Only 0.1% Of Asylum Seekers Granted Asylum Under Trump’s Remain In Mexico Policy

Speaker 1: 00:00 It was about one year ago when the Trump administration instituted the so called remain in Mexico program where people seeking asylum must wait in Mexico until their cases are adjudicated. Another policy and asylum ban makes non Mexican asylum seekers ineligible for asylum unless they first applied in another country. The administration says the changes in policy were needed because the system for processing asylum was being overwhelmed, but human rights groups say the policies essentially mean virtually no one is being granted asylum in the U S joining us to talk about the situation is San Diego union Tribune reporter Gustava solace and Gustavo welcome. Well, thank you Jane. Before the remain in Mexico policy was adopted, thousands of people were being granted asylum. How does the administration defendant's current policy, Speaker 2: 00:50 well, I think you explained it pretty well in the opening there, right? The explanation from the Trump administration is that a lot of people use the asylum process to file illegitimate asylum claims, get into the country and then just not follow up and ignore their court dates and use false claims as a vehicle for becoming undocumented citizens. Speaker 1: 01:12 The numbers of people being granted asylum just last year differ greatly from the 2019 numbers. Can you contrast those two sets of numbers? Speaker 2: 01:21 Yeah, it can. It is really, really startling. The numbers and historically most people who apply for asylum don't get it right. We have numbers from 2018, uh, about 20% of the applicants actually received asylum, about 50% were denied and the other, um, you know, 40 or so were dismissed. Um, so compare that 20% grant rate from last year and what we've noticed with remained in Mexico is that they have a 0.1% grant rate. A total of 11 people have gotten it. So it's virtually nothing. Speaker 1: 01:58 Nothing. Yeah. Human rights groups say there are a number of problems with the remain in Mexico policy. Those problems include migrants being attacked, robbed, raped, and even killed. Can you tell us more about that? Speaker 2: 02:11 Right. Well, Mexico is a dangerous place, particularly some of the border towns in Mexico. And it's important to know that what this policy does is that it forces asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their cases are adjudicated. In the U S and those cases take eight months to a year to be completed. So you're asking people to live in Mexican border towns, which are very dangerous. And these people who are asylum seekers are almost by definition, very vulnerable already. And now the program remade in Mexico is officially called migrant protection protocols, but advocates don't like using that name because as far as they see on the ground, there are very few protections in in that program. And the U S government has said a CBP have said that the protection part of it is supposed to come from Mexico. So the U S is not responsible for any of the protections outside of the border. Mexico is. But what we're seeing on the ground is that there are very few, if any protections. Speaker 1: 03:12 What has been the reaction of the Mexican government to the Trump administration's policies? Speaker 2: 03:17 Hmm. I think it's been sort of different reactions. Right? At the federal level, they are agreeing with some of the policies, right? They're accepting people back through the program. At the local level. In Tijuana, there's been some pushback because local residents there don't want a large amount of migrants staying there indefinitely. Um, there has been a little bit of pushback from the Mexican government in terms of the types of migrants who are sent back and there have been reports of the Mexican government refusing migrants back if they don't have future court dates. For example. [inaudible] Speaker 1: 03:53 in your article you profiled one migrant in particular a man you called Brian. Can you tell us about his story? Yeah, I think Brian's story is really helped Speaker 2: 04:02 full and understanding, not just remain in Mexico, but all of the asylum changes that have happened in the last year. Brian is a, is a man from Honduras who fled gang violence and arrived to Tijuana last year with the central American migrant caravan. So he arrived to the border in November, 2018. Um, but he was forced to wait about three months before he actually had a chance to present himself at the border. Uh, that's through a process called metering, which is also fairly controversial and it's a subject of federal lawsuits. Uh, metering says that the U S government will turn people back from the border and make them wait, sign their name on a list and wait two to three months until they get in. The reasoning behind that is that there's a limited amount of space in detention facilities or processing centers. So the government has to, because of logistical reasons, manage the amount of people that get in. For Brian, that meant that he arrived in November but didn't get into January and by January remained in Mexico was in effect. So he was one of the first people who was returned under that policy. You know, had he arrived a month earlier, he probably would have been in the U S so I think that's why his story is very compelling Speaker 1: 05:21 in, in all of your reporting on this particular subject. Um, is there any solution that you see? Speaker 2: 05:29 I don't want to be grim, but no. Um, there are, I guess it's important to know that the, almost all of the policies are subject to federal lawsuits. So depending on how that goes are some of them are on due process grounds. Some of them are on constitutional grounds. So depending on how the courts decide, uh, the policies themselves could go away. Um, but if the policy is continued to be implemented, I don't see a change in grant. I mean, part of the reason, and I think one of the biggest obstacles and remain in Mexico is the lack of access that migrants have to attorneys. And that's because if you're an immigration lawyer based in the U S like why would you take on a pro bono case when your client is in, he won. It takes all day to schedule an appointment and go to a hearing and do consultings over there. Speaker 2: 06:17 And when you're doing that, you have to ignore all your other work here in the U S so there's very few lawyers who will do that and there's a lot of migrants who need that help. So without access to attorneys, your odds of getting a positive versus what's in your asylum case are great, really greatly diminished. Uh, and if there's no change there, then I don't see a reason to believe that the grant rates are going to improve. I've been speaking with union Tribune reporter Gustavo's Selise Gustavo, thank you very much for joining us. Oh, thank you. Jane.