This thesis examines the humanitarian and socio-economic consequences of the U.S. Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), also known as "Remain in Mexico," implemented under the Trump (MPP 1.0) and Biden (MPP 2.0) administrations. While the policy was framed as a logistical solution to reduce asylum backlogs, this study argues that MPP functioned primarily as a deterrence mechanism that intentionally obstructed access to asylum by externalizing border control and compounding migrant vulnerability. Drawing on qualitative interviews with immigration attorneys, advocates, NGO staff, and policy experts, alongside extensive secondary research, the thesis identifies three interlocking effects of the policy: legal and procedural barriers to asylum, severe humanitarian risks including exposure to violence and trafficking, and socio-economic hardships for both asylum seekers and host communities. By analyzing how the implementation of MPP intensified structural inequities and undermined international refugee protections, this research contributes to ongoing debates on the use of deterrence-based asylum policies and ethical migration governance. As wealthier nations increasingly outsource asylum processing to other countries, understanding the consequences of policies like MPP is critical to challenging this global trend for more humane and efficient alternatives.
Jahlanny Morrobel-Peña (Sun,) studied this question.