Mexico’s State Department (SRE) said in a statement after talks between the two governments in Washington over a technical task force on migration and development. It told the Mexican government it would address all humanitarian concerns related to the re-implementation of the plan..
Show He is sending asylum seekers to Mexico to wait in that area for decisions to be made by U.S. immigration courts. In some cases it can take more than three years.
The Mexican government said the project could not be resumed without its permission, citing the US government’s acceptance of humanitarian concerns. “It has been decided that certain immigrants who have been appointed to appear before an immigration judge in the United States to seek asylum in the United States, for humanitarian reasons, will not return to their home countries.”.
A brief history of the project
The MPP, also known as Stay in Mexico, was implemented in January 2019 and ceased to exist in January 2021, when President Joe Biden took control of the White House.
According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), about 70,000 migrants seeking asylum in the southern border have been repatriated. As of March this year, about 25,000 cases were pending, with the remainder dismissed or refugee petitioners failing to appear in court, mainly due to errors in the NDA notices.
Conditions put forward by Mexico and accepted by the Fitzgerald government include, “Increasing resources for shelter and international organizations, protection for vulnerable groups, consideration of local conditions for protection and capacity of the organization’s shelter and maintenance. Tests and the availability of vaccines for immigrants are subject to both MPP and Title 42 of the United States Code, ”the SRE explained.
The Mexican government said it had “reaffirmed its commitment to maintaining the human rights of migrants and the orderly, secure and regular settlement.”
According to two sources cited by the newspaper, the Washington Post reports that MPP will resume operations in the Brownsville and Laredo (Texas) areas.
In April, three months after the MPP was abolished, the Republican-ruled states of Texas and Missouri passed Biden’s immigration policy and called for the re-establishment of Trump’s asylum program.
In a lawsuit filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmidt in the Northern District Court of the Amarillo Division of Texas, they said the return of the controversial policy would hamper the criminal and humanitarian crisis on the border. “Between the two countries.
They added that the MPP “restricts the ability of undocumented foreigners to stay in the United States during immigration operations, which greatly reduces the burden on state and federal agencies imposed to protect our borders.”
“By re-establishing President Biden’s plan, we can immediately fix the infiltration of crime on our border,” they added.
“Dangerous criminals are taking advantage of loopholes in law enforcement, resulting in an increase in human trafficking, kidnapping, and violent crimes, and taxpayers have to pay the bill for the massive and unprecedented burden on state and federal programs,” Foxston said.
The official added, “This illegality can no longer be allowed to destroy our communities. President Biden must act.”
On Aug. 14, federal Judge Matthew J. Coxmary, at the end of page 53, ordered the Biden administration to reinstate the MPP.
In the judgment, the court found that the government had “failed to analyze a number of important factors” such as the benefits of the scheme and that terminating it was illegal and harmful.
Kacsmaryk also commented that the MPP had encouraged immigrants who did not qualify for asylum to come to the United States. And by modifying the plan, the judge found that plaintiff states were harmed because by releasing the immigrants they were allowed to use health services, apply for a driver’s license and go to school in the case of immigrant children.
In mid-October, the DHS issued a statement saying it was taking the necessary steps to comply with the court order, “forcing us to reactivate the MPP in good faith.” Depending on whether Mexico agrees to receive asylum seekers in its territory.
As Amarillo (Texas) Federal Court approved in its ruling, the project cannot be restarted without the permission of Mexico. “Mexico is a sovereign country that must make an independent decision to accept the return of non – static individuals to Mexico as part of any re – implementation of the MPP,” the DHS statement said on Twitter at the time.
The ministry announced in early November that the DHS would reactivate the MPP in accordance with a court order issued in August, which would finalize the plan but would have to wait until the end of its valid hearing.
DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement that “the government is dealing with long-standing problems that have plagued our immigration system for decades in order to bring about the necessary formal change.” And the MPP “does not help achieve this goal.”
Myorgos explained, “The MPP had local shortcomings, imposed unjustifiable human costs, diverted resources and manpower from other priority efforts and failed to address the root causes of irregular displacement.”
The head of the U.S. National Security Forces added that the plan “not only undermined the government’s ability to implement fundamental changes in the immigration system, but did not provide the people with a fair process and humanitarian protection under the law.”
In a recent letter to the government, the American Association of Immigrant Lawyers (AILA), which has 15,000 members across the country, said that PPMs face “severe obstacles” to obtaining legal advice, and that this situation affects the right process and opportunities.
Immigrants and their lawyers face serious risks and difficulties in pursuing this policy, and over the past two years it has become clear that the plan “violates the proper procedure and defendants’ right to a fair day in court.” Will be reactivated.
It should be noted that the cases returned to Mexico were added to the list of cases pending before the Immigration Court (EOIR), which adds up to more than 1.4 million files. On average a case can take more than 3.2 years to resolve.
AILA also points out that the statutory representation rate under the MPP is less than 7.5%, which means that the percentage of winning cases is detrimental to people fleeing their countries seeking asylum in the United States.
In turn, those waiting for their visitors in high-risk areas are left homeless, living in extreme poverty and exposed to bad weather.
About 3,000 MPP cases are currently registered in the UNHCR database. The international body hopes that the plan will be re-implemented, in accordance with the court order, to continue to co-operate in the asylum process.
“Travel aficionado. Infuriatingly humble reader. Incurable internet specialist.”