By Josiah Heyman

US political discourse characterizes the US-Mexico border as a site of threat and, of necessity, exclusion. This frame ignores the importance of borders to economies, families, and culture in our increasingly interconnected world. Moreover, it leads to policies that place people at risk of victimization and death. In conceiving of the border solely in terms of exclusion, nations forego the opportunity to strengthen relationships across borders. This paper argues that the politics of humane migration require a vision of borders as sites of encounter, engagement, and relationship, rather than solely exclusion. This reconceptualization of the US-Mexico border, in particular, would strengthen relationships across borders, and prioritize cooperation between Latin America/the Caribbean and the United States, starting with regulated legal flows. It would also respond to the shared contexts of migration, including contraband in arms and drugs, criminal violence, and climate change. It articulates an alternative vision of borders as a “commons” in which mutual needs can be addressed (a commons is an issue or resource in which every one has access and involvement). Migration itself provides a perfect example of such a need. It takes place in a political climate partially but powerfully shaped by racism and classism. Thus, it has become a polarized “issue” that appears insolvable. In fact, it may not be a problem at all. Rather, in our current demographic-economic situation, as well as for our cultural well-being, migration should be treated as an asset. Insofar as it needs to be addressed, this paper delineates many possibilities. The options are not perfect and magical — the challenges are hard and diverse — but they an advance a vision of a shared cross-border space on migration. That might be a crucial move, not only for migration, but along a path that recognizes relationships and commitments of many kinds across the hemisphere and world. Recognition is not enough; real change in resources and power needs to follow. But a vision of connection rather than exclusion provides the political starting point needed for change to happen. In every political instance in which borders are used to frame migration in terms of who, how, and how much to exclude, connectedness loses ground. A politics of humane migration can only emerge if rooted in a positive vision of borders as sites of engagement and encounter.

Journal on Migration and Human SecurityVolume 12, Issue 3, September 2024, Pages 321-331

By Cate E. Bird and Austin Shangraw

This article highlights the importance of accounting for the dead in migration contexts, from international humanitarian law (IHL), international human rights law (IHRL), and forensic perspectives. Starting by reviewing obligations under IHL and IHRL for the processes of accounting, the article discusses forensic action and the role that accounting can play to protect the dead and clarify the fate and whereabouts of the missing for their families. Considering the complexity of missing and deceased migrant cases, this problem must be approached from several complementary angles, including States codifying international legal obligations related to accounting for the dead in domestic legal or policy frameworks; developing national mechanisms to collect, centralize, and report disaggregated information on migrant deaths; addressing migrant deaths from a public health perspective; pursuing identification efforts including participating in transnational coordination mechanisms; developing strong partnerships with civil society actors; and coupling accounting initiatives with policies that promote the search for missing migrants.

Journal on Migration and Human SecurityVolume 12, Issue 3, September 2024, Pages 310-320

By Gabriella Soto

This article explores how undocumented border crosser (UBC) deaths are counted as well as mis- and under-counted across the US southwest, and proposes a suite of policy remediations to standardize this process. An accurate count of UBC recovered remains is vital to understanding the scope of fatalities associated with border crossing, providing evidence accounting for the reciprocal relationship between US border enforcement and the incidence of migration-related death. To meaningfully intervene, it is insufficient to advocate only for more robust individual death investigations, though this is pivotal to forensically identify UBC decedents and unite them with their loved ones. Though identification and reunification of UBCs are the elements of forensic care most commonly attributed as humanitarian, the relationship between forensic investigation and international humanitarian principles is equally about accumulating primary evidence for policy intervention and justice claims on behalf of those who wrongfully die. Even if existing counting mechanisms do not provide the means for establishing this attribution between border-crossing deaths and border enforcement policy, this article lays out an argument for why they must do so and it makes recommendations for how this can take place. Necessarily, this article begins with a critique of existing mechanisms for counting UBC deaths, from the federal observation of such deaths by Customs and Border Protection, to the bureaucratic mechanisms for the collection of vital statistics authored at the local level. It then suggests means for improving accurate counting using the US Standard Certificate of Death. It particularly explores two aspects of the certificate, Manner of Death reporting and a section that asks death filers to describe how the death occurred, sections 37 and 43 respectively. Finally, it explores historical precedent for altering the standard death form at local and then national levels, positing that select amendments to the existing death certificate would be useful for standardizing how medicolegal death filers across the border and beyond can more accurately enumerate and characterize UBC deaths.

Policy recommendations include the following, in order of immediacy:

• Jurisdictions across the US southwest must adopt standardized criteria for counting fatalities believed to be associated with undocumented border crossing.

• Despite some local formalization of UBC counting, current means of representing UBC status in vital records remains ad hoc across the US southwest and existing mechanisms for counting elude wider scale national recognition in vital statistics. The most straightforward and reliable method of standardization to ensure systematic representation of UBC deaths across the borderlands would be a UBC checkbox on the death certificate. This would require cooperation with state-level public health departments and legislatures. Precedent exists for changing the death form at the state level, facilitating, in some cases, for eventual inclusion of new components of the death certificate to be adopted on the US Standard Certificate of Death. This is recommended as a longer-term goal.

• Finally, there must be a means to characterize the deadly relationship between UBC fatalities and US border enforcement policy and practice in vital records where UBC Manners of Death are most often characterized as “Natural” or “Accidental.” Both are inaccurate. Unilaterally ensuring an accurate count leaves room for a trend already well underway in which agencies associated with border enforcement have cast UBC deaths as simply due to unfortunate heat-related accidents, resulting in legislation aimed to mitigate deaths that fails to address the role of border policy in causing deaths. This paper recommends that a new Manner of Death category could be useful beyond the border to represent non-capital crimes enforced by leveraging bodily harm.

Journal on Migration and Human SecurityVolume 12, Issue 3, September 2024, Pages 290-309

By Courtney C. Siegert, Molly A. Kaplan, Nicholas P. Herrmann and M. Kate Spradley

This paper details the structural and resource challenges in Texas related to identifying migrant decedents, investigating their deaths, repatriating them, and adhering to legal and ethical requirements in addressing this humanitarian tragedy. While actors working on migrant decedent investigations in Arizona can map and provide accurate counts of migrant deaths, this is not yet possible for Texas cases. Texas’ mixed Medical Examiner/Justice of the Peace medicolegal system suffers from fragmentation across county jurisdictions, lack of resources, and minimal access to investigative tools for transnational families. These challenges produce a landscape where unidentified presumed migrants may structurally disappear (e.g., buried in temporarily marked graves as unidentified persons with no investigation or case tracking). The article highlights the work of Operation Identification (OpID), a humanitarian project formed to assist border counties with recovering, identifying, and repatriating migrant decedents. OpID’s extensive community outreach and collaboration with governmental and nongovernmental partners in the United States and Latin America have improved practices in some Texas counties. However, systemic change is still needed to address this humanitarian disaster. The article proposes that presumed migrant decedents be managed using a disaster victim identification (DVI) approach, which prioritizes identification, rather than how and why someone dies. It also proposes the establishment of regional Migrant Identification Centers (MICs) to streamline identification and repatriation efforts, while ensuring compliance with Texas law by Justices of the Peace (JPs). Centralization, the article argues, can lead to more accurate counts of migrant deaths and lay the groundwork for greater resources. The article also supports increased access to national databases including the National Combined DNA Indexing System (CODIS) and the National Missing and Unidentified Persons System (NamUs). It argues that transnational families of missing persons be afforded expanded access to investigative tools (e.g., NamUs)

Journal on Migration and Human SecurityVolume 12, Issue 3, September 2024, Pages 257-276