SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
As Candidates Spar on Immigration, Rights Groups Sue for Answers
U.S. and Mexican rights groups sue State Department to find out how much it's paying to stop migrants from reaching borders
Feb 12, 2016
A coalition of human rights groups has filed a lawsuit to find out just how much the U.S. State Department is paying the government of Mexico to stop migrants and refugees from reaching the U.S. border.
The lawsuit was filed by the Los Angeles-based Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, along with other organizations in the U.S. and Mexico, to identify what kind of financial aid the State Department is giving Mexico's National Institute of Migration (INM), and whether migrants being held in detention centers are actually given the chance to seek asylum as required by human rights law.
The Guardian reports:
Detentions have surged since Mexico launched the Southern Front Plan in July 2014 just days after Barack Obama declared the surge in unaccompanied Central American child migrants seeking refuge on the us child migrants a humanitarian crisis.
[....] Public documents show that theUS State Department initially provided $86m to train the security forces and modernise inspection and communication equipment. But it is unclear how much from the $2.5bn Merida Initiative and other aid programmes have been redirected towards tightening Mexico's southern border and stopping the flow of migrants.
According to Alex Martinez, a former head of the INM, the kickback scheme is a new development. "The Americans started paying Mexico in the past three years, this didn't happen before," Martinez told the Guardian's Nina Lakhani.
The lawsuit, filed this week, alleges that the State Department's silence on the issue is "shrouding U.S. support for Mexico's unlawful interdiction program in secrecy."
Meanwhile, the U.S. presidential candidates are ratcheting up their focus on immigration as voting days approach in Nevada and South Carolina. During the Democratic debate in Milwaukee on Thursday night, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders promised comprehensive reform of immigration policies and hit at each other's records on the issue.
Clinton noted that Sanders had voted against Sen. Ted Kennedy's 2007 immigration bill, which proponents said created a pathway to citizenship, but Sanders countered that human rights groups were opposed to the bill over its expansion of exploitative guest worker programs.
He challenged Clinton's recent statements that the government "had to send a message to the families and the communities in Central America not to send their children on this dangerous journey" and her call to deport child migrants back to their home countries.
"I don't know to whom you're sending a message," Sanders said Thursday. "Who are you sending a message to? These are children who are leaving countries and neighborhoods where their lives are at stake. I don't think I would use them to send a message. I think we welcome them into this country and do the best we can to help get their lives together."
Watch the exchange:
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. If you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
A coalition of human rights groups has filed a lawsuit to find out just how much the U.S. State Department is paying the government of Mexico to stop migrants and refugees from reaching the U.S. border.
The lawsuit was filed by the Los Angeles-based Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, along with other organizations in the U.S. and Mexico, to identify what kind of financial aid the State Department is giving Mexico's National Institute of Migration (INM), and whether migrants being held in detention centers are actually given the chance to seek asylum as required by human rights law.
The Guardian reports:
Detentions have surged since Mexico launched the Southern Front Plan in July 2014 just days after Barack Obama declared the surge in unaccompanied Central American child migrants seeking refuge on the us child migrants a humanitarian crisis.
[....] Public documents show that theUS State Department initially provided $86m to train the security forces and modernise inspection and communication equipment. But it is unclear how much from the $2.5bn Merida Initiative and other aid programmes have been redirected towards tightening Mexico's southern border and stopping the flow of migrants.
According to Alex Martinez, a former head of the INM, the kickback scheme is a new development. "The Americans started paying Mexico in the past three years, this didn't happen before," Martinez told the Guardian's Nina Lakhani.
The lawsuit, filed this week, alleges that the State Department's silence on the issue is "shrouding U.S. support for Mexico's unlawful interdiction program in secrecy."
Meanwhile, the U.S. presidential candidates are ratcheting up their focus on immigration as voting days approach in Nevada and South Carolina. During the Democratic debate in Milwaukee on Thursday night, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders promised comprehensive reform of immigration policies and hit at each other's records on the issue.
Clinton noted that Sanders had voted against Sen. Ted Kennedy's 2007 immigration bill, which proponents said created a pathway to citizenship, but Sanders countered that human rights groups were opposed to the bill over its expansion of exploitative guest worker programs.
He challenged Clinton's recent statements that the government "had to send a message to the families and the communities in Central America not to send their children on this dangerous journey" and her call to deport child migrants back to their home countries.
"I don't know to whom you're sending a message," Sanders said Thursday. "Who are you sending a message to? These are children who are leaving countries and neighborhoods where their lives are at stake. I don't think I would use them to send a message. I think we welcome them into this country and do the best we can to help get their lives together."
Watch the exchange:
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
A coalition of human rights groups has filed a lawsuit to find out just how much the U.S. State Department is paying the government of Mexico to stop migrants and refugees from reaching the U.S. border.
The lawsuit was filed by the Los Angeles-based Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law, along with other organizations in the U.S. and Mexico, to identify what kind of financial aid the State Department is giving Mexico's National Institute of Migration (INM), and whether migrants being held in detention centers are actually given the chance to seek asylum as required by human rights law.
The Guardian reports:
Detentions have surged since Mexico launched the Southern Front Plan in July 2014 just days after Barack Obama declared the surge in unaccompanied Central American child migrants seeking refuge on the us child migrants a humanitarian crisis.
[....] Public documents show that theUS State Department initially provided $86m to train the security forces and modernise inspection and communication equipment. But it is unclear how much from the $2.5bn Merida Initiative and other aid programmes have been redirected towards tightening Mexico's southern border and stopping the flow of migrants.
According to Alex Martinez, a former head of the INM, the kickback scheme is a new development. "The Americans started paying Mexico in the past three years, this didn't happen before," Martinez told the Guardian's Nina Lakhani.
The lawsuit, filed this week, alleges that the State Department's silence on the issue is "shrouding U.S. support for Mexico's unlawful interdiction program in secrecy."
Meanwhile, the U.S. presidential candidates are ratcheting up their focus on immigration as voting days approach in Nevada and South Carolina. During the Democratic debate in Milwaukee on Thursday night, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders promised comprehensive reform of immigration policies and hit at each other's records on the issue.
Clinton noted that Sanders had voted against Sen. Ted Kennedy's 2007 immigration bill, which proponents said created a pathway to citizenship, but Sanders countered that human rights groups were opposed to the bill over its expansion of exploitative guest worker programs.
He challenged Clinton's recent statements that the government "had to send a message to the families and the communities in Central America not to send their children on this dangerous journey" and her call to deport child migrants back to their home countries.
"I don't know to whom you're sending a message," Sanders said Thursday. "Who are you sending a message to? These are children who are leaving countries and neighborhoods where their lives are at stake. I don't think I would use them to send a message. I think we welcome them into this country and do the best we can to help get their lives together."
Watch the exchange:
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy