How can we think geographically about the Migrant Protection Protocols? In Monday’s newsletter, I discussed the return of the Migrant Protection Protocols and linked to resources and organizations that you could follow to keep up with the roll-out of MPP 2.0. Although the reporting on MPP exploded in the past few days, relatively few people were actually enrolled in MPP this week.
I agree it's a brutal policy, and my view is based on firsthand experience: interviewing asylum seekers in Juarez for a week in 2019, after MPP. But there's also a valid argument that simply allowing all Central American asylum seekers into the country is a massive fail because as TRAC's own data shows, even in the Obama years, 75%-80% or more were ultimately denied.
In my experience and that of the dozen volunteers I worked with (and the pro bono lawyers who trained us), very very few of the refugees from CA will qualify because they weren't targeted because of their affiliation with any of the five protected grounds. They were targeted because the gangs and the corrupt cops target everybody. And when they're denied, asylum, most are not deported, as MPI's Andrew Seeley points out the Politico piece linked below (search for "72 percent).
After hearing the stories of dozens of CA asylum seekers, I root for them all to be able to stay permanently if/when they're denied a grant of asylum. Whatever it takes: fake documents, etc. But from a societal perspective, it concerns me greatly that the asylum process is leading to such an increase in the unauthorized immigrant population. MPP is not the right solution, but neither is the existing system.
I agree it's a brutal policy, and my view is based on firsthand experience: interviewing asylum seekers in Juarez for a week in 2019, after MPP. But there's also a valid argument that simply allowing all Central American asylum seekers into the country is a massive fail because as TRAC's own data shows, even in the Obama years, 75%-80% or more were ultimately denied.
In my experience and that of the dozen volunteers I worked with (and the pro bono lawyers who trained us), very very few of the refugees from CA will qualify because they weren't targeted because of their affiliation with any of the five protected grounds. They were targeted because the gangs and the corrupt cops target everybody. And when they're denied, asylum, most are not deported, as MPI's Andrew Seeley points out the Politico piece linked below (search for "72 percent).
After hearing the stories of dozens of CA asylum seekers, I root for them all to be able to stay permanently if/when they're denied a grant of asylum. Whatever it takes: fake documents, etc. But from a societal perspective, it concerns me greatly that the asylum process is leading to such an increase in the unauthorized immigrant population. MPP is not the right solution, but neither is the existing system.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/03/25/border-crisis-immigration-explained-biden-trump-mexico-478049