Immigration Perspectives: COVID-19 Edition, Week 2

Each week during the COVID-19 crisis, we’ll publish a quick recap of our top three immigration-related storylines. Let us know what you think! And be sure to tune in each week to our podcast, This Week in Immigration, for even more in-depth analysis of immigration news from the last two weeks.

This week, the partial closures at the U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico borders went into effect. Following some public back and forth, Mexico did agree to receive both Mexican and Central American citizens who will be sent back across the border in light of the CDC order suspending entry due to COVID-19. All non-essential travel across the borders has been prohibited, but since continuing trade is considered essential, trucks carrying needed parts and products continue to cross. However, overall border crossings are down significantly as citizens who might normally cross the borders for shopping, visiting and recreation are choosing to stay home. Between ports of entry, Canada is returning north-bound asylum seekers back to the United States, in a temporary expansion of the Safe-Third Country Agreement. And U.S. Border Patrol agents are processing apprehended immigrants in the field with portable biometric scanners and collecting minimal data before transporting them to the nearest Mexican port of entry and sending them across.

Although initially stating that these new procedures would not apply to unaccompanied children, today it is being reported that even those minors will be returned expeditiously. Immigration and refugee advocates are decrying these actions, stating that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention order cannot override protections for asylum and children in the immigration act. Since this is the first time these two separate laws have come into contention, it will probably be up to the courts to decide whether these actions are legal.

Finally, news leaked that Customs and Border Protection had requested the Department of Defense to lend it another 1,500 active duty troops to support its border security efforts, including 1,000 troops to the Canadian border, which would be a first for the “world’s longest undefended border.” Absent any indication of an increased threat at the northern border, and given the close cooperation the Canadian government has provided to U.S. efforts, Canadian Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland slammed this move, stating: “[T]his is an entirely unnecessary step which we would view as damaging to our relationship.” By early Friday, the White House seemed to have backed off the order, but the CBP request also asked for an additional 500 or so troops to support the existing deployments at the U.S.-Mexico border, so stay tuned.

Following a week of debate and efforts by some advocates to add immigration provisions to the coronavirus relief bill being considered by Congress, in the end, changes to immigration programs from EB-5 to H-2B to DACA were left out of the bill. The Senate passed the bill on Wednesday night, and the House passed it Friday afternoon. While leaving these items off the table was an acquiescence to the political reality of trying to pass a bill by unanimous consent or voice vote, and therefore needing to leave out any measures that would be too controversial, many immigrants on the front lines of fighting this pandemic, including health care workers, grocery clerks, home health aides and others, are still concerned about whether they can maintain their status with USCIS offices closed and a pending Supreme Court decision on DACA hanging over their heads.

As for the centerpiece of the bill, the trillion-dollar relief offered to individual taxpayers, while green card holders, who are considered U.S. tax residents and have social security numbers, are clearly included, a provision requiring a social security number to receive the payments will leave out undocumented immigrants and their families, even if they have U.S. citizen children. Just like the concerns over immigration status that immigrants may have, leaving these individuals out of any financial relief, even when they do and have paid taxes, may continue to be a drag on the economy and the fight against COVID-19. Among the most vulnerable, many undocumented immigrants will have no choice but to go out and continue to try to work, with no other financial resources available. Given that most live in mixed-status families, many with U.S. citizen children, the impact to these households will be significant. Clearly, the fact that the United States has not addressed their status before now, makes the current situation even more problematic, amid a national crisis.

As the coronavirus pandemic continues to spread, Mexico and Central American countries are starting to take action as well.

• Several countries, including El Salvador and Guatemala, have closed their borders to visitors and travelers, and Guatemala has stated it is ending deportation flights from the United States under the asylum cooperation agreement for at least two weeks.
• El Salvador, which has not yet activated its asylum agreement with the United States, nonetheless suspended deportation flights from the United States and Mexico in conjunction with its border closure.
• Honduras also had no flights since it had closed down its airports for the last week. However, at least one ICE flight arrived in the country, as the plane was used to return stranded American citizens to the United States.
• Meanwhile, Mexico has suspended refugee requests and processing as part of a partial closure of non-essential government functions. These actions show the limitations of the Trump administration’s reliance on other countries to manage the migration situation at the U.S.-Mexico border.

With much more limited capacity and capability to respond to the pandemic, these actions to protect their own populations will limit the United States’ ability to manage migrant flows. Even with the temporary entry restrictions from the CDC order, a long-term strategy to manage migration in the region cannot be one that simply forces these countries to accept the burdens of migration. Cris Ramón has written articulately about this conundrum and how it has limited the effectiveness of Europe’s response to the migration crisis in his recent blog. However, it could also have severe implications for the future of our own immigration system that we have not taken care to address before the crisis, as it could eventually drive more migration to the United States. This will be something to watch as the world makes its way through and out the other side of this pandemic.