Judge Blocks Trump Policy That Forces Asylum Seekers to Wait in Mexico

“Remain in Mexico” was the administration’s main way of deterring asylum seekers.

Ariel, a Honduran asylum-seeker, hugs an attorney before entering the United States in March to begin his asylum case after being returned to Mexico.Gregory Bull/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

A federal judge is blocking the Trump administration’s policy of forcing asylum seekers to wait in Mexico for their US court dates. The move will, at least temporarily, end the Trump administration’s most important policy for deterring Central American families from requesting protecting under US asylum laws. 

The preliminary injunction was issued by San Francisco district court judge Richard Seeborg. The administration’s policy, known as Remain in Mexico, was announced in December and went into effect in late January. It forces migrants to wait in dangerous border cities and makes it impossible for many of them to find lawyers.

Remain in Mexico was arguably Kirstjen Nielsen’s biggest achievement as homeland security secretary. President Donald Trump pushed Nielsen out on Sunday, and she will be replaced by Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan on Wednesday, two days before Seeborg’s injunction goes into effect.

“We’re thrilled that the judge agreed with our arguments and has blocked this heinous policy,” said Melissa Crow, an attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center, which, along with the American Civil Liberties Union, represented the plaintiffs challenging the policy. “It’s a huge statement that he agreed with our arguments.

“Today’s victory is especially important amidst reports that the Trump administration is planning to move toward even more extreme immigration policies,” she added. “The decision will prevent incredibly vulnerable individuals from being trapped in dangerous conditions in Mexico, but it’s only a step in a much larger fight.”

Seeborg’s order is below:

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

A BETTER WAY TO DO THIS?

We have an ambitious $350,000 online fundraising goal this month and we can't afford to come up short. But when a reader recently asked how being a nonprofit makes Mother Jones different from other news organizations, we realized we needed to lay this out better: Because "in absolutely every way" is essentially the answer.

So we tried to explain why your year-end donations are so essential, and we'd like your help refining our pitch about what make Mother Jones valuable and worth reading to you.

We'd also like your support of our journalism with a year-end donation if you can right now—all online gifts will be doubled until we hit our $350,000 goal thanks to an incredibly generous donor's matching gift pledge.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate