

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Kevin Short, Physicians for Human Rights, media@phr.org
A new investigation by Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) documents the severe health and human rights tolls of the Title 42 border expulsion order, under which the United States government has expelled children and adults seeking refuge at the U.S. border nearly one million times since March 2020.
"Neither Safety nor Health: How Title 42 Expulsions Harm Health and Violate Rights" exposes some of the consequences of the expulsion policy, including family separations, abusive actions by U.S. and Mexico government officials, and acute medical and psychological impacts on asylum-seeking children and adults. Based on in-depth interviews conducted in Ciudad Juarez and Tijuana, Mexico in May 2021 with 28 expelled asylum seekers and six health professionals who provide medical care to migrants, the report underscores the dire consequences of the Title 42 ban and the urgency for the Biden administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to revoke the order.
Despite the order being implemented under the guise of a COVID-19 pandemic safety measure, public health experts have long objected to Title 42 expulsions and called out the lack of epidemiological evidence to justify banning only asylum seekers to the United States while keeping the borders largely open to other travelers. Although the ban was conceived by Trump administration officials, the Biden administration continues to expel hundreds of thousands of families and adults to countries where they face severe harm and persecution, violating their rights, threatening already traumatized people, and failing to protect public health.
In a first-of-its-kind approach to documenting the psychological effects of these expulsions and family separations, PHR researchers used validated Spanish-language screening tools to screen participants for mental health symptoms, including the PCL-5 Civilian scale for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL25) for anxiety and depression symptoms. Of the 26 participants who were administered validated screening tools, 96 percent screened positive for at least two disorders, and 88 percent screened positive for PTSD, anxiety, and depression. Parents interviewed by PHR reported that the family separations produced by Title 42 expulsions caused severe psychological harms to their children, resulting in excessive crying, disturbed sleep, and developmental setbacks such as resuming bed wetting. Eleven interviewees stated that their children were not eating and had lost significant weight due to the trauma of family separation.
The PHR report also sheds new light on abusive and dangerous actions by U.S. officials during the expulsion process. All 28 asylum seekers interviewed described gratuitously cruel and inhumane treatment at the hands of the U.S. government, including physical and verbal abuse by border agents, inhumane detention conditions, active deception about their expulsion and the whereabouts of their family members, and unsafe returns that put people at great risk of harm. Of those interviewed by PHR, 11 people were forcibly separated from family members by U.S. officials and eight people were separated from family members they traveled with who were not their biological children, but for whom they were the primary guardian (such as younger minor siblings or nieces and nephews). Asylum seekers reported that U.S. border officials also deceived and actively provided false information to them, such as telling people they were being reunited with family members while actually separating them.
These accounts reflect how the Title 42 order both directly and indirectly separated families without considering the best interests of the child during the separation process, increasing the trauma and vulnerability of family members. Family support is a critical resilience factor for children and separations have been associated with long-term adverse mental health outcomes.
After being expelled across the U.S.-Mexico border, asylum seekers interviewed by PHR reported that they had been assaulted, kidnapped, extorted, and subjected to physical and sexual violence in Mexico. Interviewees reported that they did not have access to state protection from Mexican authorities, and several were even robbed or extorted by Mexican authorities after they were expelled from the United States.
"U.S. policy is ensnaring people in a deadly dilemma, where they are unsafe in their home country, unsafe in Mexico, and yet unable to seek safety at the U.S. border," said Michele Heisler, MD, MPA, report co-author, medical director at PHR, and professor of internal medicine and public health at the University of Michigan. "From a public health perspective, the Title 42 order was junk science from the moment it began. Rather than protect anyone's health, these expulsions accelerate a health and human rights emergency in Mexican border cities.
"Since the beginning of the pandemic and with the rise of new COVID-19 variants, the best way to protect public health remains vaccines, masking, and social distancing - not a targeted and unscientific ban on asylum seekers," said Dr. Heisler.
A letter from public health experts, including Dr. Heisler, to the Biden administration in July 2021 reiterated that the latest scientific knowledge regarding transmission of the virus that causes COVID-19 did not support expulsion as a public health measure, and that the order undermined trust in the CDC itself as a scientific body.
"The United States has the means and the know-how to process asylum seekers safely at the border and to welcome them with dignity, but every day the Biden administration instead chooses to condemn people to kidnappings, extortion, and violence in northern Mexico," said Cynthia Pompa, report co-author and asylum program officer at PHR. "Asylum seekers told us searing accounts of being separated from family members, brutalized by U.S. officials, and abused by Mexican authorities. Title 42 expulsions are nothing short of a human rights catastrophe and, by continuing them, the Biden administration is responsible for devastating harms to children and adults who are fleeing persecution."
"U.S. officials actively deceived people about their expulsion and family separation, while denying them access to basic information, such as where they were being transported, where their family members were, and what was happening to them," said Kathryn Hampton, report co-author and senior asylum officer at PHR. "Title 42 expulsions are a flagrant violation of people's rights under both the U.S. Constitution and multiple international treaties. With each passing day, the Biden administration is trampling on its professed commitment to science-based policymaking and a humane immigration system. The administration must stop playing politics and start saving lives: Revoke the Title 42 order now."
"Our findings make it clear that the Biden administration's recent announcement that it will expedite removal of some asylum-seeking families from the United States without a hearing in front of a judge will only increase the vulnerability and risks of harm for children and adults. This change will result in wrongful removals and undermines efforts to create a humane, safe, rights-respecting asylum system," said Hampton.
PHR is calling on the Biden administration and the CDC to immediately nullify the Title 42 expulsion order and restore access to asylum at the border by working with public health experts to ensure that border COVID-19 screening guidelines are implemented in line with scientific evidence and U.S. asylum laws and treaties. The PHR report provides detailed recommendations for the CDC, Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Congress, and government of Mexico to safeguard the health and human rights of people who seek asylum in the United States.
Read the full report here.
PHR was founded in 1986 on the idea that health professionals, with their specialized skills, ethical duties, and credible voices, are uniquely positioned to investigate the health consequences of human rights violations and work to stop them. PHR mobilizes health professionals to advance health, dignity, and justice and promotes the right to health for all.
"Let’s be clear — this proposal isn’t a compromise, it’s a capitulation," said one progressive lawmaker in the US House.
Fury on the progressive left and among lawmakers who opposed such "capitulation" to the Republican Party erupted overnight after a handful of Senate Democrats joined with their GOP counterparts in a procedural vote on Sunday night to end the government shutdown without gaining any meaningful concessions.
With the support of eight members of the Democratic caucus—Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, Dick Durbin of Illinois, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Tim Kaine of Virginia, Angus King of Maine, Jacky Rosen of Nevada, and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire—Republicans in the upper chamber secured the necessary 60 votes needed to pass a cloture vote that paves the way for a deal critics warn does nothing to save Americans from soaring healthcare premiums unleashed due to the GOP spending bill passed earlier this year and signed into law by President Donald Trump.
“It is thoroughly disappointing that, while most Americans overwhelmingly oppose Republicans’ horrific budget, support the fight to curtail Trump’s authoritarianism, and want to protect healthcare, some Democrats failed to hold the line, and squandered an opportunity to score a popular and decisive win for the American people," said Lisa Gilbert, co-director of the progressive watchdog group Public Citizen.
The deal will combine three separate funding measures into a single stopgap bill that will reopen the government and keep it funded through the end of January of 2026, but contains no restoration of Medicaid funding, fails to curb Trump rescissions that have devastated government agencies and programs, and does nothing to address Affordable Care Act subsidies other than a "meaningless" promised vote to extend them within 40 days—a vote nearly sure to fail in the Senate and likely not even taken up in the US House, controlled by Republicans.
"What the election showed is that the American people want us to stand up to Trumpism—to his war against working people, to his authoritarianism. That is what people wanted, but tonight that is not what happened." —Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)
"How absolutely pathetic," declared the Justice Democrats, an advocacy group that focuses on assisting progressive challengers willing to take on more establishment lawmakers in office. "Your voters expect you to hold the line for their basic healthcare and food benefits. This is just surrender. Every Senate Democrat that joined Republicans to pass this sold the American people out and we should make sure they have no future in public office."
"Let’s be clear — this proposal isn’t a compromise, it’s a capitulation," said Rep. Jonathan L. Jackson (D-Ill.). "Millions would lose their health coverage, and millions more would face skyrocketing premiums. The Senate should reject this misguided plan. In the House, my vote will be HELL NO."
The original Dem demands were:1) Permanent ACA subsidies2) Medicaid funding restored3) No more blank checks for the regime (rescission)They dropped Medicaid immediately. Went silent on rescission. Cut back to 1 year of subsidies on Friday. And surrendered today.The Senate Democrats!
— Ezra Levin ❌👑 (@ezralevin.bsky.social) November 9, 2025 at 9:29 PM
For Gilbert, the shutdown exhibited exactly "how far Republicans will go to demonstrate subservience to their authoritarian leader, even at the expense of the most basic needs of ordinary Americans. Republicans have destroyed affordable healthcare access for millions of Americans, and have allowed the President to weaponize hunger against millions more of our most vulnerable people, all so that they can bully through a budget that’s catapulting us towards a dystopian future of stark inequality."
While the shutdown may come to an end this week, Gilbert said it remains imperative that "everyone who cares about the well-being of Americans to use all the leverage they have to push back on Trump’s authoritarianism and his cannibalizing of the basic needs of Americans for the benefit of his corporate donors and billionaire friends."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who, like Sen. King of Maine, caucuses with the Democrats, called it a "very bad night" as he condemned the eight members of the caucus for making a "very, very bad vote" at a time when the political winds and the moral argument were clearly on the side of holding the line.
"What it does, first of all," said Sanders in a statement following the vote, "is it raises healthcare premiums for over 20 million Americans by doubling, and in some cases tripling or quadrupling. People can't afford that when we are already paying the highest prices in the world for healthcare. Number two, it paves the way for 15 million people to be thrown off of Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act," citing a statistic that indicates over 50,000 people "will die unnecessarily each year" due to lack of adequate healthcare coverage.
"All of that was done," continued Sanders, "to give a $1 trillion in tax breaks to the top 1%." In a political context, Sanders noted that last week's electoral wins in numerous races across the country showed that voters are in the mood to reward lawmakers who stand up to President Donald Trump and his allies in Congress, rather than give in to them.
"What the election showed is that the American people want us to stand up to Trumpism—to his war against working people, to his authoritarianism," he said. "That is what people wanted, but tonight that is not what happened."
Democrats in the House, who had backed their Democratic colleagues for holding the line over 40 days in the Senate, fumed over the failure to keep going.
"Americans have endured the pain of the longest government shutdown in history for a 'deal' that guarantees nothing on healthcare," said Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.). "If Republicans wanted to vote to extend subsidies, they would’ve done it already. Capitulating is unacceptable."
"What Senate Dems who voted for this horseshit deal did was fuck over all the hard work people put in to Tuesday’s elections." —Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.)
Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Senate Minority Leader, voted "no" on the deal. Still, it's widely understood he was the driving force behind putting the agreement together and privately supported the eight lawmakers—none of whom are facing reelection in 2026—to cross over.
"Schumer voting 'no' for a shutdown deal he facilitated every step of the way," noted journalist Ken Klippenstein. "Just trying to keep his hands clean. Don't fall for it."
In the wake of the vote, others called for Schumer to resign or be primaried for capitulating to deliver practically nothing.
The surrender by Democrats in the Senate facilitated by Schumer, opined journalist Krystal Ball, "perfectly encapsulates why centrists are the problem for the party both substantively and electorally. After romping nationwide victories, the worst members of the Democratic caucus decided to abandon the healthcare fight, which hurts Americans and demobilizes their own base."
"This president will stop at nothing to take food out of the mouths of hungry kids across America. Soulless," said Democratic Sen. Patty Murray.
President Donald Trump's Agriculture Department on Saturday threatened to penalize states that don't "immediately undo" steps taken to pay out full Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits for November following a Supreme Court order that temporarily allowed the administration to withhold billions of dollars of aid.
In a memo, the US Department of Agriculture warned that "failure to comply" with the administration's directive "may result in USDA taking various actions, including cancellation of the federal share of state administrative costs and holding states liable for any overissuances that result from the noncompliance."
Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.), the top Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee, said in a statement that it appears the Trump administration is "demanding that food assistance be taken away from the households that have already received it."
"They would rather go door to door, taking away people's food, than do the right thing and fully fund SNAP for November so that struggling veterans, seniors, and children can keep food on the table," said Craig.
The USDA memo came after Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson temporarily blocked a lower court ruling that had required the Trump administration to distribute SNAP funds in full amid the ongoing government shutdown. SNAP is funded by the federal government and administered by states.
The administration took steps to comply with the district court order while also appealing it, sparking widespread confusion. Some states, including Massachusetts and California, moved quickly to distribute full benefits late last week. Some reported waking up Friday with full benefits in their accounts.
"In the dead of night, the Trump administration ordered states to stop issuing SNAP benefits," Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said in response to the Saturday USDA memo. "This president will stop at nothing to take food out of the mouths of hungry kids across America. Soulless."
Under the Trump administration's plan to only partially fund SNAP benefits for November, the average recipient will see a 61% cut to aid and millions will see their benefits reduced to zero, according to one analysis.
Crystal FitzSimons, president of the Food Research & Action Center, stressed in a statement that "the Trump administration all along has had both the power and the authority to ensure that SNAP benefits continued uninterrupted, but chose not to act and to actively fight against providing this essential support."
"Meanwhile, millions of Americans already struggling to make ends meet have been left scrambling to feed their families," said FitzSimons. "Families and states are experiencing undue stress and anxiety with confusing messages coming from the administration. The Trump administration’s decision to continue to fight against providing SNAP benefits furthers the unprecedented humanitarian crisis driven by the loss of the nation’s most important and effective anti-hunger program."
"Trump said he’d leave abortion care up to the states. Well, this latest scheme makes it crystal clear: A de facto nationwide abortion ban has been his plan all along," said Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden.
Congressional Republicans are reportedly trying to insert anti-abortion language into government funding legislation as the shutdown continues, with the GOP and President Donald Trump digging in against a clean extension of Affordable Care Act tax credits as insurance premiums surge.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, sounded the alarm on Saturday about what he characterized as the latest Republican sneak attack on reproductive rights.
"Republicans said they might vote to lower Americans’ healthcare costs, but only if we agree to include a backdoor national abortion ban," Wyden said in remarks on the Senate floor.
The senator was referring to a reported GOP demand that any extension of ACA subsidies must include language that bars the tax credits from being used to purchase plans that cover abortion care.
But as the health policy organization KFF has noted, the ACA already has "specific language that applies Hyde Amendment restrictions to the use of premium tax credits, limiting them to using federal funds to pay for abortions only in cases that endanger the life of the woman or that are a result of rape or incest."
"The ACA also explicitly allows states to bar all plans participating in the state marketplace from covering abortions, which 25 states have done since the ACA was signed into law in 2010," according to KFF.
Wyden said Saturday—which marked day 39 of the shutdown—that "Republicans are spinning a tale that the government is funding abortion."
"It's not," Wyden continued. "What Republicans are talking about putting on the table amounts to nothing short of a backdoor national abortion ban. Under this plan, Republicans could weaponize federal funding for any organization that does anything related to women’s reproductive healthcare. They could also weaponize the tax code by revoking non-profit status for these organizations."
"The possibilities are endless, but the results are the same: a complete and total restriction on abortion, courtesy of Republicans," the senator added. "Trump said he'd leave abortion care up to the states. Well, this latest scheme makes it crystal clear: A de facto nationwide abortion ban has been his plan all along."
The GOP effort to attach anti-abortion provisions to government funding legislation adds yet another hurdle in negotiations to end the shutdown, which the Trump administration has used to throttle federal nutrition assistance and accelerate its purge of the federal workforce.
Trump is also pushing a proposal that would differently distribute federal funds that would have otherwise gone toward the enhanced ACA tax credits, which are set to expire at the end of the year.
"It sounds like it could be a plan for health accounts that could be used for insurance that doesn’t cover preexisting conditions, which could create a death spiral in ACA plans that do," said Larry Levitt, executive vice president for health policy at KFF.