Biden administration may revive Trump-era Migrant Protection Protocols this week + important immigration news.
The Biden administration is close to an agreement with Mexico on reviving the Migrant Protection Protocols, Rohingya people face forced relocation, and problems with the framing of "refugee crisis."
Starting this week, migrants could face even more barriers to asylum along the U.S.-Mexico border if the Biden administration revives the Trump administration’s Migrant Protection Protocols as expected. Today’s newsletter gets you up to speed on where MPP stands right now and highlights important news and policy updates from the U.S. and around the world.
What’s in today’s newsletter. ℹ️
Migrant Protection Protocols❗️
Immigration Policy Updates 🏛
Immigration News from Around the World 🌍
Big Ideas in Immigration💡
But first…
Do you have a suggestion for holiday donations? We are getting into the holiday season and your end-of-year giving can make a big difference to organizations that serve others. If you would like to suggest an organization that you believe in, please leave a link in the comments and I will feature as many as I can throughout December.
MPP is (almost) back. ❗️
After weeks of uncertainty, this could be the week that the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) go back into effect according to Stef Knight at Axios. MPP was a Trump-era policy designed to undermine the asylum system by making refugees wait in Mexico for their asylum hearings. The Biden administration initially ended the MPP, but DHS is now complying with a federal judge’s orders to restart the program. The administration originally said it would restart the program by mid-November, but Mexico—with whom the administration must negotiate since the policy impedes on their national sovereignty—has apparently not yet given the green light.
If you are already familiar with how the Migrant Protection Protocols worked during the Trump administration but need to catch up on recent news, here’s what you need to know this week. (If you are not familiar with MPP, I highly recommend Fernanda Echavarri’s excellent first-person story of the Perla family titled “One Family’s Escape From Trump’s Border Hell: A 130-Week Diary.”)
Immigration attorneys and immigrant rights organizers have been pushing back strongly against the Biden administration’s attempt to humanize what many would say is an un-humanizable program.
Advocates walked out of an immigration meeting with the White House back in October over the administration’s revival of MPP as well as the administration’s ongoing use of Title 42 to quickly expel most migrants coming to the southern border. Advocates point to the contradiction of the administration claiming to be different than the Trump administration on immigration while upholding some of the Trump administration’s most controversial policies.
The Biden administration faced a further snag earlier this month when many immigration attorneys and organizations refused to be added to the list of pro bono (“free”) legal services that should be provided to migrants in MPP court. Adolfo Flores from Buzzfeed quotes one attorney as saying: "I am not willing to or able to emotionally and physically continue to put my life at risk because the Biden administration has broken its promise and decided to reinstate this utterly evil program."
The refusal of attorneys to make themselves available to MPP is not just a moral or ethical position, it has policy consequences, as well. Mexico has said from the beginning that one of its conditions for moving forward on MPP is that the United States must show that it will provide better access to legal counsel. Research by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University found that asylum seekers in MPP faced extremely low rates of representation and success compared to asylum seekers in the United States.
Laura Lynch at the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) recently shared a letter from the NILC to the administration threatening new lawsuits if the administration moves forward on MPP under a previous inunction from the Orantes-Hernandez case that “uphold[s] certain rights of Salvadoran nationals.” I have to admit that I was not at all familiar with this case before reading the letter, so I can’t provide any further context to it. The larger point here, however, is that if and when the Biden administration does revive MPP, it seems quite likely that it will draw new lawsuits.
Criticism about MPP isn’t just coming from immigrant rights groups. Some Republican lawmakers aren’t satisfied simply with getting the federal courts to order the Biden administration to reinstate MPP, they want it done faster. On November 5, Congressman Andy Biggs of Arizona sent a letter to President Biden co-signed by other House Republicans claiming that the administration is dragging its feet in its reimplement MPP. I don’t believe these criticisms appreciate either the foreign policy aspect of MPP or the infrastructural challenges with rebuilding the MPP program (like physically building the MPP courts).
DHS officially terminated the program in June of this year, DHS Secretary Mayorkas issued a second termination memo at the end of October.
Looking for data on MPP cases? Check out TRAC’s interactive data tool here: Details on MPP (Remain in Mexico) Deportation Proceedings. TRAC’s most recent in-depth report on the aftermath of MPP cases is “MPP Transfers Into United States Slow and Nationality Inequities Emerge.”
IMMIGRATION POLICY UPDATES 🏛
An employer in Maryland settled a lawsuit with the Department of Justice after the employer violated an anti-discrimination provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) when it rejected the worker’s valid work documentation. See the DOJ announcement here.
The Biden administration faces renewed criticisms for upholding Title 42 after a former senior health official testifies that the Trump-era policy was not based on science. See the story here. For background information on Title 42, see this explanation by Borgen Magazine.
Despite raising the refugee cap to 125,000 for FY 2022 (which started on October 1), the Biden administration is unlikely to reach anywhere close to that number. Nicole Narea for Vox writes about the challenges of turning refugee policy into reality in her article “Why Biden is struggling to revive the US refugee program.”
The White House announced that due to new concerns about the COVID-19 variant identified in South Africa, travel from several countries in southern Africa would be restricted effective immediately. Announcement here.
Many people currently at risk of deportation in court could experience a sigh of short-term relief due to a new administrative closure memo released last week by EOIR Director Neal. I discussed this announcement in greater detail in a post last week available here.
IMMIGRATION NEWS FROM AROUND THE WORLD 🌍
Asylum seekers drown in the English Channel.
At least 27 people drowned in frigid waters off the coast of France on Wednesday, after a boat carrying migrants trying to reach Britain capsized in the English Channel, one of the worst death tolls in recent years for migrants attempting the dangerous crossing. Full story here. The tragedy has sparked political tension between the UK and France. Thom Brooks of Durham University argues—rightly, in my view—that the appropriate context here is Brexit, which is driving migrants to the UK which is less able to relocate those refugees now that the country has pulled out of the Dublin regulations.
Bangladesh forcibly relocates Rohingya minority.
More than 2,000 Rohingya are set to be transferred to Bhashan Char island in the Bay of Bengal, amid claims of forced relocations. Full story here. The Rohingya are an ethnic minority in Bangladesh who have been incredibly persecuted and even pushed out of their country as refugees in recent years. Vox has a short 5-minute explanation of the ethnic cleansing of Myanmar’s Rohingya people.
“Afghan Girl” granted asylum in Italy.
The "Afghan Girl", made famous after featuring on the cover of National Geographic magazine in 1985, has been granted refugee status by Italy's Prime Minister Mario Draghi, according to an Italian government press office statement. Full story here.
The photograph produced by photographer Steve McCurry for National Geographic in 1985 was iconic from the start but has received well-deserved criticism over the years. Among other criticism is the following: the photo of Sharbat Gula was taken in the middle of Sharbat’s school day without her father’s consent and may have actually put her in more danger due to her recognizability. Academics have discussed this photo as an example of an exoticizing, orientalist gaze. The Wire published a more accessible critique here with lots of important background.
BIG IDEAS IN IMMIGRATION💡
It matters how we talk about migration.
An important think-piece in Border Criminologies argues that how we talk about immigration can be politically dangerous. Grażyna Baranowska, Begüm Başdaş, and Natalie Welfens look at the recent situation involving the politicization of migrants along the Belarus-Poland border. Read the article here: The Dangerous Politics of Framing: The Situation at the Polish-Belarusian Border.
THANK YOU FOR READING! 🙏🏼
If you found this information useful, help more people see it by clicking the ☼SHARE☼ button below.