On March 29, El Salvador became the first country in the world to ban metal mining. The ban passed through the El Salvador unicameral legislature with support from a sweeping coalition and is favored by nearly 80 percent of the El Salvadorian population. In spite of the overwhelming support for the ban, the anti-mining movement started with a handful of grassroots groups determined to push back against the country’s historical devotion to “pro-business” policies.

El Salvador: An Unlikely Contender

Like many Latin American countries, El Salvador opened its doors to multinational companies in the early 1990s in the hope that an influx of foreign investment would help steady its newly reformed political system. Entrance into the globalized economy appeared to be the best option for a country emerging from a long and brutal civil war. The region saw a spate of political pushbacks against neoliberal economic policies, but El Salvador remained devoted to the globalized economy.

Following the 1992 peace accords, the right-wing, pro-business Nationalist Republican Alliance (NRA) controlled El Salvador for 17 years. During this time, foreign money, much of it from mining, flooded into El Salvador. In 2001, the conservative government adopted the U.S. Dollar as its official currency. Officials pegged their currency to the dollar with the intention of stabilizing the economy and making El Salvador a more attractive destination for international investors.

Candidates from the socialist Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN) have won the past two presidential elections but have largely continued the economic strategies initiated by the NRA. The FMLN leaders have not employed the kind of “anti-imperialist” rhetoric that has often been used by other socialist leaders in the region. When Salvador Sánchez Cerén, a former leftist guerilla, took power in 2014, he promised budget cuts and to maintain a close relationship with the United States. Sánchez’s predecessor and fellow FMLN member, Mauricio Funes, ruled the country as a centrist.

It is surprising that a country so roundly committed to foreign investment and the global economy would be the one to lead a charge against multinational metal mining corporations.

From Grassroots to Mainstream

Not long ago, El Salvador was actively courting multinational mining operations. After the civil war, the government began trying to rebuild the large-scale mining industry that had died out when conflict erupted in 1980. When global gold prices began to climb in the early 2000s, El Salvador received a flurry of exploration permit applications.

After some exploratory drilling, Pacific Rim Mining Corporation proposed plans for a mine named El Dorado to be built in the basin of the Rio Lempa–El Salvador’s primary source of drinking water.  According to Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch Division, El Dorado would use two tons of cyanide and 900,000 liters of water a day to extract over 1.4 million ounces of gold in about four years.

Rapid industrialization and population growth in the 1990s caused extreme environmental degradation. By the early 2000s, over 90 percent of El Salvador’s ground water was chemically contaminated and no amount of boiling, filtering, or chlorination would make it potable. The prospect of a cyanide and water intensive mine on the crux of the country’s primary source drinking water was, for many, too much to stomach. Locals feared the mine’s copious water consumption would suck up supply and that the cyanide would render it undrinkable in the process.

As word of the mine spread, groups began to form and resist the El Dorado mine and mining in general. By 2005, the grassroots movement had turned national. Local and international groups united to form The National Roundtable Against Metal Mining in El Salvador (La Mesa), and the population’s support for a metal mining ban had grown.

In May 2007, El Salvador’s anti-mining movement gained one of its most powerful allies–the Catholic Church. In response to anti-mining statements from archbishops in neighboring countries, the El Salvadorian Catholic Church publicly denounced mining, claiming “no material advantage can be compared to the value of human life.” By October of the same year, polls showed 62 percent of the population opposed metallic mining in El Salvador.

The conservative NRA party had previously blocked attempts by the FMLN to pass a legislative ban on metallic mining but public support for the ban had become irresistible. In March 2008, NRA President Antonio Saca instituted a nationwide moratorium on metal mining permits.

The Backlash

Though this moratorium remained in place until the passage of an anti-mining law last month, the presidential moratorium wasn’t permanent and could have been lifted at any moment. The situation was precarious.

Pacific Rim and other mining cooperations quickly filed legal complaints against El Salvador. These suits quickly devolved into drawn-out legal battles, in which mining corporations demanded hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation from one of the poorest countries in Latin America.

As these compensation claims crawled through World Bank tribunals, pro-mining operatives launched violent attacks against the anti-mining movement. From 2009 to 2011, at least four anti-mining activists were murdered. Rather than silencing the movement, these acts of violence galvanized support for the ban.

In late 2016, the World Bank slapped down Pacific Rim’s claim to compensation paving the way for a permanent ban.

A Future Without Mining

Over the course of a few years, the El Salvadorian government’s stance on mining underwent a 180-degree turn. Forces that once backed the mining lobby were forced to concede to a groundswell of opposition. As the effects of environmental degradation and exploitation become more apparent, El Salvador’s grassroots movement provides hope for similar ones around the world.

Callum Cleary

Callum is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is from Portland OR by way of the United Kingdom. He is a senior at American University double majoring in International Studies and Philosophy with a focus on social justice in Latin America. Contact Callum at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post How El Salvador Became the First Country to Ban Metal Mining appeared first on Law Street.

Their tiny, delicate wings make their migration from Central Mexico to Southern Canada equitable to a trip from the Earth to the Moon and back. But due to climate change and habitat loss, the great Monarch Butterfly is growing endangered and few people are likely to act in their defense.

Butterflies are one of the first things we learn about in school, and one of the last that we come to appreciate. Many of us have fond elementary school memories of collecting caterpillars in jars for the classroom. It was an exciting project, but we rarely truly thought about the wonder of what was happening. During its time in the chrysalis, a caterpillar literally dissolves into a bag of liquid, to reassemble as a new creature. One that can take flight, and has an ingrained knowledge of its mission. A butterfly is a symbol of transformation; a reminder that patience and hard work can yield fantastic results.

Numbering in the half billions, Monarch Butterflies cluster in the Oyamel Fir Forests of Mexico, covering nearly ever square inch of tree trunk and branch. As spring appears and warms the air, they emerge from their sleepy lull and prepare for a fantastic journey. This group of insects can make it only so far, mating and subsequently dying somewhere in the Southern United States; however, their offspring appear shortly thereafter, and resume the flight northward. It takes three generations to make the trip, each one understanding its current location and distance it must travel. Then, one “super generation” makes the entire trip back to Mexico.

Courtesy of Agunther via Wikipedia.

The Oyamel Fir Forests are a product of older geological patterns, when the Earth was cooler and wetter. Monarch Butterflies are adapted to the same conditions; if it gets too hot or dry they are very susceptible to death. As the climate changes, the forest coverage recedes, leaving them vulnerable. In addition, the trees retain heat, which keeps the butterflies warm throughout the night and in general provides a suitable temperature zone for the delicate creatures. As illegal logging takes place in this region, poorly regulated by the Mexican government, the butterflies face threats on multiple fronts.

The brilliant orange shading of a Monarch’s wings is actually a defensive signal to predators, warning them of toxicity; few creatures are willing to eat a Monarch. This characteristic comes from a very particular diet, namely the milkweed leaf. It is on this plant that the caterpillar is born and, though a handful of flower types can provide food for the butterfly, is the only thing the caterpillar is capable of eating before making its transformation. Extensive use of certain herbicides and pesticides is killing milkweed in large swathes; caterpillars now face starvation before ever turning into butterflies.

A Monarch caterpillar. Courtesy of vladeb via Flickr.

In the last 20 years Monarch’s populations have declined by 90 percent, while they have lost over 160 million acres of habitat. So what is being done about this? This past August, scientists filed for protection of Monarch Butterflies under the Endangered Species Act. This would enable authorities to take more action with regard to the logging and pesticide use, as international regulations could help curb hazardous human activities.

In a recent meeting of the New Jersey chapter of the Sierra Club, panelists discussed the implementation of butterfly habitats on public property. This would basically be an extension of home gardening, insofar as planting milkweed nurseries outside on which butterflies can lay their eggs. We already enjoy hanging bird feeders in our yards and installing bird baths in parks, right? Birds are pleasant company. Butterflies are too; milkweed gardens in our yards, parks, and schools would draw beautiful creatures to our sides, enhancing our appreciation and outdoor experiences. Furthermore, as Conservation Chair of the Sierra Club’s Central Jersey Chapter Kip Cherry pointed out, it would bring greater visibility to the crisis.

Most recently, this endeavor has received a major boost from the Fish & Wildlife Service as well as the National Fish & Wildlife Foundation, who together will contribute over $3 million to assist in the development of butterfly oases in communities across the country. While some people are concerned that this action is not enough, as it does not address the use of pesticides that are killing milkweed plants in the first place, it is nonetheless a major effort to provide for the butterflies and may lead to further productive measures in the future.

A milkweed field. Courtesy of mwms1916 via Flickr.

The Butterfly Effect is a scientific model that suggests a minuscule action at the outset of an event can have titanic ramifications down the line. This is often metaphorically exemplified by images of the flapping of a butterfly’s wings setting in motion a chain of events that will alter the behavior of a hurricane. Similarly, this is a common literary tool, as when a time traveler in the past steps on a butterfly and in so doing induces drastic changes to the future. These constructions are poignant because they rely on our perceptions of a butterfly’s insignificance and lack of importance.

Some people might be hesitant to act in defense of butterflies. They conjure up images of effeminateness; a delicate creature is suitable for a delicate person, such as a Victorian gentleman traipsing about with a net. I myself have been laughed at after arguing that butterflies are awesome. In addition to this cultural stereotype, the bottom line is that butterflies are insects. They have antennae and lots of legs and people find these things gross. We flinch and shoo them if they get too close. We imagine insects in general as being infinitely numerous; it is hard to accept that some of them could disappear. As far as endangered species go, they are not comparable to the great Bengal tiger, or sweet and gentle manatee, or majestic humpback whale. In fact, though, they are all of these things. Our prejudices do not entitle us to judge which species deserve to survive or die off, especially if it is our actions that are putting them in that precarious position in the first place.

Courtesy of docentjoyce via Flickr.

Franklin R. Halprin

Franklin R. Halprin holds an MA in History & Environmental Politics from Rutgers University where he studied human-environmental relationships and settlement patterns in the nineteenth century Southwest. His research focuses on the influences of social and cultural factors on the development of environmental policy. Contact Frank at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post A Member of Royalty is in Trouble appeared first on Law Street.

Last Friday, July 25, 2014, three Central American leaders  — Presidents Juan Olando Hernádez of Honduras, Otto Pérez Molina of Guatemala, and Salvador Sánchez Cerén of El Salvador — convened at the White House to discuss with President Obama the recent wave of Central American immigrants, specifically unaccompanied minors, to the United States.

“Washington must understand that if you have a Central America with violence because of the drug traffic crime, a Central America without opportunities, without growth in the economy, it is going to always be a problem for the United States,” said President Hernández of Honduras. The root causes, Hernández went on, are not America’s lax border polices, but rather the demand for illegal drugs in North America, which fuels violence in Central America, causing migrants to flee their homes. In a joint statement on Friday, President Obama and the three Central American leaders pledged to address the “underlying causes of immigration by reducing criminal activity and promoting greater social and economic opportunity.”

What this estimation overlooks, though, are the perspectives of the immigrants themselves. What causes them to submit to a perilous exodus, vulnerable to a harsh desert climate, drug violence, and personal injury crossing rivers and fences, all at the likelihood of being detained by U.S. border security, and possibly being sent back? Drug violence may very well be a cause for the flight of immigrants, but I am skeptical to hear this from leaders of governments who have vested interests in the economic exploitation, and repression of their citizens. Rather, we should listen to the people.

In Central America, graffiti is a voice for a voiceless people: the agrarian peasants and the urban poor. Graffiti is an alternative medium of communication that broadcasts messages that corporate media outlets such as radio and television fail to incorporate. It is an open forum of dissent, writ large on the side of a government building, or across a freight car, traveling throughout the region. More importantly, graffiti is a vantage point from which we can discern the perspective of Central American immigrants, and the pressures behind their flight.

Ciudad de Juárez, the capital of Oaxaca, Mexico, six hundred miles from the Guatemalan border, is home to the Assembly of Revolutionary Artists of Oaxaca (ASARO). Comprised of multiple graffiti crews and independent artists, ASARO was forged in the summer 2006 following the violent state-oppression of teachers demanding better pay and working conditions. Forty-five hundred federal police forcibly removed the teachers from the streets, injuring 92 protesters and killing 17, including an American news correspondent. The brutal government crackdown on protests mobilized disparate activist groups against the government, which they saw as a common cause of their plights, and ASARO emerged as a visual amplification of their dissent through the streets of Ciudad de Juárez.

“Arte Del Pueblo y Para el Pueblo” (Art of the People for the People) courtesy of ian m via Flickr

What is more interesting, though, in regard to immigration to the United States, is the political motive and content of the ASARO graffiti. In their images and slogans, we find the root cause of strife afflicting the people in Mexico and Central America, and ultimately the systemic causes for the massive waves of immigration to the U.S. over the last five years.

“The assembly of revolutionary artists arises from the need to reject and transcend authoritarian forms of governance and institutional, cultural, and societal structures, which have been characterized as discriminatory for seeking to impose a single version of reality and morality[.]” – ASARO Manifesto

In Oaxaca, where 80.3 percent of the population lack sanitation services, street lighting, piped water, and paved roads, ASARO illuminated institutional prejudices against ethnicity, class, and sex, keeping eight out ten people in extreme poverty. Their graffiti critiqued the violence of the Mexican government in the 2006 uprising, but also demanded  equal rights for disenfranchised groups like farm workers, indigenous people, and women, as well as exposing the hypocrisies and corruption of the ruling elite. Slogans such as “Todo el Poder al Pueblo. Colonos en Pie de Lucha” (All the Power to the People. Neighbors on our feet to fight!) incited reflection and fiery debates on issues ranging from the privatization of public goods, to gender equality, democratic participate, and Indigenous rights. Moreover, images of the Oaxacan governor labeled “Cynic, Thief, Autocrat, Repressor, Murders,” and “End Fascism in Mexico!” rallied protesters against the government.

Courtesy of natarén via Flickr

“Todo el poder al pueblo. Colonos en lucha” (All Power to the people. Neighbors, on their feet for the fight). Courtesy of nataren via Flickr.

In addition to social struggles in Mexico, ASARO’s political graffiti illustrate issues that affect Central America broadly, such as the economic exploitation of natural resources and labor by transnational corporations, as well as documenting the physical and emotional trauma of immigration. ASARO’s political graffiti critiqued the extraction of oil and minerals from Oaxacan land, which is exported by the Mexican government at an exorbitant profit, without benefit to the Oaxacan people. One ASARO poster featuring a barefoot peasant tilling the land read, “La Tierra es de queen la Trabaja” (The earth belongs to those who work it); a wood-cut block print depicted Uncle Sam under an eagle drinking from an oil can, kicking miniature figures with guns, who represent the Mexican people.

These critiques of foreign exploitation not only speak to conditions in Mexico and Central America, but suggest a system of global colonization by transnational corporations. A block print called Body Parts on Railroad (2010) documents the perils of immigration. Body parts litter train tracks leading to the U.S.: a leg labeled “Salvador,” a finger labeled “Mexico,” a hand “Honduras,” and a head “Guatemala.” Similarly, another block print depicts small animals standing at the opening of a sewer drain like those used by some immigrants to enter the U.S., that runs under a border fence replete with police and an American flag.

In all, the political graffiti of Oaxaca, Mexico demonstrates that there is much more to the immigration debate than just the quips of politicians. In order to understand the root cause of the recent wave of unaccompanied child immigrants, and in order to address this crisis adequately, discussions must include the perspectives of the immigrants themselves. Drug violence is not the only cause for immigration from Central America; but rather a host of systemic issues force immigrants to travel to the U.S. Government corruption and economic exploitation are, perhaps, the most intolerable conditions for the people, as evidenced by the ASARO graffiti. Only from the oppressed can we fully understand their oppression; graffiti is the voice of the subaltern.

 —
Ryan D. Purcell (@RyanDPurcell) holds an MA in American History from Rutgers University where he explored the intersection between hip hop graffiti writers and art collectives on the Lower East Side. His research is based on experience working with the Newark Public Arts Project and from tagging independently throughout New Jersey and New York.

 Featured image courtesy of [Fabricator77 via Flickr]

Ryan Purcell

Ryan D. Purcell holds an MA in American History from Rutgers University where he explored the intersection between hip hop graffiti writers and art collectives on the Lower East Side. His research is based on experience working with the Newark Public Arts Project and from tagging independently throughout New Jersey and New York. Contact Ryan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Graffiti Describes the Struggle of Immigrants and Undocumented Minors appeared first on Law Street.

Congress and President Barack Obama have to quickly respond to a recent influx of thousands of Central American child immigrants spilling over the border into Texas. Read on to learn about why they are coming here and why finding a place for them will be a challenge.

How many people are coming over the border?

There has been a recent surge of Central American children illegally immigrating into the United States over the Texas border. 47,000 unaccompanied minors have been detained at the border in the past eight months. This is a 92 percent increase from the eight month period prior to that.

Why now?

Evidence points to two different factors.

First, living conditions in Central America have gotten significantly worse in recent years. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 48 percent of the detained minors had experienced abuse from an organized criminal group before fleeing to America. This should not be too surprising. Honduras, the country where the plurality of children are coming from, boasts the highest murder rate in the world. In 2012, there were more than 90 murders per 100,000 people. The next country on the list, Venezuela, only has 53.7 homicides per 100,000 people. It should be no surprise that children want to leave Central America.

Check out this story from The New York Times to learn more about the gang violence that Honduran children are escaping.

You can also watch this report on gang violence in Honduras, but it is graphic:

So it makes sense that children would want to leave this environment, but why are they coming to America? Why do they choose this specific country? Critics of President Barack Obama argue that his immigration policies have convinced illegal immigrants that they will have an easy time entering the country, and there is some evidence to support that. There is a belief among Central Americans that the United States has recently started treating children easier than they treat adults. This is because of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA). The law requires the United States to ensure the safety of any children repatriated back to their homes. This means that the United States cannot just simply turn away or deport children. Border officials have an obligation to make sure that the environment the children are being deported to is safe. President Obama signed this bill into law March 7, 2013; however, a key part of the law allowing these children to gain legal counsel and appeal to stay in the country was signed by President George W. Bush in 2008.

Republicans also assert that Obama’s enforcement of the DREAM act through executive order is an incentive for children to come to America, but there is less concrete evidence to support this.

What is happening to these children when they come here?

These children would be quickly brought back home if they were coming from Mexico or Canada; however, they have to go through a formal deportation process because they are coming from far-away countries. Thanks to the TVPRA, this process involves month-long hearings where the children can appeal to stay in the country. Currently, there’s a massive 360,000-case backlog preventing many of these children from having their cases heard. Since so many are coming at once, it is likely that they will be stuck in detention for some time until a solution is found.

What is the Obama administration trying to do about it?

Obama has requested $3.7 billion from Congress to deal with the border crisis. The administration is telling Congress that the money will go toward building detention facilities to help ease overcrowding, the hiring of judges to hear the backlog of immigration cases, and border security to prevent more children from illegally entering the country. The plan would also allocate $300 million to the State Department to assist Central American countries in repatriating their citizens.

Watch President Obama present this plan to the press:

How are Republicans reacting?

Not well. Republicans are calling the plan a “blank check” without any accountability. Republicans in Congress are also not happy that Obama is not planning on amending the TVPRA to make it easier to deport illegal immigrants.

Conservatives have been crying foul about this crisis for the last week. Texas Governor Rick Perry even called this situation “Obama’s Katrina.” Most notably, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has called for Obama’s impeachment. Palin argues that Obama is deliberately opening the borders and allowing illegal immigrants into the country.

Is Obama going to be impeached? Absolutely not. A President can only be impeached if he has committed high crimes. Obama has not violated any laws. In fact, the current immigration laws are part of the reason this crisis is happening in the first place. Still, Palin’s call for Obama’s impeachment shows that Republicans are angry about this issue.

Watch Boehner blame Obama’s actions for the current problem and criticize the President’s plan to solve the humanitarian crisis:

Law Street’s Allison Dawson lives in the affected area of Texas and has expressed anger at the fact that the children will be housed in abandoned Texas schools that could be used for other purposes.

Across the board, it looks like this has become the newest reason for Republicans to criticize the President.

What does this mean for immigration reform?

Not much. Immigration reform is almost guaranteed not to happen in 2014. Both Speaker John Boehner and President Obama agree that the reform effort is dead.

This is unfortunate because a comprehensive immigration bill could fix many of the problems posed by this spike in illegal immigration, including solving the backlog of cases, sealing the border, and providing a path to citizenship for those who go through the proper channels.

Resources

Primary

US Congress: The Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act

Additional

Washington Post: Central American Immigrants Overwhelm Texas Border

Migration Policy Institute: Surge in Unaccompanied Kids Has Deep Roots

CNN: Honduras Has the Highest Murder Rate

The New York Times: Fleeing Gangs, Children Head to U.S. Border

Appleseed Network: Report: Children at the Border

Washington Post: White House Request $3.7 Billion for Border Crisis

MSNBC: Rick Perry: This is Obama’s Katrina

Breitbart: Sarah Palin: It’s Time to Impeach President Obama

Washington Post: Obama is Accused of ‘Lawlessness’ for Following Law

Slate: Immigration Reform is Dead

Eric Essagof

Eric Essagof attended The George Washington University majoring in Political Science. He writes about how decisions made in DC impact the rest of the country. He is a Twitter addict, hip-hop fan, and intramural sports referee in his spare time. Contact Eric at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Crisis at the Border: Influx of Child Immigrants Causes Major Problems appeared first on Law Street.

Immigration has long been a pressing issue in the United States. The debate has taken a new turn following a drastic increase in unaccompanied children from Central America trying to cross the border illegally. Current facilities for children are not equipped to handle this surge, and immigration courts are already backlogged. Why are children flocking to the United States in the first place, and what is the appropriate action for dealing with the crisis?

Who are illegal child migrants?

“Unaccompanied alien children,” who are generally defined as any unmarried person under 18 years of age illegally coming to the United States without an adult. The recent surge of child migrants from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador has sparked major concern. Most of the children apprehended range from ages 14 to 17, but more recently the children are even younger. Kids coming to United States by themselves are a particular cause for concern since they are more vulnerable and susceptible to harm. Oftentimes, these children are trying to find family members that currently reside in the United States. Honduras’ President Juan Orlando Hernández described the children fleeing to the United States as war refugees, and the Obama administration has recently termed the escalating situation to be an “urgent humanitarian crisis.”

Where are the child migrants coming from?

Children from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador account for more than 90 percent of those now in government shelters. Children from Mexico continue to illegally enter the United States, but apprehended children from Mexico are immediately returned to Mexico rather than housed in shelters. The problem now is how to shelter all the children coming from Central America. The graph below shows the scope of the growing problem in the past few years:

According to Border Patrol statistics and a UNHCR Report, the United States saw a 92 percent increase in child migrants ages 18 and under from a year ago, and a fivefold increase since 2011. In the 2011 fiscal year , roughly 4,059 kids from Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador entered the United States unaccompanied. By 2013 fiscal year, that number rose to 21,537 kids. This year, 52,000 children were apprehended at the southwest border from October 1, 2013 to June 15, 2014. The Obama administration anticipates that number to rise to 90,000 before the end of the fiscal year in September. Next year’s estimates show the number of children illegally entering the United States from Central America could soar to as much as 130,000. Last year, fewer than 2,000 of these children were returned to their home countries.

Why are they coming?

A variety of factors contribute to children seeking to enter the United States, and debate surrounds exactly what has driven the children to cross the border.

Violence

Many say civil unrest and gang activity; drug-fueled violence in Central America has led to an influx of children coming to the United States. Parents may feel that the children are not safe at home, more likely to join gangs, or  be subjected to violence. Others have family already in the United States that they are trying to reach. When interviewed, many children cited violence as reasons for leaving their country rather than any knowledge of U.S. immigration policy.

Lax Immigration Policy

Others, including Congressman Bob Goodlatte and House Speaker John Boehner, say that children are coming with the belief that the United States will not push deportation. Some interview-based studies cite that many women who entered the country with children believed the law would allow them to secure a “permiso”, or pass to stay in the county indefinitely. Conservatives blame the 2012 Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals Policy (DACA), which exempts many undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children from deportation for two-year renewable periods. Recently the White House is trying to make clear that children who have recently crossed the border illegally are not eligible for legal status under the DACA program, since it only applies to immigrants who arrived in 2007 or earlier. Immigrants would not even qualify for the Senate’s recent immigration plan, where the eligibility cutoff was the end of 2011. On June 20, 2014, Vice-President Joe Biden traveled to Guatemala to meet with Central American governmental leaders in an effort to secure their support in dispelling rumors that those who cross the U.S. border illegally would not be deported. Whether or not immigrants are influenced by DACA remains contested, but there is little dispute that those in Central America believe unaccompanied children are more likely to be allowed to stay in the United States.

What does the United States do with the children?

Border officials are overwhelmed since the United States lacks appropriate facilities for the surge of children being apprehended. Children crossing the border are treated differently than adults and are not placed in immigration detention, but in shelters. The laws for processing unaccompanied, illegal children differ from those of adults due to the 2002 Homeland Security Act and the 2008 Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act. The Act was designed to protect children and address concerns involving human trafficking for vulnerable, unaccompanied children. All unaccompanied child migrants not from Mexico have to be screened, housed, and then transferred to the care of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Border facilities have been struggling to supply enough food, beds, and sanitary facilities for the incoming children. Watch the strain on these facilities below:

By law, children can only be held at border facilities for 72 hours before they are transferred to the care of ORR. Due to the recent surge, many children have been held for longer than 72 hours. Border officials are caring for the children rather than spending time apprehending those crossing the border. Many agree the situation is far from ideal. Various reports of abuse in the system have surfaced, and children complain of being denied medical care or being kept in ice-cold holding cells.

ORR is tasked with administering long-term shelters and finding relatives of the children in the United States. Roughly 100 permanent shelters exist and all are currently filled to capacity. Authorities have been forced to open three temporary shelters at military bases in Texas, Oklahoma, and California (CNN). According to Vox, for some 90 percent of children, a relative can be found. Others remain in long-term care or foster homes until their case works its way through the immigration courts. It is possible some of the children could qualify for asylum or some sort of humanitarian protection. However, the minors lack legal representation which would help them obtain such protection, since unaccompanied children are not granted counsel in court proceedings. Many of the released children fail to even show up for their court date. The Department of Homeland Security released a helpful infographic to convey the entire process.

What has the United States done to deal with the problem?

The United States now faces two major issues:

1. What to do with the thousands of children who are need to be sheltered?
2. What to do to stem the future tide of unaccompanied child migrants from Central America?

Solution to the Current Problem

Aside from creating more temporary shelters, President Obama has called for a response through a new Unified Coordination Group. The Group was created to leverage federal resources to provide humanitarian relief using branches of the Department of Human Services and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The President announced a “surge” of immigration officials at the border and sent more immigration judges to Texas to help with backlogged cases.

Preventing future problems

The more difficult issue is how to prevent an influx of children going forward. Biden’s meeting in Guatemala was aimed at preventing false rumors about U.S. immigration policy to make clear that children crossing the border illegally will be deported. Watch for more on Biden’s visit below:

The United States also plans to aid Central American countries to prevent drugs, gangs, and violence while improving security. So far, the United States has announced over $80 million in aid to Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador. Legislation providing $2.28 billion in funds to handle the food, housing, and transportation of illegal children has advanced in Congress – an increase of $1.4 billion from the Obama administration’s original funding request.

Are there any other solutions?

If billions of dollars are provided to federal agencies and more immigration judges are sent to the Southwest, it is likely to reduce the strain of the current crisis. Some still call for stronger legislation regarding child immigration, but it would be difficult to pass a law specifically hard on children. Others in Central America shift the blame to the United States for lax drug policy which fuels the drug trade and generates violence. Some, such as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, suggest the United States should launch a campaign in Central America to warn of the dangers of illegal immigration. The problem, as with any refugee situation, is that such campaigns have little effect if the dangers children are trying to evade are much greater than any posed by the United States. Providing aid to Central American countries to assist with safety, security, and aid for at-risk youth all provide a good starting place. However, the United States must first resolve what to do with all of the children already in the country.

Resources

Primary

State Department: Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008

White House: Unaccompanied Children from Central America

US Customs and Border Protections: Southwest Border Unaccompanied Alien Children

Additional

The New York Times: As Child Migrants Flood to Border, U.S. Presses Latin America to Act

Vox: Thousands of Children are Fleeing Central America to Texas – Alone

UNHCR: Children on the Run: UNHCR Report

Mother Jones: Why are More and More Children Walking Across the Border?

US News: Obama Calls Spike in Unaccompanied Children Crossing the Border

LA Times: Enforcement Alone Can’t Stop Surge in Child Migrants

CBS: Thousands of Illegal Immigrant Children Will be able to Attend Public Schools

KIND: A Treacherous Journey: Child Migrants Navigating the U.S. Immigration System

CNN: Daniel’s Journey: How Thousands of Children are Creating a Crisis in America

Huffington Post: These are the Real Reasons Behind our Humanitarian Crisis

AP: Obama: Child Migrants ‘Urgent Humanitarian Issue’

Alexandra Stembaugh

Alexandra Stembaugh graduated from the University of Notre Dame studying Economics and English. She plans to go on to law school in the future. Her interests include economic policy, criminal justice, and political dramas. Contact Alexandra at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The New Immigration Crisis: Children Crossing the Border appeared first on Law Street.