in another country along the way.
It is unclear whether the new rule resulted in increased returns or deportations of migrants on its first day—a briefing from DHS officials offered no numbers—and if so, how they were carried out.
The proclamation and rule claim that the new “asylum shutdown” authority’s legal underpinning is Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which allows the President to bar the entry of entire classes of non-citizens considered “detrimental to the interests of the United States.” However, courts have cast doubt on whether 212(f) can in fact be used to remove an asylum seeker already on U.S. soil and asking for protection, who are protected by Section 208 of the INA.
“We intend to challenge this order in court,” the ACLU announced. Aaron Reichlin-Melnick of the American Immigration Council noted that the ACLU “successfully blocked” a similar “2018 Trump asylum ban within days.” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut), the principal Democratic negotiator on an unsuccessful “border deal” that sought to legislate a similar asylum limit, said “I am sympathetic to the position the administration is in, but I am skeptical the executive branch has the legal authority to shut down asylum processing between ports of entry on its own.”
The administration’s announcements did not refer to increased capacity to implement its new barriers to asylum seekers. That would involve costly measures like more asylum officers for expedited removal proceedings, more detention space, or more capacity to deport migrants (more flights, or permission from Mexico to deport more non-Mexican citizens by land). Three DHS officials told the Washington Post that “the administration has not scheduled a short-term increase in deportation flights to ramp up the number of migrants returned to their home countries under the new measures.”
Though administration officials reportedly delayed the asylum restriction’s rollout until after Mexico’s June 2 presidential election, the announcement did not come with any word of policy changes from Mexico’s government. Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador told reporters that, in a June 4 conversation with President Biden, he encouraged Biden to deport non-Mexican migrants directly, not into Mexico: “Why do they come to Mexico? We have no problem, we treat migrants very well, all of them, but why triangulate?” (Since January 2023, Mexico has accepted up to a combined 30,000 U.S. deportations per month of citizens of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.)
The New York Times’s Hamed Aleaziz reported that now, when asylum seekers in custody try to prove that they meet higher standards of fear of return (called “reasonable probability” of harm), they will have just four hours to find legal representation. “Migrants previously had at least 24 hours or more to find a lawyer.”
Reports from the border documented worry and perplexity among migrants. People passing through the northern state of Durango told Milenio that the U.S. policy change did not alter their plans. “We do not have a plan, and we cannot return. This is a low blow,” a 64-year-old man from Colombia told the Guardian in Ciudad Juárez. Some told the Guardian that they are now considering crossing through dangerous nearby desert. Shelter operators in northern Mexican border cities braced for new strains on their capacity.
Coverage of the new rule’s political and electoral implications found progressive Democrats outraged by the rollback of asylum rights; most Republicans claiming it is “too little, too late” and doesn’t do enough to stop migrants from arriving; and centrist Democrats—especially those from tightly contested states or districts—supporting it. (See our June 6 update for many links to coverage and statements.)
Mexican migration agents and National Guard personnel carried out a June 5 operation to evict over 400 migrants from a plaza near the Mexico City headquarters of the country’s refugee agency, COMAR. The late-night sweep, which officials claim sought to transfer many to shelters, highlighted the challenges faced by protection-seeking migrants trying to enter Mexico’s underfunded asylum system.
That system is managed by the Mexican government’s Refugee Assistance Commission (COMAR), which released new data on June 3 about the number of asylum applications it has received so far this year. The data, in fact, show a dramatic and unexpected drop.
Between January and May, COMAR reported receiving 36,860 applications for asylum. This is 42 percent fewer than where COMAR stood after the first five months of 2023 (63,436). COMAR is on pace to receive just over 88,000 asylum applications by the end of the year, which would make 2024 the refugee agency’s quietest year since 2020, when pandemic border closures brought a sharp and anomalous drop.
As in recent years, the top five citizenships of asylum applicants are Honduras, Cuba, Haiti, Venezuela, and El Salvador. Looking closely at these numbers reveals that most of this year’s drop in Mexico’s asylum applicants owes to a sharp drop in applicants from Haiti.
Haitian entrants into Mexico’s asylum system are 87 percent behind where they were at this point in 2023. Other top nationalities, particularly Cuba but also Honduras and El Salvador, are in fact ahead of where they were after the first five months of 2023.
This drop in Haitian asylum applications is not paralleled by a drop in migration from Haiti. Mexico’s migration authorities reported encountering or stopping 22,884 Haitian citizens during the first four months of 2024 (out of 481,025 migrants overall); that is more than double the number of Haitian people whom Mexico had reported encountering or stopping in January-April 2023 (10,717). U.S. authorities’ border encounters with Haitian citizens during January-April (40,251) are also nearly double what they were a year before (22,298).
This indicates that Haitian migrants have largely stopped choosing to use Mexico’s asylum system this year. A possible explanation could be the availability of humanitarian parole and CBP One appointments in the United States; those options, however, are also available to migrants from Cuba, whose asylum applications have nearly doubled in Mexico’s system this year.