"Mexicans are deeply frustrated with immigrants after a year of heightened migration from Central America through the country, according to a survey conducted by The Washington Post and Mexico’s Reforma newspaper."On paper, Mexico has tough laws against illegal immigration - much tougher than the USA. Plus, Mexico doesn't maintain a massive welfare state to subsidize anyone entering their country illegally.
MEXICO’S IMMIGRATION LAW: General Law on Population (2010)
– Immigration officials must “ensure” that “immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance” and for their dependents. (Article 34) IE: No welfare.
– Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets “the equilibrium of the national demographics,” when foreigners are deemed detrimental to “economic or national interests,” when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when “they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy.” (Article 37) IE: Race-based.
– Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73) IE: No sanctuary cities.
– A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91). IE: Visas and work permits.
– Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116) IE: No stolen identities.
– Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118) IE: No revolving door.
– Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). IE: No wink & nod to over-stayed visas.
– “A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally.” (Article 123) IE: We'll come back to this one.
• The Mexican constitution expressly forbids non-citizens to participate in the country’s political life.
Non-citizens are forbidden to participate in demonstrations or express opinions in public about domestic politics. Article 9 states, “only citizens of the Republic may do so to take part in the political affairs of the country.” Article 33 is unambiguous: “Foreigners may not in any way participate in the political affairs of the country.”
• The Mexican constitution denies fundamental property rights to foreigners.
If foreigners wish to have certain property rights, they must renounce the protection of their own governments or risk confiscation. Foreigners are forbidden to own land in Mexico within 100 kilometers of land borders or within 50 kilometers of the coast.
You get the point.
So, what explains the numerous, massive migration caravans in recent years snaking their way along the shadows of the Sierra Madre up from Central America to the USA southern border? We all know the obvious answer by heart: no effective wall, an over-whelmed border patrol, abused asylum laws of the USA, coupled to the magnet of a generous welfare system in the USA - aided and abetted by the wink-wink from Mexican authorities when not applying their own tough laws against illegal immigration. This decades long dysfunction is perpetuated by their allies in a do-nothing U.S. Congress who refuse to fix a broken immigration system.
Although the Democrat-controlled House has time to squabble about a worthless resolution to condemn Trump tweets.
There are two bright spots along this front. The first one, mentioned above, is the Mexican people themselves.
Even Mexicans Are Sick Of Illegal Aliens Invading Their Country
"More than 6 in 10 Mexicans say migrants are a burden on their country because they take jobs and benefits that should belong to Mexicans. A 55 percent majority supports deporting migrants who travel through Mexico to reach the United States.'Antipathy?' Is that a WaPo dog whistle calling Mexicans racist?
Those findings defy the perception that Mexico — a country that has sent millions of its own migrants to the United States, sending billions of dollars in remittances — is sympathetic to the surge of Central Americans. Instead, the data suggests Mexicans have turned against the migrants transiting through their own country, expressing antipathy that would be familiar to many supporters of President Trump north of the border."
The second is the Trump administration moves to restrict asylum access, aiming to curb Central American migration.
From Nick Miroff, Arelis R. Hernández, andKevin Sieff at (surprise, again) The Washington Post:
"U.S. authorities will sharply restrict access to the nation’s asylum system for anyone who did not seek protection from other countries before crossing the southern border, according to a joint statement from the Department of Homeland Security and the Justice Department. The policy shift could result in the Trump administration deporting most aslyum-seekers back to their nations of origin, largely with the hope of discouraging migrants from trying to reach the United States.But, of course. Of course. Because executive plenary power granted by the Constitution and Congressional statute to control our borders really means what any lawyer with a black robe & gavel says it means.
Attorney General William P. Barr said that the United States is a “generous country,” but that its immigration court system — run by the Justice Department — is being “completely overwhelmed” by applicants crossing the southern border.
Barr said the change would curb what he called “forum shopping by economic migrants,” referring to what immigration restrictionists say is a growing trend of refuge-seekers trying to reach their most-desired destination rather than the first place that provides a safe haven.
Critics say the proposed changes are an attempt to rescind core principles of U.S. immigration law that protect vulnerable asylum seekers from being sent back to persecution in their homelands or other countries. The administration said it will publish an “interim final rule” Tuesday that will promptly take effect.
The move brought immediate threats of legal challenge; the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) contains broad provisions that allow foreigners who reach U.S. soil to apply for asylum if they claim a fear of persecution in their native countries."
