Part II in a Series, Part I can be found here.
The Mexican Constitution establishes the fundamental principles governing immigration in Mexico. The Ley de Migración (Migration Law) is the most significant piece of federal legislation addressing immigration matters in Mexico, while the Reglamento de la Ley de Migración (Regulations of the Migration Law) provides detailed rules and procedures for implementing the Ley de Migración. Additionally, the Ley sobre Refugiados, Protección Complementaria y Asilo Político (Law on Refugees, Complementary Protection and Political Asylum) governs asylum procedures and defines who qualifies for refugee status in Mexico, including an expanded definition based on the Cartagena Declaration, which is a non-binding regional document that broadened the definition of a refugee in Latin America to include those fleeing violence, internal conflicts, and human rights violations, in addition to persecution based on race, religion, nationality, social group, or political opinion. [1]
The National Migration Policy outlines the Mexican government’s strategic decisions for addressing migration, encompassing Mexico as a country of origin, transit, destination, and return. [2][3] International treaties also shape Mexico’s immigration framework, as the country has signed various agreements and conventions related to immigration, including the Global Compact for Migration and the Cartagena Declaration, which impact its immigration policy. [4][5] The U.S.-Mexico Bicentennial Framework for Security, Public Health, and Safe Communities supports cooperation between the two countries on border security, combating cross-border crimes such as migrant smuggling and human trafficking, and managing migration flows. [6]
Additionally, the Interagency Commission for Comprehensive Assistance in Migration Matters was created to temporarily shift responsibility for migration management from the Secretaría de Gobernación (SEGOB) to a commission composed of multiple government agencies, as outlined in the working paper Institutional and Legal Migratory Framework of the United Mexican States by Ana Paulina Ornelas Cruz and María Jesús Mora under the Migration Policy Institute. [7]
The key institutions involved in migration governance in Mexico include the Instituto Nacional de Migración (INM), which is responsible for executing, controlling, and supervising migration matters, including regulating the entry, stay, and exit of foreign nationals. The Secretaría de Gobernación (SEGOB) plays a role in formulating and overseeing Mexico’s migration policy, while the Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores (SRE) is involved in promoting and subscribing to international instruments on migration and managing visa issuance. The Comisión Mexicana de Ayuda a Refugiados (COMAR) is responsible for the asylum process in Mexico. [8][9]
The Instituto Nacional de Migración (INM) is the body of the Mexican government that controls and supervises migration within the country. It is responsible for regulating the entry, stay, and exit of both foreign and Mexican citizens in Mexico, monitoring compliance with immigration laws, conducting migrant interdiction operations, and performing biometric screenings at detention centers. The Comisión Mexicana de Ayuda a Refugiados (COMAR), Mexico’s Commission for Refugee Assistance, is responsible for the asylum process and related protection measures. COMAR receives, analyzes, and resolves applications for refugee status, provides complementary protection to individuals who do not meet the refugee definition but still face danger in their home countries, and works to ensure the protection and integration of asylum seekers and refugees in Mexico. Both the INM and COMAR fall under the Secretaría de Gobernación (Ministry of the Interior). [10][11]
Other relevant agencies include the Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores (Ministry of Foreign Affairs), which is responsible for granting citizenship through naturalization and manages communications between the INM and Mexican embassies and consulates, according to the Baker McKenzie Resource Hub on Global Immigration and Mobility Handbook: Mexico. [12] The National Guard has also been deployed for migration enforcement, leading to increased migrant apprehensions. [13] Additionally, Child Protection Authorities are tasked with designing and implementing programs and policies that address the protection needs of migrant and asylum-seeking children. [14]
Recent shifts and reforms in Mexico’s migration system include a focus on human rights and family reunification, as the Mexican Ministry of the Interior has emphasized special programs centered on family unity and upholding immigrants’ rights. Mexico has also implemented changes to ensure all foreigners in the country have legal authorization to stay and may engage in activities permitted to residents. In response to a large influx of migrants from Central and South America, authorities have increased migrant interdiction operations and added visa requirements for certain nationalities. Mexico’s Commission for the Aid of Refugees (COMAR) has significantly expanded its capacity to process asylum applications, supported by the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). [15]
Additionally, Mexico has strengthened international cooperation with the United States to manage migration flows and combat cross-border crimes, including migrant smuggling and human trafficking. [16][17] Pending legislation and potential changes include the impact of U.S. policy shifts under the Trump administration, which took office in January 2025. The administration has implemented increased deportations and reinstated policies affecting migration flows. Mexico has increased staff at its consulates in the U.S. to assist Mexican migrants facing removal, and the Sheinbaum government has worked to improve Mexico’s capacity to receive and reintegrate Mexican deportees while negotiating enforcement cooperation with President Trump. [18] Additionally, the U.S. Congress has the potential to impact U.S.-Mexico migration cooperation through legislative actions. [19][20]
National Institute of Migration (INM): The INM, under the Secretariat of the Interior (SEGOB), is Mexico’s primary authority for migration management. It oversees the processing and resolution of entry, stay, and exit of foreign nationals, enforces immigration laws, and maintains the National Registry of Foreigners.
Federal Executive: Sets the overarching framework of immigration policy, including categories of stay, regulatory requirements, and conditions for foreign nationals seeking entry or residency. The executive branch determines national policy priorities regarding admission, stay, and labor authorization.
Federal Law: The Migration Law and its Regulations form the core legal structure governing immigration. They outline entry requirements, conditions of stay, visa categories, and penalties for non-compliance. [21]
Federal Policy Focus: Federal immigration policy primarily emphasizes regulating and managing migration flows, including establishing admission standards and defining categories such as visitor, temporary resident, and permanent resident. [22]
Advocacy and Service Provision: States and municipalities play growing roles in advocating for migrant populations, particularly in areas of social protection and local integration. [23]
Support Services: Local governments may provide services such as issuing local ID documents, offering legal orientation, facilitating access to education and health services, and supporting initiatives related to remittances and community development.
Local Initiatives: Some municipalities—Mexico City being a key example—have introduced proactive programs to support migrant inclusion, including financial assistance, specialized training for public servants on migrant rights, and incorporating migrant needs into city planning. Mexico City’s government has provided support to approximately 500 migrants and people in transient situations. [24]
Limited Direct Immigration Decision-Making: Despite expanded local involvement in migrant support, states and municipalities do not have authority to decide on immigration status, entry, or residency. These functions remain exclusively under federal jurisdiction through the INM and other federal entities. [23]
Mexico’s border control and security measures are carried out primarily by the National Migration Institute (INM), which plays a key role in migrant interdiction, processing, and enforcement, increasing operations along transport routes, improving border crossing infrastructure, and implementing mobile highway checkpoints. INM also utilizes biometric screening for migrants at detention centers, using equipment provided by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Additionally, INM has aimed to improve the professionalism of its agents and enhance coordination with federal, state, and local security forces, though concerns about corruption and abuse of migrants persist. [25]
Northern Border (with the U.S.): Mexico collaborates with the United States on various border security measures, including joint operations and information sharing to combat cross-border crime like migrant smuggling and drug trafficking. Mexico has increased its enforcement efforts along its northern border, leading to a decline in migrant encounters in the U.S. Mexico has focused on disrupting smuggling operations, including targeting cartels and transnational criminal organizations involved in illegal migration and drug trafficking. Modernization of ports of entry through investment in new technology and infrastructure aims to improve security and facilitate legitimate trade and travel. [26][27][28][29]
Southern Border (with Guatemala and Belize): Mexico has enhanced its security presence along its southern border, including the establishment of naval bases on rivers and security cordons north of its borders with Guatemala and Belize. Mexico utilizes drone surveillance in its border regions, contributing to monitoring and security efforts. [30]
Concerns and Challenges: There are several concerns and challenges related to Mexico’s migration policies and enforcement. Human rights reports of mistreatment of migrants have increased, raising human rights concerns, especially following the deployment of Mexico’s National Guard for migration enforcement and the practice of busing migrants from northern to southern Mexico. Increased enforcement and restricted access to humanitarian visas have caused migrants to resort to more dangerous routes and rely heavily on smugglers. [31]
Mexico operates a large immigration detention system, with several dozen detention centers, sometimes referred to as “migration stations.” These facilities have housed hundreds of thousands of people annually, with numbers exceeding 300,000 in 2022. Despite legal provisions for brief stays and due process, migrants often experience lengthy detentions in overcrowded and unsanitary conditions. Mexican immigration law considers irregular migratory status an administrative infraction, not a crime. However, the system still allows detention for those without proper documents. Recent reforms in 2020 aim to prohibit the detention of migrant children, shifting responsibility for their care to family development agencies. [32][33][34]
Mexico actively deports irregular migrants, often under pressure from the U.S. Mexico has been a significant deportation actor in the region. According to the Migration Policy Institute, Mexico has at times surpassed the United States in apprehensions of Central American migrants, though direct deportation comparisons vary by year and methodology. Guatemala reported receiving over 25,100 deportees from Mexico in 2023, demonstrating Mexico’s active role in migration enforcement. There are concerns that in some instances, migrants are pressured into accepting voluntary returns despite risks they may face in their home countries. Mexico has a program, “Mexico embraces you,” to support Mexican citizens deported from the U.S., offering some reintegration assistance. [35][36][37]
Mexico has developed programs to protect its nationals abroad and support those deported from the United States, though implementation faces significant challenges. The “Mexico Embraces You” (México Te Abraza) program provides reintegration assistance to Mexican citizens deported from the U.S., offering some support for documentation, transportation, and access to services. [38] However, as of early 2025, despite initial expectations of mass deportations under the Trump administration, the program has received relatively few returnees, with President Sheinbaum noting in March 2025 that “’Mexico Embraces You’ has received very few people.” [39]
The Mexican government maintains an extensive consular network in the United States—50 consular offices as of 2025—to provide legal assistance and support to Mexican nationals facing removal proceedings. [40] In anticipation of increased deportations under the Trump administration, Mexico increased staffing at consulates to assist Mexican migrants, with the Sheinbaum government working to improve Mexico’s capacity to receive and reintegrate deportees. [41] Between January 20 and March 3, 2025, Mexico received 19,663 returnees, of which 15,611 were Mexican nationals and 4,052 were foreign nationals. [42]
For Mexican nationals residing in the United States, the Mexican government has prioritized protecting the approximately 436,000 individuals shielded from deportation under DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) and ensuring that long-established Mexican residents are not targeted for removal. [43] Mexico’s diplomatic strategy has emphasized these protections in bilateral negotiations, recognizing that the welfare of Mexican diaspora communities represents a core national interest affecting millions of families across both countries.
Mexico has faced calls to implement and expand community-based alternatives to detention, particularly for vulnerable migrants, including children and families. Civil society organizations advocate for greater access to detention centers to provide legal and humanitarian assistance. Mexico also has a refugee system, and asylum applications have significantly increased in recent years, demonstrating a legal pathway to remain in the country for some irregular migrants. However, the refugee system is reportedly overwhelmed and underfunded, leading to delays and challenges for asylum seekers. [44][45]
Key considerations include the fact that Mexico’s migration policies and practices are significantly influenced by U.S. pressure and enforcement efforts, according to Congress.gov. While Mexico aims to uphold migrants’ rights, implementation of these protections can be inconsistent, leading to reported abuses and challenges in accessing services and legal processes. The “Remain in Mexico” (MPP) policy, while currently terminated, highlights the impact of U.S. policies on migrants in Mexico and the strain it places on Mexican resources and humanitarian capacity. [46][47]
Alignment with Human Rights Standards: Mexico recognizes a broader definition of refugee than some other countries, including those facing “generalized violence; foreign aggression; internal conflicts; massive violations of human rights; and other circumstances leading to a serious disturbance of public order.” [48] Non-refoulement is also observed, as Mexico is bound by the policy of non-refoulement, which prohibits the return of individuals to a country where they face a risk of persecution, torture, or other serious human rights violations. Mexico adopted the UN Global Compact for Migration, signifying its commitment to safe, orderly, and regular migration pathways. Additionally, Mexico has focused on protecting migrant children and adolescents, implementing stronger penalties for those involved in crimes against them, and reinforcing strategies for the reintegration of returning Mexican families. [49][50][51]
Potential Conflicts with Human Rights Standards: Conflict with human rights standards includes enforcement and deterrence tactics, as Mexico’s increased enforcement measures, including the deployment of its National Guard for migration enforcement, have been associated with reports of migrant mistreatment. Arbitrary detention is also a concern, as immigration detention centers are often overcrowded, unsanitary, and dangerous, raising concerns about arbitrary detention and lack of due process, according to Human Rights Watch. [52]
Barriers to asylum persist, with asylum seekers, particularly those at the southern border, facing difficulties accessing protection, experiencing delays in processing applications, and often being pressured to accept voluntary returns despite potential risks in their home countries. Migrants in transit through Mexico are vulnerable to violence and exploitation by criminal groups, and human rights organizations have documented numerous cases of kidnapping, extortion, and sexual abuse, according to Human Rights Watch. [53] Reports indicate that migrants face discrimination, threats, physical violence, and sexual assault, sometimes perpetrated by or with the complicity of Mexican state agents, according to Human Rights First. [54]
The Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance (COMAR) is overwhelmed by the growing number of asylum applications, leading to backlogs and prolonged waiting periods in precarious conditions for asylum seekers, according to Human Rights Watch. Immigration checkpoints throughout Mexico, despite a May 18, 2022 Supreme Court ruling deeming them unconstitutional and discriminatory, continue to operate because Congress has not removed the unconstitutional provision from the law. These checkpoints disproportionately affect Indigenous and Afro-Mexican people. [55]
External Pressures: External pressures include US policies, as Mexico’s immigration policies are heavily influenced by pressure from the United States, particularly regarding border enforcement and restricting access to asylum at the US southern border. [56]
This report analyzes Mexico’s immigration policy framework as of February 2026, drawing on data and developments through late 2025 and early 2026. Given the rapidly evolving nature of migration policy, particularly in the context of changing U.S. administrations and bilateral negotiations, some statistics and policy positions reflect very recent developments. Where possible, we have relied on official government sources, established research institutions, and credible reporting to document recent trends. Readers should note that migration statistics, enforcement patterns, and bilateral agreements continue to evolve, and figures cited for 2025 represent the most current data available at the time of writing but may be subject to revision as official annual reports are published
Mexico’s immigration policy framework in early 2026 exists at a critical inflection point, shaped by developments throughout 2025 that fundamentally altered migration governance in the Americas. The most visible manifestation of this transformation emerged in data from the second half of 2025: migrant encounters at the U.S.-Mexico border fell by 93.3% from February to July 2025 compared to the same period in 2024, according to Congressional Research Service analysis. [57] This dramatic reduction did not result from improved conditions in sending countries, expanded legal pathways, or enhanced asylum processing capacity. Rather, it emerged from what Human Rights Watch characterizes as Mexico’s “intensified efforts to prevent migrants from traveling through Mexico to reach the US,” including the deployment of more than 31,000 soldiers for immigration enforcement operations and an unprecedented expansion of detention infrastructure. [58]
The current enforcement architecture operates through multiple pressure points that funnel migrants into increasingly precarious situations. Mexico’s cooperation with the United States intensified significantly after President Claudia Sheinbaum took office in October 2024. By early 2025, this cooperation took concrete forms: the deployment of 10,000 additional National Guard troops to border regions in February 2025, [59] the acceptance of thousands of deportees from the United States in the first half of 2025—with President Sheinbaum reporting 19,663 returnees between January 20 and March 3 alone [60]—and Mexican authorities apprehending more than 1.2 million migrants throughout 2024. [61]
This enforcement surge operates through immigration checkpoints that the Mexican Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional in May 2022 for disproportionately targeting Indigenous and Afro-Mexican people, yet which continue to function because Congress has not removed the invalidated provision from law. [62] The human cost of this system manifests in what Human Rights Watch documents as routine targeting of migrants and asylum seekers “by criminal groups and Mexican officials for serious abuses, including sexual assault, armed robbery, kidnapping, and extortion.” [63] An International Rescue Committee survey found that one in four migrants reported having been kidnapped and experienced severe violence and abuse. [64] The organization warns that “children face threats of sexual abuse, kidnapping and gang recruitment, while women are especially vulnerable to criminal groups involved in human trafficking and exploitation.” [65]
Immigration detention centers, where Mexican authorities detained at least 318,660 people in 2022, [66] remain “notoriously overcrowded, unsanitary, and dangerous.” [67] On March 27, 2023, 40 migrants died in a fire at a detention center in Ciudad Juárez after staff failed to release them from their locked cell. [68] Security camera footage showed immigration agents fleeing the facility as smoke filled the detention area, without attempting to unlock cells or evacuate detainees. [69] The tragedy highlighted systemic failures in Mexico’s immigration detention infrastructure, including overcrowding, lack of safety protocols, and inadequate staff training. [70]
Civil society organizations report that individuals in detention face “threats and degrading treatment, spoiled food, generally bad conditions, and sensory deprivation, deprivation of vital needs, and difficulty sleeping due to lights being turned on full time.” [71] Despite 2020 reforms prohibiting the detention of migrant children, implementation remains inconsistent, and the fundamental conditions of detention have not substantially improved.
While enforcement capacity has expanded dramatically, Mexico’s asylum infrastructure faces a severe crisis of capacity and resources. [72] The Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance (COMAR) resolved just under 26,000 cases in 2023 despite receiving more than 140,000 applications which is the highest number ever. [73] This dramatic gap between applications and processing capacity has created multi-year backlogs, leaving asylum seekers in prolonged precarity. [74] Although the system continues to function, the resource constraints and overwhelming demand render it increasingly unable to meet its protection mandate.
Between January and June 2025, 42,000 more migrants applied for asylum, with 75% being Cubans and Venezuelans—a demographic shift reflecting both U.S. policy changes and deteriorating conditions in sending countries. [75] This surge occurs as COMAR’s 2025 budget of 47.9 million pesos ($2.36 million)—already significantly smaller than the enforcement agency INM’s budget—was cut by 6.5%. [76]
The situation worsened when the Trump administration cancelled Migration and Refugee Assistance funding that had provided more than $163 million from fiscal year 2018 through 2023 to support asylum capacity in Mexico. [77] As the Congressional Research Service reports, these cuts “caused UNHCR to scale back operations in Mexico” and ended U.S. assistance to nonprofit organizations that had supported migrants stranded after the cancellation of CBP One appointments. [78] The International Rescue Committee notes that “significant reductions in funding for migration and humanitarian response projects deeply affected local organizations working on the front lines to support people in transit throughout Mexico.” [79]
Shelters designed to house migrants for three days now support individuals for over a month, operating far beyond intended capacity. [80] In border cities, essential services such as health care and education are scarce, leaving service providers overwhelmed, and growing numbers of people—particularly families with children—are sleeping on the streets, exposing them to violence and exploitation. [81]
The enforcement cooperation between Mexico and the United States represents more than bilateral coordination; it signals a fundamental reorientation of migration governance in the Americas. According to the International Rescue Committee, 66% of refugees, asylum seekers, and migrants in Mexico now seek to stay rather than continue to the United States—a 61% increase from the previous year. [82] This shift did not emerge from Mexico developing robust integration infrastructure or expanding protection capacity. Rather, as IRC emphasizes, it reflects “US policy shifts” that have closed borders and eliminated asylum access, leaving people with no alternative but to attempt to build lives in a country unprepared to receive them. [83]
The human impact is captured in IRC’s January 2025 Rapid Needs Assessment, conducted across five Mexican cities with 243 households representing 618 individuals. The assessment revealed “pressing protection, livelihoods, and basic needs” driven by “recent policy changes and a series of executive orders limiting access to asylum at the border including the removal of the scheduling functionality within the CBP One app.” [84] People interviewed described being left “in limbo” without access to work authorization due to asylum system backlogs, lacking social networks to facilitate employment, and unable to verify credentials or work experience. [85]
For those who do manage to work, conditions are precarious. Labor informality in Mexico stands at 45% nationally and exceeds 69% among young people aged 15 to 29 in Mexico City, forcing migrants into work that is “underpaid, uncontracted, and without the proper protections, leaving them vulnerable to potential exploitation by criminal groups.” [86] UNHCR reports that more than 320,000 households changed homes in 2023 as a means of protecting themselves from crime—an increase of more than 40% compared to previous years—underscoring how violence and insecurity affect not only migrants but also receiving communities. [87]
The current enforcement model creates several trajectories of concern for migrants, refugees, and human rights defenders. First, the resource disparity between enforcement and protection agencies means that as migration pressure continues, the asylum system will face escalating crisis. COMAR’s capacity to process 26,000 cases annually against 140,000 applications creates a mathematical impossibility where most asylum seekers face years-long waits in precarious conditions. During these delays, Human Rights Watch documents how migrants “are routinely targeted for serious abuses, including sexual assault, armed robbery, kidnapping, and extortion.” [98]
Second, the militarization of migration enforcement normalizes practices that violate due process and exacerbate abuse. The deployment of more than 31,000 soldiers for immigration operations places enforcement in the hands of forces trained for combat rather than protection. [99] As Human Rights Watch notes in its submission to the Universal Periodic Review of Mexico, allegations of “extrajudicial killings and other abuses by the armed forces” are rarely effectively investigated by civilian authorities, and “arbitrary detention remains a widespread practice in Mexico and is too often the catalyst for ill-treatment, torture, enforced disappearance and arbitrary executions.” [100]
Third, the enforcement-first approach does not address root causes—economic insecurity, violence, political instability, and climate change—that will continue generating migration pressure regardless of enforcement capacity. The Migration Policy Institute warns of “regional uncertainty over maintaining existing cooperation levels in the face of growing U.S. pressure and escalating demands, especially if irregular migration spikes again in the future.” [101] If economic conditions deteriorate in sending countries, political violence escalates, or climate disasters intensify, the current enforcement architecture will face pressure it cannot sustainably manage through deterrence alone.
Fourth, the reduction in humanitarian funding creates a cascade effect. IRC warns that without “emergency funding to support a response that meets the scale of this crisis,” essential services will continue deteriorating. [102] When shelters operate beyond capacity, when legal services are unavailable, when asylum processing faces multi-year backlogs, migrants face impossible choices: attempt irregular border crossing and risk exploitation by smuggling networks, accept deportation to countries where they face persecution, or remain in Mexico in conditions of chronic insecurity and illegality.
The analysis presented in this report reveals a profound gap between Mexico’s formal legal commitments and operational realities. Mexico’s Constitution, its Migration Law, the Law on Refugees, Complementary Protection and Political Asylum, and its adherence to international conventions all articulate a framework centered on human rights, non-refoulement, and protection of vulnerable populations. The Cartagena Declaration’s expanded refugee definition—covering those fleeing generalized violence, internal conflicts, and massive human rights violations—positions Mexico as a regional leader in protection standards. [103]
Yet implementation tells a different story. Immigration checkpoints operate despite being ruled unconstitutional. Detention centers remain overcrowded and dangerous despite legal provisions for brief stays and due process. Asylum seekers face years-long processing delays despite laws requiring prompt examination of claims. Migrants experience violence by state actors despite constitutional protections against cruel treatment. This gap between framework and implementation is not merely bureaucratic failure—it represents a structural choice to prioritize enforcement over protection, deterrence over due process, and bilateral cooperation over legal obligations.
The path forward requires acknowledging that sustainable migration management cannot rest on coercive economics and militarized enforcement alone. As the Migration Policy Institute recommends, both countries need “transparent, shared border infrastructure” at the Mexico-Guatemala border, coordinated efforts to “combat cross-national migrant smuggling organizations using follow-the-money strategies,” and “sustainable policy commitments that match demands of each government while recognizing legal limitations and institutional capacities.” [104]
More fundamentally, it requires rebuilding Mexico’s asylum infrastructure to meet the protection needs the legal framework promises. This means matching COMAR’s budget and staffing to actual application volumes, implementing genuine alternatives to detention for vulnerable populations, ensuring civilian oversight of military involvement in migration enforcement, and providing integration support—including legal residency and sustainable income sources—for those seeking to remain in Mexico. [105]
For migrants and refugees, the current moment represents increasing instability and uncertainty. Those who survived violence in their home countries, who endured dangerous journeys through multiple countries, who sought protection under international law now find themselves in a system structurally unable to fulfill its stated purpose. They face what the American Civil Liberties Union and partner organizations describe as “abuse, neglect, and unsafe living conditions” in detention, the constant threat of kidnapping and extortion in transit, the impossibility of legal work during multi-year asylum waits, and the risk of deportation to countries where their safety remains at risk. [106]
The choice before policymakers is clear. The current enforcement surge has reduced migrant encounters but at enormous human cost and unsustainable resource allocation. Mexico can use this moment to rebuild protection infrastructure, develop sustainable integration programs, and establish transparent bilateral cooperation mechanisms. Alternatively, the system can continue prioritizing deterrence, leaving in place an architecture incapable of protecting the vulnerable populations for whom Mexico’s laws and international treaties were designed. This choice will define not only Mexican migration policy but also the broader credibility of international protection frameworks in an era of mass displacement.
[1] ICLG, “Corporate Immigration Laws and Regulations: Mexico,” accessed January 13, 2026, https://iclg.com/practice-areas/corporate-immigration-laws-and-regulations/mexico; World Bank, “Mexico Country Profile,” 2023, https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/a9fff55cf4ad70ece073ac185d4e97f4-0050062023/original/WDR2023-UNHCR-Mexico-FINAL.pdf; Ana Paulina González and Rey Koslowski, “Reinforcing a Regional Approach to Managing Irregular Migration: The Role of Mexico in North and Central America,” Wilson Center.
[2] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts,” In Focus, accessed January 13, 2026.
[3] UNHCR, “Mexico,” Global Compact on Refugees, accessed January 13, 2026.
[4] Ana Paulina Ornelas Cruz and María Jesús Mora, “Institutional and Legal Migratory Framework of the United Mexican States,” Migration Policy Institute.
[5] UNHCR, “Mexico,” Global Compact on Refugees.
[6] Migration Policy Institute, “One Year After the U.S.-Mexico Agreement.”
[7] Ornelas Cruz and Mora, “Institutional and Legal Migratory Framework.”
[8] UNHCR, “Mexico,” Global Compact on Refugees.
[9] Migration Policy Institute, “One Year After the U.S.-Mexico Agreement.”
[10] UNHCR, “Mexico,” Global Compact on Refugees.
[11] Baker McKenzie Resource Hub, “Global Immigration and Mobility: Latin America - Mexico: Key Government Agencies,” accessed January 13, 2026.
[12] Baker McKenzie Resource Hub, “Global Immigration and Mobility: Mexico - Key Government Agencies Involving Immigration,” accessed January 13, 2026.
[13] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[14] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[15] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[16] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[17] Ariel G. Ruiz Soto and Micayla Spence, “Tariff Threats, Trump, Sheinbaum, and Migration,” Migration Policy Institute.
[18] Ruiz Soto and Spence, “Tariff Threats, Trump, Sheinbaum, and Migration.”
[19] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico: Evolution of the Bilateral Migration and Security Challenge,” In Focus.
[20] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[21] University at Albany, “Ley de Migración (Migration Law) - English Translation,” accessed January 13, 2026.
[22] Consulate of Mexico, “Services for Foreigners,” accessed January 13, 2026.
[23] Natalia Banulescu-Bogdan and Susan Fratzke, “Understanding Migration Governance from the Local Level Up,” in Migrants and Cities: Stepping Up to the Challenge.
[24] Mayors Migration Council, “How Mexico City Is Preparing for Inclusive Growth,” accessed January 13, 2026.
[25] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[26] U.S. Department of Homeland Security, “Border Security,” accessed January 13, 2026.
[27] U.S. Department of Homeland Security, “Border Security.”
[28] U.S. Customs and Border Protection, “Readout: U.S.-Mexico Meeting on Joint Actions to Further Enhance Border Security.”
[29] U.S. Department of Homeland Security, “Fact Sheet: DHS Continues to Strengthen Border Security, Reduce Irregular Migration,” June 4, 2024.
[30] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[31] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[32] NY1, “AP Top News,” accessed January 13, 2026.
[33] ReliefWeb, “Immigration Detention,” accessed January 13, 2026.
[34] Strauss Center, “Mexico’s Migratory Detention System,” Policy Research Project 207, 2019.
[35] Human Rights Watch, “Mexico: Asylum Seekers Face Abuses at Southern Border,” June 6, 2022.
[36] Context News, “What’s Mexico Doing to Stop Migration to the US?,” accessed January 13, 2026.
[37] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[38] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[39] Washington Office on Latin America, “Weekly U.S.-Mexico Border Update: tariffs, February migration, military role, mass deportation,” March 10, 2025.
[40] Migration Policy Institute, “Amid Tariff Threats, Migration Management Is Key to the Evolving Trump-Sheinbaum Relationship,” May 15, 2025.
[41] Ariel G. Ruiz Soto and Micayla Spence, “Tariff Threats, Trump, Sheinbaum, and Migration,” Migration Policy Institute.
[42] Washington Office on Latin America, “Weekly U.S.-Mexico Border Update,” March 10, 2025.
[43] Migration Policy Institute, “Amid Tariff Threats, Migration Management Is Key to the Evolving Trump-Sheinbaum Relationship,” May 15, 2025.
[44] NBC News, “Mexico Will Stop Holding Migrant Children in Detention, Wins Praise from U.N.”
[45] Border Report, “Mexico to Stop Holding Child Migrants in Detention Centers.”
[46] American Immigration Council, “Migrant Protection Protocols.”
[47] Georgetown Security Studies Review, “A Nation of Immigrants: The Harmful Legacy of ‘Remain in Mexico,’” January 25, 2025.
[48] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[49] Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, “Experts of the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families,” April 2025.
[50] International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research, “Migration and Human Rights in Mexico,” 2024.
[51] World Bank, “Mexico Country Profile,” 2023.
[52] Human Rights Watch, “World Report 2024: Mexico.”
[53] Human Rights Watch, “Mexico: Asylum Seekers Face Abuses at Southern Border.”
[54] Human Rights First, “Remain in Mexico: Unlawful and Ineffective.”
[55] Human Rights Watch, “World Report 2024: Mexico.”
[56] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Immigration Control Efforts.”
[57] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Migration Control Efforts,” In Focus IF10215, updated September 10, 2025.
[58] Human Rights Watch, “World Report 2025: Mexico,” January 16, 2025.
[59] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Migration Control Efforts,” September 2025.
[60] Washington Office on Latin America, “Weekly U.S.-Mexico Border Update: tariffs, February migration, military role, mass deportation,” March 10, 2025.
[61] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Migration Control Efforts,” September 2025.
[62] Human Rights Watch, “World Report 2024: Mexico,” January 11, 2024.
[63] Human Rights Watch, “World Report 2025: Mexico,” January 16, 2025.
[64] International Rescue Committee, “Mexico,” accessed February 9, 2026.
[65] International Rescue Committee, “Mexico.”
[66] Amnesty International, “Mexico: Fatal fire in migrant detention center is result of inhumane policies,” March 30, 2023.
[67] Human Rights Watch, “World Report 2024: Mexico.”
[68] United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, “Mexico: UN experts call for investigations into migrant deaths at Ciudad Juarez immigration detention centre,” April 5, 2023.
[69] NBC News, “Official details of deadly fire at migrant center in Mexico challenged in investigative report,” March 22, 2024.
[70] Human Rights Watch, “Tragedy at a Mexican Immigration Detention Center,” April 3, 2023.
[71] U.S. Department of State, “2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Mexico,” April 22, 2024.
[72] Human Rights Watch, “World Report 2025: Mexico,” January 16, 2025.
[73] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Migration Control Efforts,” In Focus IF10215, updated September 10, 2025.
[74] International Rescue Committee, “Mexico,” accessed February 2026.
[75] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Migration Control Efforts.”
[76] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Migration Control Efforts”; Washington Office on Latin America, “Weekly U.S.-Mexico Border Update: Post-Election Migration, Relations with Mexico, Incoming Administration Plans,” December 2024.
[77] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Migration Control Efforts.”
[78] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Migration Control Efforts.”
[79] International Rescue Committee, “Mexico.”
[80] International Rescue Committee, “Mexico.”
[81] UNHCR, “Mexico Fact Sheet,” March 2025.
[82] International Rescue Committee, “As More Refugees Seek Safety in Mexico Amid US Policy Shifts, IRC Adapts to Evolving Humanitarian Needs,” November 3, 2025.
[83] International Rescue Committee, “As More Refugees Seek Safety in Mexico Amid US Policy Shifts.”
[84] International Rescue Committee, “2025 Mexico Rapid Needs Assessment (January),” accessed February 9, 2026.
[85] International Rescue Committee, “As More Refugees Seek Safety in Mexico Amid US Policy Shifts.”
[86] International Rescue Committee, “As More Refugees Seek Safety in Mexico Amid US Policy Shifts.”
[87] UNHCR, “Mexico Fact Sheet,” March 2025.
[88] Migration Policy Institute, “Amid Tariff Threats, Migration Management Is Key to the Evolving Trump-Sheinbaum Relationship,” May 15, 2025.
[89] The White House, “Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Imposes Tariffs on Imports from Canada, Mexico and China,” February 2, 2025.
[90] Washington Office on Latin America, “Weekly U.S.-Mexico Border Update: tariffs, February migration, military role, mass deportation,” March 10, 2025.
[91] Americas Society/Council of the Americas, “Tracking Trump and Latin America: Trade—Tariffs Threatened on Mexico over Water Sharing,” accessed February 2026.
[92] Migration Policy Institute, “Amid Tariff Threats, Migration Management Is Key to the Evolving Trump-Sheinbaum Relationship,” May 15, 2025.
[93] Michelle García, “Claudia Sheinbaum Is Winning Against Trump—For Now,” The Boston Globe, February 14, 2025.
[94] Associated Press, “Mexico’s President Says She Rejected Trump’s Plan to Send US Troops Across the Border,” NPR, May 4, 2025.
[95] Congressional Research Service, “Mexico’s Migration Control Efforts.”
[96] Migration Policy Institute, “Amid Tariff Threats.”
[97] Migration Policy Institute, “Facing New Migration Realities: U.S.-Mexico Relations and Shared Interests,” October 30, 2025.
[98] Human Rights Watch, “World Report 2025: Mexico.”
[99] Human Rights Watch, “World Report 2024: Mexico.”
[100] Human Rights Watch, “Submission to the Universal Periodic Review of Mexico,” July 18, 2023.
[101] Andrew Selee, Rodolfo Cruz Piñeiro, Theresa Cardinal Brown, and Ariel G. Ruiz Soto, “U.S.-Mexico Migration Cooperation in the Trump-Sheinbaum Era,” ReVista: Harvard Review of Latin America, June 26, 2025.
[102] International Rescue Committee, “Mexico.”
[103] ICLG, “Corporate Immigration Laws and Regulations: Mexico.”
[104] Migration Policy Institute, “In the Face of a New Migration Reality in the Americas, U.S.-Mexico Cooperation Remains Indispensable,” May 15, 2025.
[105] International Rescue Committee, “Mexico.”
[106] Nic Garcia, “ACLU Reports Physical Abuse of Migrants Held at Fort Bliss,” Texas Tribune, December 10, 2025.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.