Donald Trump’s return to the White House and the start of the America First agenda have triggered profound uncertainty around the globe. This is especially true for Latin America, particularly regarding anticipated changes in U.S. immigration policy. Reducing the flow of migrants heading to the U.S., mainly those crossing the southern border, was one of the central promises of Trump’s presidential campaign. It has been repeatedly portrayed as an “invasion” threatening the people and national security of the United States. In this context, illegal migration emerges as the primary concern, often linked to the illicit drug trade. The calls for a stricter immigration policy became a reality within the first days of Trump’s return to the presidency, dramatically affecting the lives of millions of people.
The Latin American Route
Since 2010, Latin America and the Caribbean have seen the largest relative increase in international migration, resulting from economic insecurity, violence, political instability, and climate change. The migrant population nearly doubled from 8.3 million in 2010 to 16.3 million in 2022 due to displacement crises, free-movement agreements, and the return of former emigrants with foreign-born families. As of January 2025, 34% of encountered migrants were family units, 5% were unaccompanied minors, and the rest were single adults. Most come from Venezuela, Mexico, and smaller Central American countries, including Guatemala, Cuba, Honduras, and Haiti.
The Latin American route to the U.S. belongs to the world’s most dangerous migration routes. Violent crimes, human trafficking, and sexual abuse are among the numerous threats migrants face on their journey. The route has two particularly problematic sections: the inhospitable region between Panama and Colombia known as the Darién Gap and the US-Mexico border crossing, the riskiest and deadliest parts of the land route. However, it is important to note that not all migrants leaving their country of origin choose the U.S. as their destination.
The migration patterns have changed showing the rise in intra-regional migration, with millions of people moving to neighbouring countries or further within the region. The latest data show that the total number of migrants from Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) rose from 34.6 million in 2010 to 42.0 million in 2020, with a significant increase in intra-regional migration by 83.2%, reaching 11.3 million. In contrast, migration to North America, the main destination for LAC migrants, grew only slightly by 2.2%, counting 25.5 million in 2020. Following the recent shifts in U.S. immigration policies, it is highly likely that intraregional migration will increase significantly, as migrating to North America becomes even more difficult.
Asylum restrictions, national emergency, and “massive deportations”
President Trump issued several executive orders, some aimed at reshaping immigration policy in line with the America First agenda. In support of “protecting the American people,“ all policies established by Biden’s administration setting priorities for immigration enforcement were immediately revoked. These policy changes have far-reaching consequences for Latin Americans who already live in or attempt to enter the U.S. territory.
Under the banner of security, the entry of undocumented migrants to the U.S. has been suspended in any circumstances, restricting them from invoking asylum. This restricts the right incorporated into U.S. law in 1980, which guarantees the right to asylum regardless of how the person fearing persecution entered the U.S. territory. As of January 20, there is no possibility to access the U.S. asylum system at the U.S.-Mexico border. In addition, by declaring a national emergency at the southern border, the Department of Defense (DOD) can reallocate military funds for border enforcement, which includes constructing barriers and enhancing detention capacity. The goal is to ensure effective control of the U.S.-Mexico border.
Along with that, the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), better known as the Remain in Mexico program has been revived since January 21. It requires non-Mexican asylum seekers arriving at the southern border to wait in Mexico while their asylum cases are processed by U.S. immigration courts, which can take months or years. The program faces wide criticism, as it exposes asylum seekers to insecurity and violence while waiting, and simultaneously violates international refugee law by denying them the right to seek protection. Moreover, the CBP One app, used to schedule appointments at the ports, has been cancelled, further complicating the situation for migrants.
However, the core point of the immigration policy changes is the launch of the “massive deportation” campaign, representing an expanded version of expedited removal. This allows U.S. officials to deport individuals without a court hearing and arrest those suspected of entering the country unlawfully. Immigrants are required to prove they have been present for more than two years. It is indicated that the “mass deportations” should initially concern migrants with criminal records, with plans to include a larger undocumented population, potentially affecting up to 13 million people. Another process that has to do with deportations is to label certain cartels as „foreign terrorist organizations„, potentially allowing the use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport members without trial, regardless of their legal status in the U.S.
From “Safe Third Country” deals to birthright citizenship
In addition, the State Department has been directed to negotiate with other countries to accept U.S. deportations of asylum seekers under “Safe Third Country” agreements. This would allow the U.S. to limit access to its asylum system by requiring asylum seekers to claim protection in the first safe country they reach. The safe third-country model faces criticism from human rights organizations and migration experts for its legal, ethical, and practical shortcomings. Classifying a country as “safe” suggests that its asylum system meets international standards and does not expose asylum seekers to refoulement or further persecution. Nevertheless, in practice, many “safe”-declared countries lack legal apparatus to ensure effective protection. This results in violating human rights law, specifically the principle of non-refoulment, which guarantees that no migrant, regardless of their status, should be returned to a country where they would face persecution or harm.
As part of the counter-immigration measures, the federal government announced to stop recognizing U.S. citizenship to some children born in the country since February 19, 2025. Citizenship in the United States is based on the jus soli (right of the soil) principle, guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. It is a birthplace-based citizenship granted to individuals born on U.S. soil regardless of their parents‘ citizenship or immigration status. Repealing birthright citizenship would thus significantly increase the unauthorized migrant population, possibly counting 4.7 million by 2025. However, this executive order has faced significant legal challenges and opposition, with multiple federal courts blocking its implementation.
Latin America reacts
Recent changes in U.S. immigration policy have raised concerns among Latin American countries. Honduran President Xiomara Castro, currently serving as the rotating president of CELAC (Community of Latin American and Caribbean States), called for an emergency meeting to address these issues. However, the summit was ultimately cancelled due to a lack of unity among the member states, with only two out of the 33 leaders willing to participate.
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum resisted some U.S. migration plans while willing to cooperate with others, possibly under Trump’s threat of a 25 percent tariff on Mexican goods. Sheinbaum stated that Mexico will accept deported Mexican citizens and others, including migrants from countries, such as Cuba and Venezuela to repatriate them eventually. However, she did not agree to accept foreign asylum-seekers as part of the “Remain in Mexico“ policy.
The most vocal critic of deportations was Colombian President Gustavo Petro. However, despite initial resistance and calls for respectful treatment of migrants, Colombia succumbed to the threat of sanctions. Petro offered to send the presidential plane to facilitate migrants‘ return to Colombia, arguing it was a more dignified alternative to the U.S. deportation flights. Brazilian President Lula responded similarly, sending a Brazilian Air Force plane to organize the return of concerned undocumented Brazilian citizens. Lula too demanded “dignified, respectful, and humane treatment” for the returning immigrants.
Smaller countries, like Panama and Costa Rica, prefer cooperation with the U.S. and assist in the repatriations paid by the U.S. government. El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala have reached or are on the way toward negotiating a “safe third country” deal, which involves accepting migrants from other countries and preventing them from requesting asylum in the U.S. The threat of tariffs or the Panama Canal takeover leaves them little space to maneuver.
Recent changes in the U.S. immigration policy have strained inter-regional relations, as migration is one of the defining factors shaping the United States‘ ties with Latin American countries. The message sent by the U.S. government that emigration to the country is not worth the effort is likely to cause an ever-greater increase in intra-regional migration. Although the northern neighbour’s radical moves generate deep uncertainty, they may also be the impetus for closer and more effective regional cooperation within Latin America.
Author: Adela Sadloňová
Picture Source: Pixabay
