So as I understand it, the new rule would preclude asylum claims at the southern border unless they were first made in another country, subject to some exceptions. I'm not going to pretend to know what the arguments are for whether this is legal under US law or consistent with international norms, though I'm sort of assuming it probably isn't at least in the latter case (and for reasonable humanitarian reasons).
With that said, it does seem to me that it is not unreasonable to infer that if a person can pass through over 1000 miles of Mexican territory, and not find a stable place along the way where they were not subject to alleged persecution from which they fled, they may well be unprotected/inadmissible economic migrants rather than political refugees.
Reactions?
With that said, it does seem to me that it is not unreasonable to infer that if a person can pass through over 1000 miles of Mexican territory, and not find a stable place along the way where they were not subject to alleged persecution from which they fled, they may well be unprotected/inadmissible economic migrants rather than political refugees.
Reactions?
