Winning On Immigration... Maybe

Likely it will cost a small fortune but it will at least put a halt or a slow down to people traversing Mexico for Asylum… as it should be.

It might be cheaper to house and feed them in Mexico…going thought the justice system wouldn’t change much. Either way I think it would be a deterrent for future migration.

On side note I wonder if Andrés Manuel López Obrador will continue that policy.

I was lead to believe he’s anti-Trump. :wink:

1 Like

First line says the deal was struck with his transition team… Perhaps they can find employment for these fine hardworking individuals… at least the cartel is always looking for good help… or maybe it is just easier for their Federal police to … deal with them…

If Trump and Obrador get this right, Colombia just might be the new immigration hotspot…

Damn I feel stupid…how did I miss >incoming< government.

The Trump administration has won the support of Mexico’s incoming government for a plan to remake U.S. border policy by requiring asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their claims move through U.S. courts,

That’s good news then.

As for Colombia…not sure how many more they can accept because of Venezuelans flooding into that country as well.

Shame really, have some family members came/live there.

There’s a paywall on that article, can you give us a summary?

While it sounds good the solution would be to hold them on Mexico’s southern border while we secure our own.

90% of these supposed asylees are found to be making baseless claims so obviously this isn’t about people fleeing tyranny it’s all about economic opportunity for the vast majority which makes their claims a fraud to begin with.

I’m all for limited, legal, controlled immigration but it has to be done for the benefit of The United States and the Citizens of same.

1 Like

MEXICO CITY - The Trump administration has won the support of Mexico’s incoming government for a plan to remake U.S. border policy by requiring asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their claims move through U.S. courts, according to Mexican officials and senior members of president-elect Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s transition team.

The agreement would break with long-standing asylum rules and place a formidable new barrier in the path of Central American migrants attempting to reach the United States and escape poverty and violence. By reaching the accord, the Trump administration has also overcome Mexico’s historic reticence to deepen cooperation with the United States on an issue widely seen here as America’s problem.

The White House had no immediate comment.

According to outlines of the plan, known as Remain in Mexico, asylum applicants at the border will have to stay in Mexico while their cases are processed, potentially ending the system Trump decries as ‘‘catch and release’’ that has until now generally allowed those seeking refuge to wait on safer U.S. soil.

You know all we really need to do is insist that international law be followed which requires potential asylees to seek same in the first safe country they enter upon leaving their own.

We also need to change US law to make it unlawful to deny anyone the right to apply in the US that passes through a third safe country on the way here.

It doesn’t have to be all that complicated.

We need to create a good solid constitutional foundation under the 14th amendment… That is what created the ‘wet foot dry foot’ asylum of the Cubans… and it is the same for everyone else that reaches our border… and we need to put a nail in the coffin of birthright citizenship of anyone who entered or remained in our country illegally… the 14th amendment and its implementation over the past 50 years has lead us into this constitutional no mans land…

1 Like

I disagree with following international law. We are a sovereign country. We need to follow the laws and enforce them as they exist.

1 Like

They have mocked up the original intent of 14th to a point it became unrecognizable…which I believe was on purpose.

But again it seems what happen to rest of Amendments.

It’s why I like the 2nd. It’s just as clear today as it was 200 plus years ago. Just that some have hard time admitting to it.

1 Like

There’s a lot of truth in that. All we need really though is one good court decision establishing what it was intended to do originally.

There was no intent whatsoever on the part of those who passed it to grant birthright citizenship to children of anyone here unlawfully.

We need to do both. International law sets the rules for the conduct of refugees and asylees passing through foreign countries. If we simply insisted it be followed it they would have no basis for a legal claim once reaching the US period unless the US passed legislation specifically allowing it.

The rest of the civilized world expects us to bend over every time they cite international law so let them live under it as well.

The problem Mexico fans is if the hoard of people trying to crash into the US success, the border will likely b sealed preventing import of Mexican made goods.

It would be in their best interest to stop any further caravans of people to cross their borders.

Here is an alternative link. @Scott, feel free to include this in the OP instead.

I think the Mexican government is realizing this. Sealing that border would be detrimental to Mexican own interest/agenda.

I thus the reason why their goverment agreed to worked with Trump administration.

“The medium- and long-term solution is that people don’t migrate,” Sánchez Cordero said. “Mexico has open arms and everything, but imagine, one caravan after another after another, that would also be a problem for us.”

While no formal agreement has been signed, and U.S. officials caution that many details must still be discussed, the incoming Mexican government is amenable to the concept of turning their country in to a waiting room for America’s asylum system.

While they remain anxious the deal could fall apart, U.S. officials view this as a potential breakthrough that could deter migration and the formation of additional caravans that originate in Central America and cross through Mexico to reach the United States. They have quietly engaged in sensitive talks with senior Mexican officials, attempting to offer a diplomatic counterbalance to President Donald Trump’s threats and ultimatums.

Like they said, its a kick of the can down the road, except down the road, its Mexico; and even the Mexican gov’t is worried about incoming caravans that incite much vitriol, for example for the border town of Tijuana .

The prospect of keeping thousands of Central American asylum seekers for months or years in drug cartel-dominated Mexican border states - some of the most violent in the country - has troubled human-rights activists and others who worry that such a plan could put migrants at risk and undermine their lawful right to apply for asylum.

So instead of fixing the problems of drug cartels, they are just going to cry victims as usual? Thats a bit “racyst” in the part of those “human-rights activists” to call Mexico a place infested with drug cartels, hummmm?

But regardless, Im ambivalent about this “deal”. Sounds to be potentially really expensive compared to jsut a border wall.

I’m sorry WildRose. Unless I am missing something (which is entirely possible) I concede nothing to international law given the liberal bias of the UN as it stands today.

We are a sovereign nation. Our laws belong to us and are not up for scrutiny by any nation. Should we as a nation, decide to change our laws then so be it for better or worse.

One cannot serve two Masters.

1 Like

SO you have invaded and infested an ARMED nation . Well pedro and abdul have we got a surprise for you.
The day the killing begins it will be nation wide in seconds. And it is coming.

At best it’s a temporary fix that takes some of the pressure off of US while the border is secured.