As part of the Intercultural Mobility Week held in October 2025, the Welcoming Communities Program at USCRI Mexico, through the Network of Committees for Integration and Welcoming (ReCIBE) at Universidad Panamericana, organized an academic essay contest focused on mobility, inclusion, and intercultural dialogue. Seven teams, comprising nineteen students, participated in the contest, contributing legal and social analyses on contemporary mobility challenges. We are pleased to present the essay awarded first place in recognition of its academic rigor, critical insight, and relevance to the broader discussion on human mobility.
FORCED DISPLACEMENT AND THE RIGHT TO ASYLUM: CHALLENGES IN MEXICO AND THE UNITED STATES AND POLICY PROPOSALS TO SAFEGUARD THE DIGNITY OF VULNERABLE GROUPS
AUTHORS: Valeria Flores Romo – Erika Montserrat Sevilla Vite – Regina Cadena Díaz – Constanza Hidalgo Almanza
UNIVERSIDAD PANAMERICANA, SCHOOL OF LAW – Aguascalientes, México
Introduction
The right to asylum is recognized in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states: “Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.” This right does not apply to common crimes or acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Its modern foundation emerged after the Holocaust, when millions—including Jewish and Roma people—sought refuge abroad. In the absence of a robust legal framework and effective international cooperation, many States closed their borders, condemning those fleeing persecution to violence and, in many cases, death (United Nations, n.d.). This historical context underscores the enduring importance of asylum as a mechanism of protection in situations of forced displacement—that is, when individuals or groups are compelled to leave their homes because of armed conflict, violence, human rights violations, or disasters. In such circumstances, seeking asylum abroad becomes the only means of ensuring safety and dignity (Government of Mexico, n.d.).
Despite its recognition as a human right, asylum remains a source of contention. Many countries have adopted restrictive policies that force thousands to risk their lives on dangerous routes, exposing them to abuse and exploitation. While States retain the sovereign right to control their borders, they also bear a binding obligation to respect and protect the human rights of all persons.
Forced displacement and the right to asylum present urgent legal and humanitarian challenges for both Mexico and the United States. In 2023, Mexico recorded 140,982 asylum applications—the highest number ever registered by the Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance (COMAR) (El Economista, 2024). In 2024, it remained among the ten countries with the highest number of asylum requests, with nearly 80,000 cases (UNHCR, 2025). In the United States, by the end of fiscal year 2024, immigration courts faced nearly 1.5 million pending asylum claims (Council on Foreign Relations, 2024). These figures reveal institutional saturation and the growing vulnerability of those seeking protection.
The impact is even more severe for children, women, LGBTIQ+ individuals, and victims of human trafficking, who face disproportionate risks during transit and while awaiting adjudication. This reality highlights the need to examine existing barriers, assess compliance with international obligations, and propose feasible reforms. This essay undertakes that analysis and presents concrete policy recommendations, with particular attention to the situation in Aguascalientes, Mexico.
Problem diagnosis
In recent decades, the increase in forced displacement has placed enormous pressure on protection systems throughout North America. Mexico, as both a transit and destination country, and the United States, as the primary destination for asylum seekers, face restrictive policies, institutional limitations, and practical barriers that obstruct access to rights. These challenges disproportionately affect vulnerable groups such as women, children, LGBTIQ+ individuals, and victims of trafficking.
It is important to note that the progressive tightening of access policies has prevented thousands of people from submitting asylum applications safely and in an orderly manner. In the United States, measures such as the Remain in Mexico program (also known as Quédate en México) and the mandatory use of the CBP One mobile application have created severe bottlenecks, forcing applicants to wait in Mexican border cities where criminal violence is widespread. These dynamics expose people to kidnapping, extortion, and sexual violence.
In Mexico, the situation is equally concerning. The Mexican Commission for Refugee Assistance (COMAR) has seen the number of asylum applications multiply in recent years without a proportional increase in operational or budgetary capacity. According to Professor Jessica Nájera, in her lecture “Refuge in Mexico: History and Recent Developments,” organized by the Institute for Social Research at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), between 2013 and 2024 Mexico received 575,124 asylum applications. Of those, only 35%—that is, 202,990 cases—were resolved. Moreover, among the resolved cases, only 134,960 resulted in refugee status. This situation has led to prolonged delays, limited access to information, and denials that often fail to meet international due process standards.
Furthermore, the limited issuance of regular stay documents, such as the Visitor Card for Humanitarian Reasons, prevents people in the process of seeking asylum from accessing health services, education, and formal employment. This reality condemns them to informal work and, consequently, to deeper socioeconomic vulnerability.
The combination of restrictive policies, slow bureaucratic procedures, and exclusionary technological systems has forced many asylum seekers to rely on smuggling networks or to remain in unsafe environments. This dependency heightens the likelihood of labor exploitation, human trafficking, and gender-based violence.
Mexico has shifted from being primarily a country of transit to becoming a destination for thousands of asylum seekers, especially from Central America, the Caribbean, and South America. However, this structural transformation has not been accompanied by robust public policies to ensure effective access to protection.
The institutional overload faced by COMAR has resulted in waiting periods exceeding six months, during which individuals remain in legal limbo without guaranteed access to basic services. Moreover, the northern border cities—where many applicants wait for their chance to enter the United States—are deeply affected by organized crime. Migrants in waiting are frequently victims of express kidnappings, extortion, and forced recruitment by criminal groups.
Another serious obstacle is the lack of reception infrastructure. Shelters, most of which are run by civil society organizations or churches, lack the resources necessary to serve the growing population of asylum seekers. This results in overcrowded conditions, limited medical care, and insufficient food supplies. In such contexts, the most vulnerable—especially children and women—face an elevated risk of sexual violence and exploitation.
The obstacles within asylum systems have a differentiated and disproportionately harsh impact on certain population groups who face particular risks that exacerbate their vulnerability.
For children and adolescents, the lack of access to education and healthcare during prolonged waiting periods results in structural deprivation. In addition, practices such as immigration detention and family separation cause deep and long-lasting psychological trauma. These minors are often exposed to violence and exploitation, whether in improvised shelters or at the hands of smugglers, making them one of the most unprotected sectors of the displaced population.
Women, in turn, face high rates of sexual and gender-based violence along migration routes and in the cities where they must wait while immigration authorities process their cases. The lack of effective reporting mechanisms and institutional protection leaves them in a state of defenselessness that compounds the risks they already face because of their gender. For single mothers, the situation is even more precarious, as they shoulder the dual responsibility of family care and physical safety in environments marked by insecurity, scarcity of resources, and limited institutional support.
LGBTIQ+ individuals also experience distinct and severe challenges. Their sexual orientation or gender identity exposes them to violence, discrimination, and social exclusion both in their countries of origin and in transit and destination countries. Restrictive policies such as Remain in Mexico have forced LGBTIQ+ asylum seekers to remain in hostile border environments where they are frequently victims of physical assaults, extortion, and attacks that endanger not only their physical integrity but also their emotional well-being and right to live with dignity.
Finally, victims of trafficking and exploitation face even more invisible barriers. The lack of effective identification mechanisms within migration processes increases the likelihood that they remain hidden within forced displacement dynamics. Many become trapped in networks of labor or sexual exploitation, without access to specialized shelters or justice mechanisms. The absence of an adequate institutional response perpetuates cycles of violence and abuse.
Assessment of International Commitments
Mexico and the United States are parties to the principal international instruments that regulate the right to asylum. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes in Article 14 the right of every person to seek and enjoy asylum from persecution. At the regional level, the American Convention on Human Rights reaffirms this right in Article 22 and prohibits the return of persecuted individuals to territories where their lives or freedom would be threatened. Likewise, the Cartagena Declaration on Refugees broadens the definition of refugee status in Latin America to include those fleeing generalized violence, foreign aggression, internal conflicts, or massive human rights violations.
At the global level, the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol define a refugee as any person who, owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, is outside their country of nationality and is unable or unwilling to avail themselves of its protection. These instruments oblige States to guarantee access to asylum procedures and to respect the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits returning an individual to a country where their life or freedom would be at risk.
In Mexico, the domestic legal framework reflects a broad commitment to international protection by adopting the expanded Cartagena definition and by incorporating the right to asylum into the Law on Refugees, Complementary Protection, and Political Asylum. In recent years, institutional progress has been made. According to UNHCR’s 2025 report “Un Hogar en México,” COMAR processed 40% more applications than in 2023, achieved a recognition rate above 60%, and advanced in digitalization efforts.
However, Mexico remains among the ten countries with the highest number of asylum applications worldwide, with nearly 80,000 cases in 2024, revealing continued pressure on its operational capacity. Added to this are reports of summary returns at the southern border and precarious conditions in migration detention centers, which demonstrate that despite legal and institutional advances, there is still a gap between formal commitments and effective protection in practice.
In the United States, the asylum framework was consolidated with the Refugee Act of 1980, which incorporated international obligations into federal law and established procedures consistent with the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol. However, in practice, U.S. migration policies have substantially restricted access to protection. Measures such as the Remain in Mexico program and the enforcement of Title 42—applied until 2023—resulted in mass expulsions without individualized assessments, in direct violation of the principle of non-refoulement (UNHCR, 2024).
Additionally, by the end of fiscal year 2024, the U.S. immigration courts faced a backlog of more than 1.5 million pending asylum cases, placing applicants in prolonged legal uncertainty and undermining their right to a fair and timely procedure (Council on Foreign Relations, 2024). This situation constitutes a substantive breach of international obligations: although the right to asylum is formally recognized, border enforcement policies severely restrict its exercise.
Taken together, the migration and asylum policies of Mexico and the United States demonstrate partial compliance with their international commitments. Mexico has strengthened its institutions and adopted progressive legislation, yet continues to face chronic underfunding and logistical constraints that prevent full implementation. The United States, despite having greater capacity, has chosen restrictive measures that directly contradict international principles it has pledged to uphold.
In conclusion, the compliance of both countries with their international obligations remains more formal than real. While Mexico demonstrates normative and institutional progress, and the United States maintains sophisticated procedural frameworks, both fail in practice to guarantee effective protection. As a result, asylum seekers remain exposed to conditions of vulnerability, discrimination, and risk—highlighting the urgent need for structural reforms to ensure genuine respect for the right to asylum and human dignity.
National Context and Proposals
Throughout its history, Mexico has served as a refuge for countless individuals who were forced to leave their homes and countries in search of safety and protection. This humanitarian commitment began during the Guatemalan Civil War, when violence displaced thousands of people. In 1980, Mexico created a legal and regulatory framework to address the influx of refugees and migrants (United Nations, 2023).
Over time, Mexico developed and strengthened its human rights framework. On June 10, 2011, a constitutional reform to Article 1 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States expanded the catalogue of human rights by granting constitutional status to the rights contained in international treaties to which Mexico is a party. The reform also recognized the pro persona principle and established the obligation of the State to prevent, investigate, punish, and remedy human rights violations. That same year, Mexico enacted the Law on Refugees, Complementary Protection, and Political Asylum and the Migration Law, which today regulate asylum applications and define the principles and rights that should guide the country’s migration policy (Ministry of the Interior, n.d.).
Because of its geographic proximity to the United States, Mexico functions as a key transit corridor for migrants from Central America seeking to reach U.S. territory. This geographical reality requires the Mexican Government to reinforce its institutions and policies to guarantee safe, violence-free passage for migrants and to ensure the protection of its own citizens.
In formal terms, the Government of Mexico recognizes its obligation and commitment to protecting human rights, including those of refugees and migrants. The Migration Law, published on May 25, 2011, establishes the principles and rights recognized for migrant populations. Article 1 provides that within Mexican territory, the transit and stay of foreigners must be based on respect for and protection of human rights.
The Migration Law guarantees for migrants a set of fundamental rights, including nationality, freedom of movement, legal security, consular assistance, non-discrimination, access to asylum and refugee status, and the protection of family unity and human dignity (National Human Rights Commission, n.d.). It also sets forth guiding principles for migration policy, such as the absolute respect for human rights and international solidarity.
The Law on Refugees, Complementary Protection, and Political Asylum is founded on principles of non-refoulement, non-discrimination, the best interests of the child, family unity, non-penalization for irregular entry, and confidentiality. Article 6 explicitly prohibits the rejection or return (refoulement) of any asylum seeker or refugee at the border to a country where their life would be at risk if: (i) They fear persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, gender, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion; (ii) Their life, safety, or freedom is threatened by generalized violence, foreign aggression, internal conflict, or massive human rights violations in their country of origin; or (iii) New circumstances arise during their stay in Mexico that create similar fears or threats.
In Mexico, shelters and migration stations constitute the main mechanisms for providing assistance to migrants and asylum seekers. These facilities are intended to offer temporary protection and to meet basic needs such as food, shelter, medical care, and legal assistance. However, most are managed by civil society organizations and religious institutions, revealing the limited direct action of the Mexican Government.
Currently, there are approximately 103 shelters and food centers in key areas of the country operated by NGOs and the Catholic Church (Government of Mexico, n.d.). On the Government’s side, the National Migration Institute (INM) operates only 29 migration stations, where migrants are detained for up to 15 days, and several provisional holding facilities, which depending on capacity, hold people for 48 hours or up to seven days. However, 33 of these temporary facilities were closed in 2023 following recommendations by the National Human Rights Commission concerning human rights violations. The National System for Integral Family Development (DIF) also established a network of specialized shelters for children and adolescents (Government of Mexico, n.d.).
Despite these efforts, the number of migrants and asylum seekers in the country continues to grow. In 2024 alone, there were 360,146 people in irregular migratory situations (IOM, 2024)—a figure vastly exceeding the existing infrastructure and budget allocated to these issues. Overcrowding has increased as flows rise beyond existing infrastructure, as well as deficient care, and an urgent need to move toward a more comprehensive and coordinated model.
In Mexico, the national network of shelters for asylum seekers and migrants in transit forms a cornerstone of the protection system. However, these facilities operate with limited budgets and insufficient institutional oversight, which reduces their capacity to ensure dignified and safe conditions. According to data from the International Organization for Migration, the resources allocated are clearly disproportionate to the magnitude of the migratory flows confronting the country (IOM, n.d.).
In this context, one of the most urgent measures is to increase the budget allocated to shelters and strengthen government oversight mechanisms. Such reforms would expand coverage, improve infrastructure, and guarantee more effective and specialized care for vulnerable groups such as children, women, and LGBTIQ+ persons.
All these rights—recognized in Mexico’s Constitution and laws, reflected in shelters, and reaffirmed in Government commitments—appear commendable in writing. Yet they often remain “dead letter” in practice. Rampant violence, discrimination, racism, corruption, and organized crime continue to render many of these guarantees ineffective. Therefore, it is essential to enact new reforms, strengthen existing institutions, and establish stronger legal mechanisms to transform these commitments into tangible protections.
For instance, the creation of a National Shelter System specialized in asylum seekers, jointly financed by the federal and state governments, would help standardize care standards and reduce the overreliance on civil society organizations, which currently shoulder much of the responsibility. Moreover, comprehensive digitalization of asylum case files could significantly reduce processing times and enhance transparency by preventing data loss and bureaucratic delays.
Another innovative measure would be to implement early local integration programs, allowing asylum seekers to access education, healthcare, and employment from the beginning of the procedure rather than waiting for final resolution. These policies would not only be more humane but also cost-effective, as they foster autonomy and reduce pressure on shelters and public resources.
An additional innovation with transformative potential lies in the responsible use of artificial intelligence (AI) in asylum processes. Today, multiple AI tools can assist in classifying case files, translating documents, and detecting vulnerabilities, thereby accelerating procedures without replacing human decision-making. Likewise, official multilingual chatbots could be deployed by institutions and NGOs to provide reliable, accessible information to applicants, reducing dependence on intermediaries and ensuring clarity about their rights.
Nevertheless, implementing such a measure requires extreme caution. Sensitive data must be strictly protected, and any automated analysis must be subject to human supervision to prevent bias or errors that could jeopardize applicants’ dignity. For AI to contribute effectively to asylum processes without infringing rights, clear safeguards must be established. These include maintaining human oversight over all substantive decisions, protecting sensitive data through high cybersecurity standards, ensuring algorithmic transparency to avoid discrimination, and guaranteeing accessibility in multiple languages and formats. Civil society participation in the monitoring of these tools should also be mandatory. Only under these conditions can AI serve as a complement—not a replacement—to the State’s responsibility to protect the right to asylum.
A key yet often overlooked proposal is education. Implementing awareness and empathy campaigns in primary, secondary, and high schools to combat racism, xenophobia, and discrimination is vital. Education forms the foundation of society and directly influences social development. Although the Mexican Government claims to uphold an equitable and inclusive educational model, this is not reflected in practice, as seen in the high levels of violence, disappearances, and discrimination against migrants.
In the United States, former President Donald Trump’s administration advanced migration policies based on criminalization, portraying migrants as threats rather than individuals with rights. The mass detention of more than 61,000 people—nearly 70% of whom had no convictions and many detained for minor offenses (Carabaña, 2025)—normalized persecution in public spaces and reinforced a social discourse of dehumanization.
These policies have left at least 69 people dead in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody (Carabaña, 2025). The messages of hostility and fear promoted by Trump entrenched xenophobia in society, teaching even children to perceive migrants as enemies. Such rhetoric perpetuates violence and erodes respect for human rights. The role of education, therefore, is indispensable: it must become a transformative force. The values and messages conveyed by political leaders, teachers, and parents profoundly shape the next generation, for better or worse. Promoting inclusion and empathy through education is essential to building a society based on solidarity rather than fear.
It is also critical to provide comprehensive training to personnel from the National Migration Institute (INM), the National Guard, and local authorities on human rights, gender perspective, and sexual diversity. Equipping officials with the necessary tools to identify and address vulnerabilities helps eradicate discriminatory practices and inhumane treatment, fostering an institutional culture of dignity and respect. This type of training not only improves immediate responses but also represents a crucial step toward creating a more humane and secure migration system.
Regional Commitments and the Shared Responsibility of Mexico and the United States
As demonstrated throughout this essay, even though States have established domestic laws and migration policies, they lack the capacity to address forced mobility effectively on their own. The complexity and transnational nature of this phenomenon demand that national measures be integrated into a broader framework of international and regional cooperation. Mechanisms grounded in shared responsibility and solidarity are essential to distribute burdens, harmonize standards, and ensure fair and dignified protection for asylum seekers.
Up to this point, the analysis has primarily focused on the challenges that Mexico and the United States face in guaranteeing the right to asylum. However, the Latin American region provides valuable examples of cooperation that, while developed under different contexts, offer important lessons for building shared solutions. A notable example is the Inter-Agency Coordination Platform for Refugees and Migrants from Venezuela (R4V), launched by UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration (IOM). Created in 2018 in response to the Venezuelan displacement crisis, the platform currently coordinates more than 200 actors across seventeen countries in the region (UNHCR & IOM, n.d.).
Although R4V was specifically designed to address the displacement of over 7.8 million Venezuelans, it serves as a useful precedent for understanding how to organize a coordinated regional response that combines humanitarian assistance, socioeconomic integration, and shared responsibility. Mexico and the United States could draw important lessons from this model, adapting it to their unique migratory dynamics. The relevance of R4V does not lie in replicating its exact structure, but in its demonstration that crises of such magnitude require solutions that transcend national borders.
Beyond these practical examples of cooperation, the region also has developed instruments that establish higher standards of protection. The 1984 Cartagena Declaration on Refugees represented a turning point by recognizing that forced mobility also arises from structural factors such as generalized violence, internal conflicts, and massive human rights violations. By expanding the definition of “refugee” beyond that contained in the 1951 Convention, Latin American States established a framework of solidarity that placed human dignity at the center of international protection (UNHCR, 2014). Mexico incorporated this consensus into its domestic legislation; however, its application must be revitalized in light of current mass displacements and the increasing pressure along its northern border.
More recently, the 2022 Los Angeles Declaration on Migration and Protection, adopted at the Summit of the Americas, sought to operationalize the principle of shared responsibility within the Western Hemisphere. The Declaration outlines concrete commitments, including the expansion of legal migration pathways, strengthening of labor integration, and closer cooperation with international organizations (U.S. Government, 2022). Despite its potential, implementation has been fragmented and marked by conflicting national interests, which have weakened its effectiveness.
This lack of political will is particularly evident in the case of Mexico and the United States, whose bilateral relationship on migration has often been limited to containment strategies and the externalization of asylum obligations. Both countries must move beyond these reactive approaches and effectively implement the commitments of the Los Angeles Declaration, translating them into tangible public policies that alleviate border pressures and guarantee dignified access to asylum.
The Cartagena and Los Angeles Declarations charted a more humane and cooperative approach to international protection by recognizing that forced displacement requires collective responses. The current challenge is not the absence of legal frameworks but the lack of political will to apply them. Mexico and the United States have both the opportunity and the responsibility to transform these commitments into sustainable public policies. As long as these commitments remain confined to declarations and diplomatic statements, the right to asylum will continue to be an unfulfilled promise for thousands of people fleeing persecution without real guarantees of protection.
Regional cooperation further demonstrates that international protection depends not only on State-level consensus but also on local action. In Central America, there are successful experiences showing that local governments can integrate displaced individuals through community-based programs that provide access to housing, education, and essential services (UNHCR & UNDP, 2021). In Mexico, states such as Aguascalientes could serve as pilot sites for local integration, supported by international funding, to reduce pressure on border regions and provide asylum seekers with safer and more dignified living conditions.
Conclusion
The right to asylum, despite being formally recognized under both international and domestic law, continues to face serious obstacles to its effective implementation in Mexico and the United States. Institutional saturation, limited financial and human resources, and restrictive migration policies have left thousands of applicants in conditions of extreme vulnerability. These deficiencies have an even greater impact on historically marginalized groups—such as women, children, LGBTIQ+ individuals, and victims of trafficking—who face compounded risks during displacement and while awaiting resolution of their cases.
Given this reality, it is urgent to strengthen institutions, expand and monitor shelters, digitize asylum procedures, and incorporate technological tools equipped with strict safeguards. Education must also play a central role, both to combat discrimination and to foster empathy toward displaced populations. In parallel, regional cooperation is essential to address a phenomenon that transcends national borders and demands collective responsibility.
Mexico and the United States now stand at a decisive moment. They possess the legal frameworks and international commitments required to protect the right to asylum, yet the persistence of restrictive practices reveals a profound gap between law and reality. The task before them is to transform formal recognition into genuine guarantees—to shift from declarations to implementation.
Only through comprehensive reform, regional solidarity, and the political will to uphold human dignity can both countries move toward an asylum system that fulfills its original purpose: to offer protection, safety, and hope to those fleeing persecution and seeking a new beginning.
REFERENCES
Council on Foreign Relations. (2024). How the U.S. asylum process works. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/how-us-asylum-process-works
El Economista. (2024, January 3). Record broken for refugee applications in 2023. El Economista. https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/Rompen-record-solicitudes-de-refugio-en-el-2023-20240103-0095.html
Government of Mexico. (n.d.). Political asylum [PDF document]. https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/100168/010_asilo_politico.pdf
Government of the United States. (2022). Los Angeles Declaration on Migration and Protection. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/06/10/declaracion-de-los-angeles-sobre-migracion-y-proteccion
Mexico, Congress of the Union. (2011). Migration Law (DOF May 25, 2011). https://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/ref/lmigra/LMigra_orig_25may11.pdf
Mexico, Congress of the Union. (n.d.). Law on Refugees, Complementary Protection, and Political Asylum. https://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/pdf/LRPCAP.pdf
National Human Rights Commission (CNDH). (n.d.). Human rights of migrants. https://www.cndh.org.mx/derechos-humanos/derechos-de-las-personas-migrantes
Pérez, A. (2025, September 5). The bodies of ICE: 14 migrants, 3 of them Mexican, have died in custody in Trump’s first year. El País US. https://elpais.com/us/migracion/2025-09-05/los-cadaveres-del-ice-14-migrantes-3-de-ellos-mexicanos-han-muerto-bajo-custodia-en-el-primer-ano-de-trump.html
Observatorio de Migración Internacional. (n.d.). Shelters for migrants in Mexico. Government of Mexico. https://omi.gob.mx/es/OMI/ApMMX
International Organization for Migration (IOM). (n.d.). Mexico Migration Pact Agreement. http://omi.gob.mx/es/OMI/ApMMX
Secretaría de Gobernación. (n.d.). Migration policy / DFI. https://portales.segob.gob.mx/es/PoliticaMigratoria/DFI
Syracuse University, Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC). (2022, December). A sober assessment of the growing U.S. asylum backlog. https://tracreports.org/reports/705
United Nations. (n.d.). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. https://www.un.org/es/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
United Nations. (2018, November). Migration: A global phenomenon requiring responses [UN News]. https://news.un.org/es/story/2018/11/1447201
United Nations. (2023, March). UN calls for solidarity and protection for migrants worldwide [UN News]. https://news.un.org/es/story/2023/03/1519732
UNHCR. (2014). Cartagena +30: Brazil Action Plan. UNHCR. https://www.acnur.org/cartagena30
UNHCR. (2024, September 30). UNHCR reiterates its concern over U.S. asylum regulations. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. https://www.unhcr.org/us/news/press-releases/news-comment-unhcr-reiterates-concern-about-us-asylum-regulations
UNHCR. (2025, April 29). A home in Mexico: 2024 results report. UNHCR. https://www.acnur.org/mx/noticias/comunicados-de-prensa/acnur-presenta-su-informe-de-resultados-2024-un-hogar-en-mexico
UNHCR & IOM. (n.d.). Coordination Platform for Refugees and Migrants from Venezuela (R4V). R4V Platform. https://www.r4v.info/es/regional
UNHCR & UNDP. (2021). Facing the challenges of forced displacement in Central America and Mexico. United Nations Development Programme. https://www.undp.org/latin-america/publications/facing-challenges-forced-displacement-central-america-and-mexico
