Navigating the Border: San Diego’s and Tijuana’s Migrant Reception Efforts

Introduction

As the 2024 presidential election approaches, the national rhetoric surrounding migration and border security has become increasingly polarized. Former president Donald Trump has intensified his inflammatory language, falsely depicting migrants as criminals and going as far as accusing them of “poisoning the blood” of the country, a statement that has drawn widespread condemnation.[1] Other figures such as Texas Gov. Greg Abbott have embraced a similar rhetoric, repeatedly framing migration as an “invasion along the border.”[2] In fact, Texas’ portion of the U.S.-Mexico border is constantly in the national spotlight due to the state’s contentious politics surrounding migration. California, often portrayed as a pro-immigration state and a welcoming region, receives far less attention. However, earlier this year, San Diego became the top entry point for migrants trying to reach the United States for the first time in 25 years.[3] In April 2024, the San Diego sector, which covers the entire San Diego County, registered over 37,000 apprehensions by the U.S. Border Patrol, close to a 50% increase compared to April 2023, surpassing Tucson as the busiest of the nine border sectors.[4] 

Organizations on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border, namely San Diego and Tijuana, have grappled with numerous migrant arrivals in 2024, while facing difficulties such as insufficient capacity and funding. This report sheds light on the existing migrant reception infrastructure in San Diego and Tijuana, highlighting the daily work of organizations on the ground seeking to provide adequate and dignified conditions for those trying to reach the United States. It explores the numerous challenges that are being experienced in these border cities:

• Existence of open-air detention sites on the U.S. side of the border.
• Lack of sheltering space and increase of migrant street releases in San Diego.
• Persisting security issues in Tijuana.

The report also shows — building on previous research conducted in El Paso, Texas — the importance of local government involvement in migrant reception and adequate coordination with organizations on the ground to transform reception practices and advance the development of an orderly and humane asylum system.[5]

The report draws from several in-person and virtual interviews as well as informational sessions. In total, I spoke with 14 individuals, including government officials and representatives from international organizations (IOs) and civil society organizations (CSOs), all actively engaged in the reception and support of asylum-seekers in San Diego and Tijuana. Additionally, I visited San Diego in April 2024, a time of record-high migrant arrivals, to conduct interviews and record field notes.

It is important to note that, while San Diego remains the busiest port of entry, over the summer, border crossings in all border sectors drastically decreased, dropping to under 54,000 in September 2024, the lowest number in the last four years.[6] Although numerous factors likely influenced this drop, such as the hot summer temperatures and further enforcement in Mexico, a contributing factor — albeit not the only factor — was the executive order issued by President Biden on June 4, a measure barring migrants who cross the U.S. border irregularly from seeking asylum, which is explained in more detail in the next section.[7]

Immigration and Border Policy Shifts

The Trump Administration

In the last several years, both the U.S. and Mexico have experienced numerous immigration and border policy shifts. During the Trump administration, executive action allowed 472 administrative changes, drastically reshaping the U.S. immigration system by reducing humanitarian protections, tightening border controls, and intensifying enforcement.[8] Among the most notorious policies implemented by former President Donald Trump were the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) in 2019, which forced asylum-seekers from Western Hemisphere countries to remain in Mexico, often in overcrowded and unsanitary camps, while awaiting court hearings in the United States.[9]

The Trump administration also ramped up efforts to build further fences along the U.S.-Mexico border, a strategy that became the centerpiece of his 2019 presidential campaign and has had deleterious impacts for migrants. In the San Diego area, the “Trump wall” has resulted in many migrants sustaining injuries — sometimes even losing their lives — from falls while trying to jump the 30-feet fence.[10] More broadly, the construction of fencing has led migrants to take more dangerous and isolated routes, increasing the risks in their journey.[11]

With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the Trump administration banned migrants from entering the U.S. by implementing Title 42, a public health measure dating back to 1944 aimed at preventing the spread of communicable diseases in the country. By invoking Title 42, the Trump administration allowed border authorities to turn away asylum-seekers under the pretext of avoiding holding migrants in crowded U.S. immigration facilities as the COVID-19 virus was spreading, even though it was effectively being used to eliminate border crossings.[12]

The Biden Administration

Contrary to Trump, President Biden promised to manage migration at the border in a more humane manner. During his initial years in office, he worked to reverse most of the Trump-era measures. However, in response to the increasing numbers of migrants and asylum-seekers arriving at the border in 2022, the Biden administration overhauled its border enforcement policy with a new approach that narrowed access to asylum at the border.[13]

With the end of Title 42 in May 2023, a mobile app called “CBP One” became the primary way for migrants and asylum-seekers to apply for asylum at a port of entry. This requirement is part of a new Circumvention of Lawful Pathways rule, which makes migrants who present themselves at a port of entry without a CBP One appointment ineligible to apply for asylum unless they were denied protection in another country through which they transited on their way to the U.S.[14] Although this asylum ban has been challenged by numerous immigrant rights organizations, it still remains in place and is currently being contested in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Court.[15]

As border crossings continued to increase in 2024, and to reduce political pressures ahead of the November presidential election, the Biden administration issued an executive order in June allowing them to further tighten the border. The rule denies asylum to anyone who crosses the border irregularly if the daily average of apprehensions exceeds 2,500, with restrictions remaining in effect until daily encounters fall to a seven-day average of 1,500 or less. This measure is one of the most restrictive policies instituted by the Biden administration — or any previous administration — and has caused outcry among immigrant advocates and organizations.[16]

The López Obrador Administration

Mexico has also implemented numerous immigration policy changes, which in many occasions were instigated by U.S. pressure. Similarly to Biden, the former Mexican President López Obrador promised a more humane and less securitized approach to migration, but the reality on the ground shows that he adopted an enforcement-first approach and has effectively acted as a buffer to prevent migrants from reaching the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Mexican government has collaborated with both the Trump and Biden administrations. In 2019, besides agreeing to MPP, the López Obrador administration signed the U.S.-Mexican joint declaration after Trump threatened Mexico with imposing tariffs of up to 25%.[17] Through this declaration, Mexico expanded MPP by accepting further returns of non-Mexican migrants and committed to deploying its National Guard throughout the country, particularly to the southern border with Guatemala, to combat irregular migration.[18]

With the end of Title 42 in 2023, Mexico continued accepting returns of non-Mexican nationals and ordered its migration offices to stop issuing humanitarian visas to migrants in Mexico.[19] Although these visas are intended for migrants planning to remain in Mexico, U.S. and Mexican authorities maintained that they were being used for migrants to reach the U.S.-Mexico border, as these visas protected them from deportation.[20]

Since the beginning of 2024, the Mexican government has intensified its crackdown on migration by increasing checkpoints and starting a program that buses migrants from northern to southern Mexico, which likely contributed to the drastic decrease in the number of crossings and apprehensions at the U.S.-Mexico border since the beginning of the summer of 2024. As of August 2024, more than 60,000 migrants had been bused from northern cities to cities, such as Villahermosa in the southern state of Tabasco.[21] As Mexico does not have sufficient funds to deport tens of thousands of migrants — and many of them such as Venezuelans cannot be deported — these migrants who are taken south simply attempt to make the journey over and over. Mexican authorities are hoping to exhaust migrants until they stop attempting to cross the border, but this tactic of containing them in under-resourced southern Mexico is not sustainable as migrant organizations are already overwhelmed with arrivals.[22]

These continued policy changes have caused multiple challenges for organizations assisting migrants on both sides of the border as well as migrants themselves, who many times do not understand the policies in place. The next two sections use San Diego and Tijuana as case studies to highlight the way in which these organizations have been forced to constantly adapt to keep pace with policy changes.

San Diego

San Diego became a critical point of entry for migrants and asylum-seekers early in 2024, with a network of shelters and CSOs working to meet their needs despite limited resources. The following sections delve into key aspects of San Diego's migrant reception landscape by examining the following: 

• The strained sheltering system.
• The rise of street releases.
• The contentious relationship between government agencies and CSOs.
• The presence of open-air detention sites (OADs).

Insufficient Reception System and Shelter Infrastructure

Numerous actors are involved in receiving migrants and asylum-seekers in San Diego, with shelters and CSOs being the main responders. The number of shelters in the city has varied over the years, with faith-based shelters, including churches and mosques, stepping up for different periods of time to help with increased arrivals.[23] However, the two main shelter providers in the city are Catholic Charities Diocese of San Diego and Jewish Family Service of San Diego. These two organizations have been supporting migrants and refugees for decades and, to date, have served over 360,000 and 80,000 asylum-seekers at their respective shelters.[24] These shelters serve as a temporary space for migrants until they move to the next destination, as San Diego is normally not the final destination for most of them. As a CSO representative explained, “for the last several years, [both organizations] have had sufficient funding where they could receive all asylum-seeking migrants that arrived in our region.”[25]

However, several changes in the last few years have negatively impacted these shelters. First, they transitioned from a congregate shelter model to renting entire hotels, which has increased the cost and reduced the shelters’ capacity.[26] Second, state funding for migrant shelters as well as legal and humanitarian services was cut from California’s budget for fiscal year (FY) 2024–25.[27] Since 2019, state funding, including $150 million in FY 2022–23, allowed nonprofit and faith-based organizations in San Diego to provide services to migrants arriving at the border. [28] According to a CSO representative, California state officials decided to pull back this funding with the revenue shortfall, as they see the situation at the border as a federal issue and, thus, the federal government’s responsibility.[29] Therefore, the San Diego migrant shelters, which used to accept all migrants — families, women, children, and single males — had to transition to hosting only vulnerable populations, namely: pregnant women, families with minor children, senior citizens, individuals with health or medical complications, and LGBTQ+ community members.[30]

As a result, migrants and asylum-seekers who did not fit within the categories above started being released to the streets of San Diego due to the lack of sufficient sheltering space in the city, an issue that was raised by all individuals I spoke with. One of the reasons why it is so challenging to have more sheltering space — especially long-term — available in the city is the high housing costs. “It's one of the most expensive cities in the country. Just the generic, everyday San Diego population is struggling, and that extends to the migrants as well,” a shelter employee said.[31]

Due to their limited availability, most of the shelters in the city are short-term to maximize the number of migrants and asylum-seekers they can assist. The maximum allowed stay tends to be between 30 and 45 days, which oftentimes is not sufficient for those who do not have a sponsor in the country and need to determine their next steps. As a shelter employee explained, most migrants have a sponsor, but the situation changes once they get to the U.S.: “This family from Honduras, they came in with a CBP One appointment and they had their relatives that were supposed to receive them in Texas. When it was time for them to actually go, they backed out. They gave them every excuse for them not to go. So, they ended up with other relatives in Virginia.”[32]

Although most shelters in San Diego are short-term, there is a network that has been providing longer-term sheltering since 2015, after large groups of Haitian migrants began arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border. Instead of using hotels or a big congregate space, they operate a series of houses and apartments embedded in the community, a model that is more fitting for families with young children. Catholic Charities and Jewish Family Services frequently refer families without sponsors to this network to avoid them getting stuck in a hotel room for a month or two.[33]

The shelters also differ in terms of the populations they serve. Some only accept families or women, while others are more likely to host migrants from certain nationalities, such as Haitians or Latin Americans. As a shelter employee noted, “For men it's a little bit more difficult to find resources. It's more likely for a woman and a child to get more help than it is for a man.”[34] This is what led their organization to open a small shelter for single men, who for the most part, do not have a sponsor in the U.S. Since the migrants sleep in a congregate space, which is needed for other activities during the day, the shelter is closed between 7:30 am and 6:30 pm, and such is the case for other faith-based shelters. It is important to note that most of the shelters, like in other border cities, only accept migrants who have already been processed by Border Patrol, as a lot of the funding they receive is contingent on all beneficiaries being processed before receiving services.[35]

The limited shelter options in the city or the restrictions on the length of stay in certain shelters have forced some migrants to sleep on the streets. Although the exact number is unknown, many of them have joined the homeless population in San Diego living in parks or sidewalks.[36] This has been especially concerning for organizations helping migrants, as a CSO representative observed: “The city of San Diego, knowing that our shelters are full, knowing that San Diego has an affordability crisis, passed a city ordinance making it illegal to sleep in a lot of public spaces.”[37] This situation adds another layer of vulnerability for migrants and asylum-seekers, as they risk being charged with a misdemeanor for sleeping outside, which can undoubtedly hurt their asylum case.

Importantly, there are other actors involved in the reception and support of migrants and asylum-seekers. Besides sheltering, individuals arriving in San Diego need a wide range of assistance, including legal representation or access to health care. The city has numerous organizations that offer the following resources:

• Provide legal services to migrants and asylum-seekers.
• Hold asylum clinics to help migrants and asylum-seekers understand how the asylum process works.
• Travel to Tijuana to provide “know your rights” presentations at different shelters.[38]

A lot of the CSOs in San Diego that provide direct services to migrants and asylum-seekers are also part of advocacy networks, such as the San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium, a coalition comprising over 50 organizations and advocating for the human rights of immigrants and refugees, and the California Welcoming Task Force, one of five welcoming committees that was set up along the border during the transition from the Trump to the Biden administration.[39] These networks lead a lot of the advocacy work in San Diego — and more broadly in California — and play a key role in coordinating with stakeholders. For instance, the members of the California Welcoming Task Force meet with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) every other week.[40] By engaging with the federal and local government as well as with elected officials, these networks advocate policies that promote humane processing of individuals arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border and push for accountability and transparency for government agencies that come in direct contact with migrants and asylum-seekers.[41]

Rise of Street Releases

As highlighted in the previous section, when the two main shelters in the city had to reduce their capacity in September 2023, U.S. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) started releasing migrants and asylum-seekers to the streets. A CSO representative reflected on how difficult the situation was at the time as individuals were being dropped off in different areas of the city: “It was four different transit centers, one in Oceanside, which is far north, one in El Cajon, which is far east, and two here in San Ysidro. We were having to run to four different locations to find migrants to help them, to orient them.”[42] As the situation became more chaotic, CSOs and the San Diego County asked CBP to narrow down the drop-offs to one location. Subsequently, migrants and asylum-seekers started to get released at Iris Avenue Transit Center, a station of San Diego’s trolley in the Otay Mesa neighborhood, south of the city and near the U.S.-Mexico border.

Once the street releases began, numerous CSOs coordinated to send staff and volunteers to the transit center and support individuals being released, which normally happens several times a day. Every day, a number of CSOs receive an email from Border Patrol indicating how many individuals are going to be released. However, as a CSO representative explained, the numbers are not always accurate: “There's been times where we think it's going to be a large number, and it turns out to be just a few, like a hundred plus. Or sometimes the opposite happens. And that's where it's really difficult for us to figure out staffing and coverage when we think it's only going to be 200 and ends up being like more than 400 at that time slot.”[43]

When Border Patrol transports migrants and asylum-seekers to the station in vans or buses, they do not provide individuals with any information about where they are or what they can do next. Several CSO representatives emphasized that migrants are often disoriented, and some of them do not even know they are in California as transfers from different border states, such as Texas and Arizona, are common practice.[44] Once the migrants are dropped off, CSO staff and volunteers welcome them to the country and explain to them where they are and what options they have. They also help some migrants locate their family members, as family units tend to get separated, with women and children being sent to shelters run by Catholic Charities and Jewish Family Service, and men being released at Iris Avenue. The work that CSOs and volunteers do at Iris Avenue is crucial. Without them, migrants and asylum-seekers would be left to fend for themselves in a remote location.

As was visible at the time of interviewing in April of 2024, the station is ill-fitted to receive hundreds of migrants a day — no restrooms, charging stations, Wi-Fi, or food is available. Therefore, CSO staff and volunteers try to get all migrants to Old Town, another trolley station that works as a triage center. That station is normally staffed with more volunteers and also has restrooms, restaurants, stores to purchase a SIM card, a train and bus stations, etc. Since San Diego is not the final destination for most migrants and due to the insufficient sheltering in the city, volunteers normally direct individuals to the airport, where they can also charge their phones and get access to food and restrooms. As a CSO representative acknowledged, it is not an ideal or sustainable solution, but it is a safer place for migrants and asylum-seekers.

One of the reasons why volunteers encourage migrants and asylum-seekers to move out of Iris Avenue quickly is the presence of illegal vendors in the area. These vendors have realized that they can exploit the migrants — they show up at the station with unregulated taxi cabs, try to sell them inoperable SIM cards, or provide money exchange services with high rates.[45] There have also been incidents with community members with anti-immigration sentiments, fueled by the provocative rhetoric around migrants and the border and conspiracy theories by far-right activists and Republican congressmen, who have accused CSOs working with migrants of “promoting an invasion to displace white Americans and engaging in child trafficking and migrant smuggling.”[46] These CSOs have experienced incidents including people driving by and screaming profanities or racist remarks toward migrants and volunteers. A CSO representative recalled an incident where a man got out of his car with a rod and approached the migrants and volunteers: “It was dark out. We huddled together, and we told everybody to come in, get together as a group. And when he started noticing us protecting everybody, he turned around and went back to his car.”[47]

These types of incidents that can gravely affect migrants and the individuals assisting them — and are common in numerous border cities — show the urgent need for spaces where migrants and asylum-seekers can be received and helped safely.

It should be acknowledged that street releases have significantly decreased in the last three months since the number of migrants arriving in the city has also dropped. In fact, local officials stated in September 2024 that there have been no street releases in San Diego County for the last two months, as migrants and asylum-seekers were taken directly to local shelters that had sufficient capacity.[48] Nonetheless, if the issue of insufficient sheltering and the shortcomings of the reception system in the city are not addressed, street releases will likely restart once the number of individuals arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border begins to increase again.   

Disconnect Between Government Actors and CSOs

As a response to the intense advocacy from organizations working with migrants on the ground and to address the issue of street releases, in October 2023, San Diego County stepped in and established a migrant welcome center after receiving two emergency $3 million funding bills from the county’s Board of Supervisors.[49] SBCS, formerly known as South Bay Community Services, was awarded the $3 million to operate the welcome center even though the organization had not worked extensively with migrants and asylum-seekers before.[50] This created some backlash from CSOs who were working on the ground with these individuals on a daily basis.[51]

The welcome center sought to provide a safe space for migrants and asylum-seekers to plan their onward travel, charge their phones, get in contact with family members, and obtain food and temporary shelter. The first $3 million tranche for the center was meant to last until Dec. 31, 2023, but by the end of November of that same year, CSOs were getting word that funding was running out.[52] A report to the county showed that SCBS had spent $750,000 on personnel through December 2024, and $152,000 on operating expenses, including shelter, transportation, and security.[53] According to SBCS’ president and CEO, the resources were stretched to the limit due to the increase in migrants arriving at the center, but CSOs argued that funds could have lasted longer if SBCS had allocated them more efficiently.[54]

CSOs noted several reasons why the funding ran out so quickly. First, the center was located in a remote site that was far from transit centers and the airport. Therefore, SCBS was using a lot of the funds to pick up individuals from Border Patrol — even though this expense used to be covered by CBP — and provide rides to the airport, which can be very costly.[55] Second, instead of focusing on individuals that needed the most help, every single person had to go through an intake process, and housing was offered to all migrants, even those who did not necessarily need it. As a CSO representative explained, “Some migrants are middle class to upper middle class, they come with some resources, they're not really dependent on aid, but if you're offering people a hotel, they're going to take it.”[56] To extend the funding, CSOs advocated focusing on the most vulnerable individuals rather than automatically providing assistance and shelter to all migrants and asylum-seekers.

Before the end of 2023, the center had to close temporarily because funding ran out — which resulted in numerous street releases again — but reopened in January 2024, after the San Diego County received the second tranche of funding. As a CSO representative noted, “Advocates made several recommendations that went unheeded or unimplemented.” Although the funds were intended to last until March 31, 2024, they were already running out by early February. The center closed on Feb. 22, 2024, leaving CSOs that are strapped for time and resources to fill the gap once again.[57] “There’s been zero funding since mid-February and all the advocates that are responding are responding with their own staff and their own budgets,” a CSO representative recounted.[58]

The organizations interviewed for this research did not have a high opinion of San Diego County and their handling of migrant and asylum-seeker arrivals. Even though CSOs are leading the main efforts on the ground, the county did not engage with them to create a sustainable welcoming system. According to a CSO representative, “The county is not open to constructive criticism about how they should improve their services. And when they do receive that criticism, they shut their door, and some of the relationships have become hostile because of that.”[59]

Earlier this year, San Diego County applied for further funding from the Shelter and Services Program (SSP) — which is part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) — and was awarded close to $20 million to provide shelter and other eligible services to migrants in April 2024. It is important to highlight that SSP funding is completely separate from FEMA’s Disaster Relief funding, disproving former President Trump’s recent claims that emergency disaster funds are being used for “illegal immigrants.”[60] At the time of interviewing in April, CSOs had not heard from the county regarding how the funds would be spent, but by May, the county had committed to having those conversations.[61] Shortly after, the county issued a request for proposals for an operator for a migrant transition day center, which was originally awarded to Jewish Family Service.[62] This was seen as a very positive development in San Diego’s reception response, as Jewish Family Service has not only a long history of assisting migrants and asylum-seekers but also strong connections with other CSOs and service providers in the city. 

However, after two months of discussions, Jewish Family Service and San Diego County were unable to establish a sustainable plan and decided to end negotiations for the nonprofit to act as the facility operator.[63] In September 2024, San Diego County announced that it had selected The Providencia Group as the new operator and will sign an 18-month contract for $18 million if negotiations succeed. Although the company has experience with migrant populations, as it runs a similar migrant center in El Paso, several CSO representatives have expressed concerns about the new operator being based in Virginia and not having connections with local organizations who help migrants on a daily basis.[64] 

Open-Air Detention Sites

Another important challenge that San Diego — and other border cities — has been facing since at least October 2022 is the existence of OADs, which are remote areas on U.S. soil along or close to the U.S.-Mexico border where individuals are held outside and exposed to the elements.[65] Some OADs are located between border walls whereas others are in remote areas, such as the Jacumba desert, about 80 miles east of San Diego. There are four OADs in San Ysidro, a district of San Diego immediately north of the U.S.-Mexico border: Whiskey 4, Whiskey 8, Spooner’s Mesa, and 91X.[66] There used to be three additional sites in San Diego’s East County, but two of them are inactive because the Mexican authorities have built detention facilities directly south of them.[67]

CSOs do not have access to all the OADs in San Ysidro, but Whiskey 8, which is located between two border walls, is one of the OADs where volunteers have been providing continuous critical support. A CSO representative explained that the issue in Whiskey 8 has persisted since the end of 2022: “We started noticing the first groups of people that were detained between the border walls for days in October and November of 2022.”[68] The numbers decreased shortly after, but around February of 2023, they started seeing groups of migrants and asylum-seekers again. With the end of Title 42 in May 2023, the numbers increased to hundreds of individuals, and Border Patrol requested assistance from the CBP’s Office of Field Operations to clear everyone from Whiskey 8. It was not until September 2023 that CSOs began seeing people again, with numbers remaining consistent until August of 2024.

When I visited Whiskey 8, all migrants had been processed for the day, but the dire conditions they had to endure were still evident. Many were forced to stay there for days, surrounded by the foul stench of a nearby sewage plant. The floor was full of cardboard, so the migrants did not have to sit on the dirt as the site did not have any kind of sheltering. Humanitarian organizations had also set up two small tents where they prepared meals and stored supplies for the migrants, who did not receive sufficient food and water from CBP.

The CSOs I spoke with also recounted numerous stories of migrants getting injured while trying to jump the wall or getting cut by concertina wire: “I remember a man from Jamaica who was with his daughter. She fell from the border wall and hit her head. He was crying and trying to cover up his tears so that his daughter wouldn't see, but he was obviously genuinely concerned about her health.”[69] Faced with all these challenges, CSOs asked San Diego County to send a mobile medical unit or help with food safety issues, but county efforts have been completely absent, forcing CSOs to reallocate their own resources to provide these basic needs.[70]

In May and December 2023, several organizations filed complaints with the DHS’s Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, claiming that CBP was committing a grave human rights’ violation by “not providing adequate water, food, shelter, sanitation or medical assistance” to the migrants and asylum-seekers being held at OADs.[71] The reason for this, according to CBP, was that these individuals were not in detention. Therefore, they did not have to meet the minimum detention standards even though “Border Patrol themselves were capturing them, bringing them to these sites, and telling them not to go anywhere.”[72] Furthermore, Border Patrol would put wristbands on the migrants that were color coded to indicate the day they had arrived. “Monday would be red, Tuesday would be yellow, Wednesday would be blue … They were keeping track of the colors to know who had been there the longest,” a CSO representative explained.

CBP justified that migrants were being held at OADs because they did not have enough capacity to process them. However, according to CSOs, they have shared mixed information: “At times they’ve told us that their capacity is 500. Other times they’ve told us that their capacity is 1,500.”[73] A CSO representative was very critical of CBP’s justification, noting that “they have a ton of resources they can move around. They spend a lot of their resources on robot dogs, autonomous surveillance towers, and ATVs … instead of humanitarian items.” Two other representatives explained that keeping migrants and asylum-seekers at OADs seemed more like a deterrence strategy as they have been able to process individuals very quickly on specific occasions, such as when the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility visits one of the sites to investigate a case.[74]

In April 2024, there was a significant victory for all the organizations that have been advocating for better conditions for migrants and asylum-seekers held in OADs, as a federal court ruled that migrant children held at OADs are in the legal custody of CBP and, as a result, must be provided with the protections afforded to children in federal immigration custody.[75] However, this ruling does not mean that open-air detention has ended, as recent reports indicate that Whiskey 8 is still open.[76]

The fact that OADs exist on American soil, and particularly in the state of California, is extremely troubling as they are effectively open-air prisons. These sites expose migrants and asylum-seekers, including families and children, to harsh and inhumane conditions:

• Extreme weather.
• Lack of adequate shelter.
• Insufficient access to food, water, and sanitation.

These among other risks constitute cruel and degrading treatment and violate their human rights.

Tijuana

Despite the continuous security and safety challenges that affect Mexican border cities, Tijuana has been able to foster a welcoming environment for migrants and asylum-seekers settling or transiting through the city. The following sections will explore:

• The evolution of Tijuana’s migrant reception system.
• The city’s efforts toward integration.
• CBP One app’s challenges. 
• The ongoing security issues.

Reception System’s Evolution

Tijuana has not always been a city where migrants stayed for long periods of time. According to a shelter employee, “Tijuana was a migrant city, but only for migrants who were passing through. They would come, wait for their coyote, and cross over to the United States. Nobody would settle here.”[77] As several shelter employees explained, a lot of the shelters initially opened to assist Mexican migrants, mostly male, who were being deported from the United States. However, the needs changed over time, and the shelters had to adapt. When the migrant caravans from Haiti and Central America started arriving in the city in 2016, the shelters decided to open their doors to migrants from other nationalities.[78]

There are currently 31 shelters in Tijuana, including 28 private and 3 government-run shelters, with the capacity to host 4,500 migrants and asylum-seekers, although the number has fluctuated over the years.[79] Similarly to San Diego, the shelters differ in terms of the populations they serve: some host families, others single men, others LGBTQ+ members, etc.

Most of the shelters operate thanks to grants or private donations, either from local individuals or individuals in the United States, which means that maintaining adequate funding is always a challenge. They also sometimes receive donations from international organizations, such as the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), but they are either material donations, such as food or blankets, or trainings.[80] The local government also provides food and other material donations and sometimes supports these shelters in other ways, such as exempting them from paying taxes or their water bill.

In contrast to San Diego, shelters in Tijuana reported that they have not been at capacity since the beginning of the year. They shared three different reasons why their shelters are not full.

1. The federal Mexican government has greatly increased enforcement in the country to prevent migrants from traveling north, which means most migrants are apprehended before they reach Tijuana. Those who make it to Tijuana and other northern cities are also sent back to the south in many instances, as Mexican immigration authorities — likely under U.S. pressure — began a busing program that transports migrants from northern to southern cities.[81] 
    
2. The CBP One app used to work exclusively in northern Mexico, but now it can also be used in central parts of the country, including Mexico City and even further south.[82] As a local government representative explained, the capital is a sanctuary city and “migrants prefer to stay there until they get their CBP One appointment. Once they do, they can transit freely through the country to enter the U.S.”[83] 
    
3. Numerous migrants and asylum-seekers do not stay at shelters because they either have resources and decide to stay at a hotel until they get an appointment, such as Russian migrants, or because they have paid a human smuggler to help them cross, which means they are staying at a specific place designated by the human smuggler.[84]

Even though the shelters in Tijuana were not at capacity at the time of interviewing, shelter employees were able to describe periods of higher strain and their ways of adapting to increases in arrivals. A strong coordination with the local and regional government as well as with IOs has been crucial. For example, when large numbers of Venezuelans started arriving in the city in 2022, the shelters became full. In response, the local government coordinated with organizations to open a public shelter with a capacity for 400 people.[85] Although the space used belonged to the local government, the state government also collaborated by providing beds and health services, while local CSOs ran the shelter and distributed food. As a local government representative explained, increased arrivals can be managed as long as all the actors involved work together.

Integration Methods

Unlike in San Diego, the local government in Tijuana is very involved in the reception and assistance of migrants and asylum-seekers and coordinates frequently with organizations on the ground. As a CSO representative in San Diego told me, “Even though Tijuana has less resources, they are way more supportive of migrants. All levels of government have stood up and work very closely with the nonprofits and shelters.”[86] In 2015, Tijuana created the Municipal Direction of Attention to Migrants, which currently has three different offices in the city. Similar to some shelters, it was created to assist Mexican deportees but has evolved over time to assist international migrants. The offices provide migratory information but also refer migrants and asylum-seekers to other services: shelters, CSOs, the National Institute of Migration (INM), the Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance (COMAR), etc. Sometimes they even provide minimal economic assistance to individuals who are in dire need.[87]

In June 2021, Tijuana also opened the Multiservice Center, a space that “promotes the protection, integration, and coexistence of refugees, people in mobility situations, and the local community.”[88] There are 19 different institutions present in the center, including government, IOs, and CSOs. They all work in coordination to provide services to migrants and asylum-seekers in the city, which include help obtaining documentation, legal services, medical and dental assistance, psychological assistance, and cultural activities. By the end of 2023, the center had served close to 23,000 migrants and has been recognized as a positive model that could be emulated in other cities.[89]

CSOs also provide their own services to migrants. A shelter employee explained that they normally host cultural activities targeted to different communities — Haitians, Central Americans, etc. — and always provide training in different languages to be more inclusive.[90] Casa del Migrante, another shelter established in 1987 in Tijuana that belongs to the Scalabrinian missionary network focused on people on the move, has a separate center where they provide free vocational training and workshops for migrants and asylum-seekers. In this center, individuals can receive training in electricity, mechanics, acrylic nail painting, or haircutting, among other skills. This can help them secure a job in the city — regardless of whether their purpose is to resettle there or they only want to find a job until they can get a CBP One appointment to go to the U.S.[91]

According to a local government representative, for those who decide to settle in the city, opportunities are plentiful: “There are over 40,000 job openings in Tijuana,” as it is a city with high foreign investment that continues to grow.[92] Since being able to work is such an important part of integrating into a new city, local government, CSOs, and IOs have worked together to provide migrants and asylum-seekers with more job opportunities. To cite some examples, several shelters have employment offices to help migrants secure jobs. The Multiservice Center includes a National Employment Service Office, and in 2023, the UNHCR provided 200 companies with trainings geared toward hiring asylum-seekers and refugees.[93]

Despite these positive steps, Tijuana also faces some challenges in integrating migrants and asylum-seekers. A local government representative explained a significant setback. They were working closely with UNHCR and Mexico’s refugee assistance agency, known as COMAR (Comisión Mexicana de Ayuda a Refugiados), to integrate migrants and asylum-seekers in Tijuana. Yet, toward the end of 2023, the Mexican INM stopped issuing humanitarian visas to these individuals, likely due to U.S. pressure. According to U.S. and Mexican authorities, this visa, which allows individuals to transit through Mexico freely, was being used by migrants and asylum-seekers to travel to the U.S. rather than to settle in Mexico. However, without this visa, migrants and asylum-seekers need to wait until their asylum claim is resolved to obtain a work authorization, which hinders their ability to access job opportunities and forces them to work in informal settings, earning lower wages and making them vulnerable to exploitation.[94]

Security Issues

Ensuring safety for migrants has been a long-standing issue in Mexican border cities, and Tijuana is no exception. Even though Tijuana is no longer among the top five most insecure cities in the country, it is still the city with the highest number of homicides — as of October 2024, 1,470 people have been killed.[95] Organized crime is rampant in the region, and drug cartels seem to be becoming more involved in human smuggling.[96] In fact, according to a local government representative, the routes that human smuggling operations use to cross migrants into the U.S. are very similar to drug trafficking routes.

There have been numerous reports of migrants being kidnapped or extorted by human smugglers. In March 2023, the Tijuana police removed 79 migrants being held at hotels that human smugglers use as stash houses until the migrants can secure payment to cross the border.[97] Migrants can be exploited into forced labor or sex trafficking to settle their debts with human smuggling groups.[98] A shelter employee explained that migrants who are being deported from the U.S. are also at risk of being kidnapped: “When deportees arrive, they wear gray pants or clothes that are very easily identifiable. A lot of migrants are being kidnapped where they get released once they arrive from the U.S., and then their families in the U.S. are being asked for ransom.”[99]

These human smugglers have been reported to charge up to $14,000 to transport migrants irregularly into the U.S. and around $5,000 only to bring migrants to the border and tell them where to cross, which means that a lot of individuals spend their entire life savings paying these groups.[100] Migrants are also normally taken to very desolate areas that are dangerous and difficult to access, increasing the risk of injury and death.[101]

Shelters in Tijuana are also vulnerable to organized crime. There have been numerous incidents at shelters in the last few years, such as threats, shootings, and raids.[102] More recently, shelters have started receiving death threats from organized crime groups that are looking to be paid off to avoid violence. These are a few examples that highlight the difficult and dangerous environment in which these facilities operate and the extreme pressures they face to ensure the safety of migrants and asylum-seekers.[103]

CBP One App’s Challenges

A common issue mentioned by all individuals I spoke with was the use of the CBP One app, which in May 2023 became the primary way through which asylum seekers could request an appointment at a point of entry to apply for asylum. Initially, this app used to only be available in northern Mexico, but its use has been expanded to central Mexico and even further south. Since August 2024, Mexican asylum-seekers can use the app to request appointments throughout the country, and non-Mexican asylum-seekers can request appointments in central and northern Mexico as well as the southern states of Chiapas and Tabasco.[104]

A shelter employee explained some of the initial challenges surrounding the app. It was only available in English and Spanish, making it difficult for those who spoke other languages to use it. Since then, the app has been made available in Haitian Creole, but many individuals, such as Indigenous peoples, still face language barriers. Additionally, the camera was not adapted to all skin colors as the app struggled to recognize Black individuals as well as individuals with disabilities such as missing an eye. Another significant hurdle was that many migrants and asylum-seekers did not have cell phones, had lost them along the way, or had them stolen. Even those who had access to a phone, frequently struggled to navigate the technology.[105]

The app currently provides up to 1,450 appointments per day along the border, with about 400 allotted to Tijuana.[106] When it was initially launched, appointments were granted very quickly: “Migrants would get to Tijuana and leave after three days or a week because they had already gotten an appointment.”[107] However, since September 2023, wait times are much longer, sometimes of up to seven or eight months.[108] Although Tijuana, alongside Matamoros in the Texas border, is the city with the largest number of appointments, “the door is very narrow” for the thousands of migrants and asylum-seekers who are trying to cross the border daily.[109] The very limited number of appointments fails to address the reality on the ground and has led to long wait times.

These long wait times — while facing the risk of violence, extortion, and kidnapping — have caused migrants and asylum-seekers to become desperate. Some of them have been tricked by organized crime gangs into buying appointments that prove to be fake.[110] Others secure appointments at different points of entry where the wait times are not as long, forcing them to travel through dangerous areas of northern Mexico where kidnappings are common.[111] Some individuals decide to cross the border irregularly, believing that “taking the risk of coming between the ports of entry is the only option of getting onto U.S. soil to claim asylum.”[112]

Rather than expanding options for those arriving at the border, the Biden administration has narrowed access to asylum and focused instead on opening new migration pathways to a limited number of migrants — such as the humanitarian parole program for Venezuelans, Nicaraguans, Cubans, and Haitians or the expansion of family reunification programs. Importantly, preventing migrants from requesting asylum at the border if they do not have a CBP One appointment violates their human rights as well as the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits returning asylum-seekers to countries where their lives or freedom would be at risk.

Policy Recommendations

This report highlights the disparity between the responses to migration on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border through San Diego and Tijuana. Despite being portrayed as a “welcoming region that values new Americans” in a pro-immigration state, San Diego’s response is far from adequate due to the lack of sheltering space and the disconnect between government actors and organizations working on the ground.[113] Conversely, Tijuana has been able to create a more welcoming and supportive environment for migrants and asylum-seekers through the coordinated efforts of all actors involved, but other key issues such as safety remain unaddressed.

The following policy recommendations seek to address some of the challenges highlighted in this report.

1. Improve Collaboration Between Government Actors and CSOs

The case of Tijuana as well as previous research conducted in different border cities show the importance of strong collaboration between local government actors and CSOs to receive migrants and asylum-seekers in an orderly, safe, and dignified manner.[114] When local government actors are not involved in the response, it is impossible for CSOs, who are strapped for time and resources, to do this work on their own. Several success stories in other cities — namely El Paso and Brownsville — show that effective collaboration is possible, and it is only a matter of sitting all actors involved at the same table and allocating resources effectively. Just as El Paso County modeled its reception system after Brownsville, San Diego County could implement a similar approach.

At the federal level, both sides of the border could benefit from further collaboration. In Tijuana, all the shelters I spoke with highlighted the need for the federal government to engage with the work of CSOs and understand the needs of migrants and asylum-seekers, especially those who are most vulnerable.[115] In San Diego, although most CSOs viewed their relationship with CBP as contentious or adversarial, building a more trusting relationship with both parties committing to further collaboration could help in reducing street releases, as the model of El Paso shows.[116]

2. Increase Respite Shelter 

The lack of respite shelter for migrants and asylum-seekers is one of the most critical issues affecting San Diego, with hundreds of individuals sleeping on the streets. The migrant transition day center that the San Diego County is working on establishing will help get individuals to their next destination faster, likely reducing the number of those who will need to stay at a shelter. However, it is still crucial to be able to provide respite shelter to those who do not have a sponsor in the U.S. or those who are medically vulnerable. As a CSO representative explained, the number of injuries for jumping the 30-feet “Trump wall” have greatly increased.[117] When this happens, migrants and asylum-seekers are frequently sent to the hospital and released as homeless, which could be avoided if a shelter for medically vulnerable people was established.

Images of migrants and asylum-seekers sleeping on the streets not only exacerbate the city’s homelessness issue but also fuel political tensions. The presence of homeless migrants and asylum-seekers often tie the issue of migration to concerns about vagrancy and crime, which can be exploited by politicians to stoke fears and justify harsher immigration policies.

To prevent migrants from sleeping on the street and ensure dignified, safe, and humane conditions upon their arrival, local, state, and federal governments should make funding available to open new shelters in San Diego as well as allow existing shelters to maintain and expand their capacity rather than relying on grants or private donations.

3. Invest in Humanitarian Responses Rather Than Security

CBP is the largest federal law enforcement agency in the country — with a budget of $17.5 billion in FY 2023.[118] A significant portion of this funding has been spent on security, including hundreds of miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border, technology such as surveillance towers and drones, and staffing.[119] Investing solely in security measures does not deter migrants and asylum-seekers; rather, it leads them to take more dangerous and isolated routes, increasing the risk of death. In fact, according to IOM, the U.S.-Mexico border was the world’s deadliest migration land route as of 2023.[120]

The fact the CBP uses OADs or open-air prisons on U.S. soil to contain migrants and asylum-seekers, including children and vulnerable individuals, while facing harsh and unsanitary conditions raises serious humanitarian concerns and constitutes a stain on the U.S.’ human rights records. Rather than perpetuating the current strategy of continuing to invest primarily in enforcement and alleged deterrence efforts, agencies dealing with migrants and asylum-seekers should focus on the following:

• Meet migrants’ and asylum-seekers’ immediate humanitarian needs, such as food, water, or access to medical assistance, thereby adhering to domestic and international law regarding asylum procedures.
• Improve and increase the capacity of CBP’s infrastructure so that individuals arriving at the border, such as families and children, are not held in overcrowded and unsanitary areas where they may be subject to abuse, such as that currently experienced by individuals at OADs.
• Invest in a sustainable and adequate reception system that is equipped to process migrants and asylum-seekers humanely and efficiently.

4. Stop Dehumanizing and Criminalizing Migration

The often critical rhetoric surrounding migrants and the border “crisis,” currently at an all-time high ahead of the 2024 presidential election, has had deleterious effects in public opinion across the country and, particularly in border communities. Anti-immigration and hate groups frequently show up at sites with migrants and asylum-seekers screaming profanities, harassing aid workers, and putting up concertina wire in border areas.[121] Migrants and asylum-seekers are being dehumanized and falsely portrayed as criminals when most are simply people in need who are fleeing from devastating situations in their home country and have endured numerous hardships along their journey, including extortion, kidnapping, and rape.

To counteract inflammatory rhetoric centered on a so-called border invasion and anti-immigration groups’ actions, CSOs and government actors should continue to share a compassionate narrative based on on-the-ground experiences. As a CSO representative explained, “It’s a humanitarian need. It’s not this kind of emergency crisis situation, it’s not this thing to fear.”[122]

Acknowledgements

This research was approved by Rice University’s IRB (Study #IRB-FY2021-216). I want to thank Karma Elbadawy, Imogen Brown, Poema Sumrow, Bela Koshy, and Karina Pan for their assistance with research and interview transcriptions. I also want to thank Dr. Kelsey Norman for her helpful comments in a previous version of this report.

Notes

[1] Maggie Astor, “Trump Doubles Down on Migrants ‘Poisoning’ the Country,” New York Times, last modified March 18, 2024, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/17/us/politics/trump-fox-interview-migrants.html.  

[2] Matt Zdun, “We Asked A.I. to Analyze Abbott’s Rhetoric About the Texas Border. He’s Changed His Tone Dramatically,” Houston Chronicle, July 16, 2024, https://www.houstonchronicle.com/projects/2024/abbott-border-speeches-ai-analysis/.

[3] Jonathan Wolfe, “San Diego Is Once Again a Top Migrant Entry Point,” New York Times, last modified June 5, 2024, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/04/us/san-diego-migrants-california.html.

[4] U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), “Southwest Land Border Encounters (By Component),” last modified September 16, 2024, https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/southwest-land-border-encounters-by-component. U.S. Border Patrol is divided up into nine sectors along the U.S.-Mexico border: four in Texas (Laredo, Big Bend, Del Rio, and El Paso), two in Arizona (Tucson and Yuma), and two in California (El Centro and San Diego). For more details on these sector and past apprehensions statistics, see Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) Immigration, “A Close Look at the Geography of Border Patrol Arrests: How a Spike in Annual Arrests Along U.S.-Mexico Border Hides Remarkable Variation by Sector and Nationality,” August 15, 2023, https://trac.syr.edu/reports/726/.

[5] Kelsey Norman and Ana Martín Gil, “Addressing the ‘Crisis’ at the US-Mexico Border: Insights From El Paso and Ciudad Juárez,” Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy, April 18, 2024, https://doi.org/10.25613/20KD-ZH77.

[6] CBP, “Southwest Land Border Encounters”; Julian Resendiz, “El Paso, Tucson, San Diego Lead Nation in Migrant Encounters,” Border Report, October 23, 2024, https://www.borderreport.com/immigration/el-paso-tucson-san-diego-lead-nation-in-migrant-encounters/.

[7] The White House, “FACT SHEET: President Biden Announces New Actions to Secure the Border,” June 4, 2024, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/06/04/fact-sheet-president-biden-announces-new-actions-to-secure-the-border/; Gustavo Solis, “Migrant Street Releases Down Significantly in San Diego,” KPBS, August 5, 2024, https://www.kpbs.org/news/border-immigration/2024/08/05/migrant-street-releases-down-significantly-in-san-diego.

[8] Jessica Bolter et al., Four Years of Profound Change: Immigration Policy During the Trump Presidency, Migration Policy Institute, February 2022, https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/four-years-change-immigration-trump.

[9] American Immigration Council, “The ‘Migrant Protection Protocols’: An Explanation of the Remain in Mexico Program,” February 1, 2024, https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/migrant-protection-protocols.

[10] Lucy Rodgers and Dominic Bailey, “Trump Wall: How Much Has He Actually Built?,” BBC News, October 31, 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46824649; Shelby Bremer, “Video Shows Woman Was Stuck on US-Mexico Border Wall for 24 Minutes Before Falling to Her Death,” NBC San Diego, last modified July 31, 2024, https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/video-shows-woman-stuck-us-mexico-border-wall-24-minutes-falling-death/3582038/.

[11] Simon Romero and Caitlin Dickerson, “‘Desperation of Thousands’ Pushes Migrants into Ever Remote Terrain,” New York Times, January 29, 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/29/us/border-wall-crossings.html.

[12] John Gramlich, “Key Facts About Title 42, the Pandemic Policy That Has Reshaped Immigration Enforcement at the U.S.-Mexico Border,” Pew Research Center, April 27, 2022, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/04/27/key-facts-about-title-42-the-pandemic-policy-that-has-reshaped-immigration-enforcement-at-u-s-mexico-border/.

[13] Muzaffar Chishti et al., “Biden at the Three-Year Mark: The Most Active Immigration Presidency Yet Is Mired in Border Crisis Narrative,” Migration Policy Institute, last modified January 22, 2024, https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/biden-three-immigration-record.

[14] U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), “Fact Sheet: Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Final Rule,” May 11, 2023, https://www.dhs.gov/news/2023/05/11/fact-sheet-circumvention-lawful-pathways-final-rule.

[15] Center for Gender and Refugee Studies, “East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Biden,” accessed September 17, 2024, https://cgrs.uclawsf.edu/our-work/litigation/east-bay-sanctuary-covenant-v-biden.

[16] Franco Ordoñez, “ACLU Sues Biden Administration over New Executive Action on the Southern Border,” National Public Radio, June 12, 2024, https://www.npr.org/2024/06/12/nx-s1-5003722/aclu-sues-over-biden-border-executive-action.

[17] Ariel G. Ruiz Soto, “One Year After the U.S.-Mexico Agreement: Reshaping Mexico’s Migration Policies,” Migration Policy Institute, June 2020, 3, https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/one-year-us-mexico-agreement.

[18] Ruiz Soto.

[19] Pedro Villa y Caña, “INM Ordena a Todas Sus Oficinas No Otorgar Permisos Para el Tránsito de Migrantes en México, Tras Fin del Título 42,” El Universal, May 12, 2023, https://www.eluniversal.com.mx/nacion/inm-ordena-a-todas-sus-oficinas-no-otorgar-permisos-para-el-transito-de-migrantes-en-mexico-tras-fin-del-titulo-42/.

[20] Michelle Hackman and Santiago Pérez, “How the U.S. and Mexico Drove Border Crossings Down in an Election Year,” The Wall Street Journal, August 5, 2024, https://www.wsj.com/us-news/how-the-u-s-and-mexico-drove-border-crossings-down-in-an-election-year-6672071f.

[21] Hackman and Pérez.

[22] Mary Beth Sheridan, “How Mexico Is Helping Biden and Harris at the U.S. Border,” The Washington Post, September 14, 2024, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/09/14/mexico-migrant-border-merry-go-round/; Megan Janetsky and Felix Marquez, “Mexico’s Tactic to Cut Immigration to the US: Wear Out Migrants,” Associated Press, last modified June 11, 2024, https://apnews.com/article/mexico-immigration-border-lopez-obrador-biden-a5498f0791f5f1ef99f1dfd9accce8f4.

[23] Civil society organization (CSO) representative, interview by Ana Martín Gil, April 2024.

[24] Alex Lai, “San Diego Migrant Aid Org Awarded $21.6M in Federal Funding,” CBS8, last updated August 31, 2024, https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/local/san-diego-migrant-aid-awarded-216m-federal-funding/509-515ebd0a-5af4-44a6-b7f2-29aabe7a5b4c; San Diego Rapid Response Network (SDRRN), “SDRRN Migrant Shelter History,” accessed August 9, 2024, https://rapidresponsesd.org/shelter-services/.

[25] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[26] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[27] California Immigrant Policy Center, “Breaking Down the Governor’s Budget Proposal,” January 18, 2024, https://caimmigrant.org/breaking-down-the-governors-budget-proposal/.

[28] California Immigrant Policy Center, “Does the 2023–2024 Budget Reflect Your Values? Let’s Take a Look,” August 1, 2023, https://caimmigrant.org/does-the-2023-2024-budget-reflect-your-values-lets-take-a-look/.

[29] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[30] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024; government representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[31] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, July 2024.

[32] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, July 2024.

[33] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, July 2024.

[34] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, July 2024.

[35] Norman and Martín Gil.

[36] Sofía Mejías-Pascoe, “Migrant Mothers, Children Living in Tents in San Diego Amid Shelter Shortage,” inewsource, July 3, 2024, https://inewsource.org/2024/07/03/san-diego-migrants-homeless-shelter-housing-shortage/.

[37] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[38] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[39] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024. For more information, see San Diego Immigrant Rights Consortium, “Our Work,” https://www.immigrantsandiego.org/our_work; and SDRRN, “California Welcoming Task Force,” https://rapidresponsesd.org/california-welcoming-task-force/.

[40] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[41] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[42] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[43] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[44] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[45] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024; Salvador Rivera, “Advocates Worry Migrants ‘Being Exploited’ After Getting Dropped Off by Border Patrol,” NewsNation, May 14, 2024, https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/immigration/border-coverage/advocates-worry-migrants-being-exploited-after-getting-dropped-off-by-border-patrol/.

[46] Miriam Jordan, “Faith-Based Groups That Assist Migrants Become Targets of Extremists,” New York Times, June 2, 2024, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/02/us/migrants-charities-shelters-threats.html. 

[47] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[48] Alexandra Mendoza, “Supervisor Desmond, Former San Diego Border Patrol Chief Testify at House Hearing,” The San Diego Union-Tribune, last modified September 19, 2024, https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/09/18/supervisor-desmond-former-san-diego-border-patrol-chief-testify-at-house-hearing/. 

[49] Government representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024; Emily Alvarenga, “South Bay Nonprofit Will Now Manage $3 Million Funding for Migrant Services and Welcome Center,” The San Diego Union-Tribune, last modified October 27, 2023, https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2023/10/21/south-bay-nonprofit-will-now-manage-3-million-funding-for-migrant-services-and-welcome-center/. 

[50] Alexander Nguyen, “South Bay Nonprofit Receives $3M County Contract for Migrant Aid Services,” KPBS, October 23, 2023, https://www.kpbs.org/news/border-immigration/2023/10/23/south-bay-nonprofit-receives-3m-county-contract-for-migrant-aid-services.

[51] Solis, “Migrant Advocates Say County-Funded Center Is Mismanaged and Lacks Transparency,” KPBS, November 21, 2023, https://www.kpbs.org/news/border-immigration/2023/11/21/migrant-advocates-say-county-funded-center-is-mismanaged-and-lacks-transparency.

[52] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[53] Elliot Spagat, “Border Patrol Releases Hundreds of Migrants at a Bus Stop After San Diego Runs Out of Aid Money,” Associated Press, February 23, 2024, https://apnews.com/article/border-patrol-street-releases-asylum-7ae9ff48b48e203ecdd5c099942dc1f5.

[54] Kelvin Henry, “Lack of Funding Closing San Diego County’s Migrant Center, Organizers Say,” NBC San Diego, last modified February 19, 2024, https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/lack-of-funding-closing-san-diego-countys-migrant-center/3438984/.

[55] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024; Solis, “Migrant Advocates Say County-Funded Center Is Mismanaged and Lacks Transparency.”

[56] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[57] Jacob Aere, “San Diego’s Migrant Welcome Center to Close, Months After Opening,” KPBS, February 16, 2024, https://www.kpbs.org/news/border-immigration/2024/02/16/san-diegos-migrant-welcome-center-to-close-next-week-months-after-opening.

[58] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[59] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[60] Laura Strickler et al., “False Claims About FEMA Disaster Funds and Migrants Pushed by Trump,” NBC News, October 4, 2024, https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/false-claims-fema-disaster-funds-migrants-pushed-trump-rcna173955. 

[61] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[62] Mejías-Pascoe and Cody Dulaney, “San Diego’s New $20M Migrant Center Could Exclude Families Living on the Streets for Months,” inewsource, July 22, 2024, https://inewsource.org/2024/07/22/san-diego-migrant-transition-day-center-families-homeless-encampments-shelters/.

[63] Alvarenga, “Who Will Run a New Migrant Aid Center? After Months of Talks, County Is Back to the Drawing Board,” The San Diego Union-Tribune, last modified September 13, 2024, https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/09/13/who-will-run-a-new-migrant-aid-center-after-months-of-talks-county-is-back-to-the-drawing-board/. 

[64] Alvarenga, “San Diego County Selects Virginia-Based Company to Run New Migrant Aid Center,” The San Diego Union-Tribune, last modified September 23, 2024, https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/09/21/san-diego-county-selects-virginia-based-company-to-run-new-migrant-aid-center/.

[65] Women’s Refugee Commission, “People Seeking Asylum Confined Outside in Appalling Conditions: Findings and Recommendations from a Monitoring Visit to San Diego,” November 21, 2023, https://www.womensrefugeecommission.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/People-Seeking-Asylum-Confined-Outside-in-Appalling-Conditions-Final.pdf.

[66] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024; Erika Pinheiro et al., “CBP Violations of Custody Standards and Human Rights of Individuals Detained in Open-Air Detention Sites in the San Diego Sector Require Immediate Attention to Save Lives,” Center for Gender and Refugee Studies, December 11, 2023, https://cgrs.uclawsf.edu/legal-document/cbp-violations-custody-standards-and-human-rights-individuals-detained-open-air.

[67] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[68] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[69] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[70] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[71] Ricky Garza, “CBP Violations of Custody Standards and International Human Rights by Failing to Provide Water, Food, Shelter, Sanitation and Medical Assistance to Migrants Detained in Open-Air Corridor Between Border Wall Layers near San Ysidro Port of Entry,” Southern Border Policy Counsel, May 13, 2023, 1, https://bit.ly/40p4oym ; Pinheiro et al.

[72] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[73] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[74] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[75] National Center for Youth Law, “Major Victory for Children Held in Open Air Detention Sites,” April 4, 2024, https://youthlaw.org/news/major-victory-children-held-open-air-detention-sites.

[76] Rivera, “House Speaker Mike Johnson to Tour Border in San Diego Area,” Fox 5, last modified July 25, 2024, https://fox5sandiego.com/news/border-report/house-speaker-mike-johnson-to-tour-border-in-san-diego-area/; Adriana Jasso, “Opinion: I Spent a Year at the Border Wall. Here’s What I Wish JD Vance Learned,” The San Diego Union-Tribune, September 17, 2024, https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/2024/09/17/opinion-i-spent-a-year-at-the-border-wall-heres-what-i-wish-jd-vance-learned/.

[77] Coyote is a Spanish word used to refer to an individual who smuggles migrants across the U.S.-Mexico border. 

[78] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[79] Local government representative, interview by Martín Gil, June 2024; Spagat and María Verza, “‘No Cabe Nadie Más’: La Nueva Política de EE.UU. para Migrantes Venezolanos Genera Preocupación en México,” Noticias Telemundo, October 15, 2022, https://www.telemundo.com/noticias/noticias-telemundo/immigracion/no-cabe-nadie-mas-la-nueva-politica-de-eeuu-para-migrantes-venezolanos-rcna52412.

[80] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[81] Simon Romero and Paulina Villegas, “The Other Busing Program: Mexico Is Pushing Migrants Back South,” New York Times, May 14, 2024, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/14/world/americas/mexico-migrants-busing-border.html.

[82] In August 2024, the Biden administration announced that it “will expand areas where migrants can apply online for appointments to enter the United States to a large swath of southern Mexico,” which would allow individuals to stay put until they have an appointment and reduce the dangers they face while trying to the U.S. border to claim asylum (Rebecca Santana and Maria Verza, “In a Win for Mexico, US Will Expand Areas for Migrants to Apply Online for Entry at Southern Border,” Associated Press, last modified August 3, 2024, https://apnews.com/article/mexico-us-migration-migrants-cbpone-appointment-app-08f16ce6338442c8e672bcdf2cd5205b).

[83] Local government representative, interview by Martín Gil, June 2024.

[84] Local government representative, interview by Martín Gil, June 2024.

[85] Local government representative, interview by Martín Gil, June 2024.

[86] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[87] Local government representative, interview by Martín Gil, June 2024.

[88] United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), “Conoce el Centro Multiservicios Baja California – Frontera Solidaria,” May 31, 2024, https://help.unhcr.org/mexico/2024/05/31/conoce-el-centro-multiservicios-baja-california-frontera-solidaria/; Agenzia Info Salesiana — Tijuana, “Mexico – The Salesian Project Tijuana Consolidates Networking for Refugees and Migrants,” Agenzia Info Salesiana, February 7, 2024, https://www.infoans.org/en/sections/news/item/20193-mexico-the-salesian-project-tijuana-consolidates-networking-for-refugees-and-migrants. 

[89] Red América Social Salesiana, “Tijuana: Un Faro de Esperanza para Refugiados y Migrantes Gracias al Centro de Multiservicios,” accessed August 9, 2024, https://americasocialsalesiana.org/tijuana-un-faro-de-esperanza-para-refugiados-y-migrantes-gracias-al-centro-de-multiservicios/.

[90] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[91] Centro Scalabrini de Formación para Migrantes, “Talleres,” accessed September 2024, https://cesfom.org/talleres/.

[92] Local government representative, interview by Martín Gil, June 2024.

[93] UNHCR, Annual Results Report: 2023 Mexico, U.N. Refugee Agency, May 31, 2024, https://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/2024-06/AME%20-%20Mexico%20ARR%202023_0.pdf.

[94] Local government representative, interview by Martín Gil, June 2024.

[95] Uniradio Informa, “Tijuana Alcanza 1,470 Homicidios en 2024 Tras Dos Nuevos Asesinatos” October 21, 2024, https://www.uniradioinforma.com/policiaca/tijuana-alcanza-1470-homicidios-2024-tras-dos-nuevos-asesinatos-n779010.

[96] Ruiz Soto et al., Shifting Realities at the U.S.-Mexico Border: Immigration Enforcement and Control in a Fast-Evolving Landscape, Migration Policy Institute, January 2024, https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/shifting-realities-us-mexico-border.

[97] Rivera, “79 Migrants ‘Rescued’ from Smugglers at Three Tijuana Hotels,” Border Report, last modified March 16, 2023, https://www.borderreport.com/news/79-migrants-rescued-from-smugglers-at-three-tijuana-hotels/.

[98] Richard Allyn, “Human Smugglers Exploit Migrants’ Confusion for Their Own Profit as Title 42 Ends,” CBS 8, May 10, 2023, https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/investigations/beyond-the-border/human-smugglers-exploit-migrants-for-their-own-profit-as-title-42-ends/509-6f147aa5-9ffa-48c0-acfb-7448ae60b6cd.

[99] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[100] Rivera, “Smugglers Charging Migrants Up to $14,000, Human Rights Activist Says,” Fox 5, last modified October 5, 2023, https://fox5sandiego.com/news/smugglers-charging-migrants-up-to-14000-human-rights-activist-says/.

[101] Rivera, “Smugglers Sending Migrants into US via Desolate Stretch East of Tijuana,” Border Report, August 23, 2023, https://www.borderreport.com/news/smugglers-sending-migrants-into-us-via-desolate-stretch-east-of-tijuana/.

[102] Adam Isacson and Ana Lucia Verduzco, “Tijuana’s Migrant Shelters Under Increased Attack, as the U.S. Sends Hundreds of Migrants Per Day,” Washington Office on Latin America, January 31, 2023, https://www.wola.org/analysis/tijuanas-migrant-shelters-under-increased-attack-as-the-u-s-sends-hundreds-of-migrants-per-day/.

[103] Agencia EFE, “El ‘Cobro de Piso’ Amenaza Ahora a Albergues en Tijuana,” Telemundo San Diego, August 5, 2024, https://www.telemundo20.com/noticias/mexico/aumenta-cobro-de-piso-tijuana-mexico-albergues-migrantes/2398333/. 

[104] Stephanie Leutert and Caitlyn Yates, “Asylum Processing at the U.S.-Mexico Border,” Strauss Center for International Security and Law, August 2024, 3, https://www.strausscenter.org/wp-content/uploads/August_2024_Asylum_Processing.pdf.

[105] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[106] Leutert and Yates, 3.

[107] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[108] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024; local government representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[109] Local government representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[110] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024; Dan Gooding, “Gangs Trick Migrants into Buying Fake Appointments at US-Mexico Ports,” Newsweek, August 1, 2024, https://www.newsweek.com/gangs-tricking-migrants-booking-fake-cbp-one-appointments-1932819.

[111] American Immigration Council, “Beyond a Border Solution: How to Build a Humanitarian Protection System That Won’t Break,” May, 2023, https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/beyond-border-solutions.

[112] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[113] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[114] Norman and Martín Gil.

[115] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024.

[116] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024; CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, May 2024; and Norman and Martín Gil.

[117] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[118] DHS, U.S. Customs and Border Protection: Budget Overview, Fiscal Year 2023, https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/2022-03/U.S.%20Customs%20and%20Border%20Protection_Remediated.pdf.

[119] American Immigration Council, “The Cost of Immigration Enforcement and Border Security,” August 14, 2024, https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/the-cost-of-immigration-enforcement-and-border-security.

[120] International Organization for Migration, “US-Mexico Border World’s Deadliest Migration Land Route,” September 12, 2023, https://www.iom.int/news/us-mexico-border-worlds-deadliest-migration-land-route.

[121] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

[122] CSO representative, interview by Martín Gil, April 2024.

This material may be quoted or reproduced without prior permission, provided appropriate credit is given to the author and Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy. The views expressed herein are those of the individual author(s), and do not necessarily represent the views of Rice University’s Baker Institute for Public Policy.