Amnesty International has called on governments across the Americas to resist a set of immigration policies introduced by President Donald Trump that the organization labels as “harmful” and counterproductive to the safety and dignity of asylum seekers. In a statement issued on Wednesday, the Americas Director, Ana Piquer, highlighted that these policies merely fabricate exaggerated threats and contribute to the intensification of militarization at the border, undermining human rights.
Piquer singled out the abrupt halting of the CBP One application—an essential resource for those seeking asylum—as preventing more than 270,000 individuals from gaining access to the asylum process while stranded in Mexico. Additionally, Amnesty International raised concerns over the influence the US applies on regional partners, urging nations such as Mexico and Canada to maintain a distance from these US strategies.
The warning coincides with the enforcement of several executive actions under President Trump’s administration, including mass deportations, increased border militarization, and the re-implementation of the contentious “Remain in Mexico” policy—officially termed as the “Migrant Protection Protocols”. Amnesty International criticizes these moves as they arguably infringe on the fundamental rights enshrined by international frameworks such as the Refugee Convention 1951, posing serious safety risks by placing asylum seekers in dangerous conditions and unlawful detention.
The organization’s appeal underscores a broader tension between the US policies and the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits sending individuals to where they might face serious harm. Moreover, such measures challenge the consistency and predictability that are essential for the effective application of the rule of law both domestically and on an international scale.
Amnesty International’s plea urges countries in North and South America not to engage in policies that undermine the rights and safety of individuals pursuing refuge. The organization’s stance demonstrates a call to uphold international legal obligations and provides a clear commentary on the ethical responsibility of governments to protect vulnerable populations. More details on these developments can be found in the full article on JURIST.