By Bill Frelick, Martina Rapido Ragozzino, and Michael Garcia Bochenek

Between February 12 and 15, 2025, the US government expelled 299 third-country nationals to Panama after they crossed the US-Mexico border, most of whom were seeking asylum, following the inauguration of President Donald Trump on January 20, 2025. Many of these people had fled persecution due to ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, family ties, and political views. “Nobody Cared, Nobody Listened”: The US Expulsion of Third-Country Nationals to Panama documents this abusive mass expulsion, exposing the harsh detention conditions and mistreatment in the United States, beyond being denied due process and the right to seek asylum there. It also details their incommunicado detention in Panama, where authorities confiscated their phones, blocked visitors, and isolated them from the outside world. Of the 299 expelled, 179 were later returned to their home countries under the International Organization for Migration’s “assisted voluntary return” program—though the conditions of their confinement and the limited options they were given raise serious doubts about the voluntariness of those returns. The United States should allow those wrongfully removed to return and seek asylum in accordance with its international legal obligations. It should stop violating the principle of nonrefoulement by processing asylum claims of those arriving at the US border, rather than outsourcing responsibility to countries with far less capacity to examine asylum claims or to provide protection to those needing it. Panama should ensure that those it agreed to take can fairly access asylum and avoid complicity in US abuses

New York: Human Rights Watch, 2025. 45p.

By Taylor Koehler

Throughout the last decade, international human rights experts and monitoring bodies have expressed deep concern over States’ increased use of immigration detention. A primary reason for this concern is that States regularly impose immigration detention arbitrarily, and in so doing, render detained persons more vulnerable to violations of the prohibition on torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. As U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer explained in his 2018 report to the U.N. Security Council on migration-related torture and ill-treatment: “While not every case of arbitrary detention will automatically amount to torture or ill-treatment, there is an undeniable link between both prohibitions … experience shows that any form of arbitrary detention exposes migrants to increased risks of torture and ill-treatment.” While considerable analysis of components of the immigration detention system in the U.S. under international law, particularly the prohibition on torture and other ill treatment, have been completed, there have been few attempts to bring all these different analyses together to look at the U.S. immigration system as a complete whole. This backgrounder, and the more in-depth legal analysis on which it is based (linked above), attempt to fill this gap. The report analyzes the U.N. Convention against Torture and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment and Punishment (Convention against Torture) and other international and regional legal authorities. It draws on CVT’s decades-long clinical experience providing care to survivors of torture, including formerly detained asylum seekers, and highlights reports of wide-ranging abuses at immigration detention centers such as Stewart and Irwin County Detention Centers, located in Georgia where CVT has operated a survivor of torture program for the past five years. The report ultimately concludes both that the system is arbitrary and that U.S. immigration detention systematically exposes detained migrants to violations of the prohibition on torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. Indeed, it finds that the current system’s defects are structural and pervasive to a degree that the system must be phased out entirely to bring the United States into compliance with its international legal obligations.

Center for Victims of Torture, 2021. 21p

By Karen Musalo, Anna Law, Annie Daher, and Katharine Donato

Immigration judges (IJs), housed within the Executive Office for Immigration Review within the Department of Justice (DOJ), make decisions in asylum and withholding claims, which are life or death matters. And although their title is “judge,” IJs are DOJ attorneys who lack independence and are particularly susceptible to political pressures. Federal court judges and scholars alike have criticized the quality and fairness of IJ decision-making, and many studies have been carried out to better understand the factors that impact it. The prior studies have relied principally on quantitative data because IJ decisions are not publicly available or searchable in any existing database. The authors of this study had unprecedented access to more than five hundred IJ decisions, allowing for both a quantitative and qualitative analysis. Our findings were consistent with other studies in noting that IJ experience and gender made a difference in case outcomes, with male IJs and IJs with enforcement backgrounds denying protection at higher rates. We were able to identify other significant trends as well, including that the most common reasons why IJs denied protection to credible asylum seekers were their findings that they failed to meet the extremely stringent requirements of two elements of the refugee definition elements which arguably are overly restrictive and inconsistent with international norms. We also observed patterns of incompetence and bias among these decisions.

This Article recommends several policy reforms to address the shortcomings we identify, among them: (1) the creation of Article I immigration courts, (2) improvement of IJ competence through more stringent hiring standards and continuing education, (3) increased diversity of IJs based on employment experience, (4) reduced deference to the Board of Immigration Appeals in reviewing cases, and (5) allocating additional resources to immigration adjudication.

Boston College Law Review [Vol. 65:2743], 2024, 58p.

By Elana Fogel, Kate Evans

Traffic stops are the most common form of police-initiated contact with members of the public. The sheer volume of traffic stops combined with their use as a pretext to surveil Black and Latiné communities has generated substantial scholarship and movements for police reform. Yet this commentary assumes that the subjects of traffic stops are U.S. citizens. At the same time, scholarship on the intersection of criminal and immigration law and the convergence of their enforcement methods focuses on traffic stops as the immediate entry point for removal proceedings. This Article addresses the gap in literature by describing the experience of noncitizens who endure frequent traffic stops that result in neither immediate criminal nor immigration proceedings but nonetheless produce significant legal and nonlegal consequences-consequences that are likely to grow under a second Trump administration.

This Article frames the experience of traffic stops for noncitizens as a form of "slow deportation." It describes how the use of traffic stops to police noncitizens extends the system of racialized social control to immigrant communities with the effect of surveilling both race and status. It surveys scholarship across disciplines, racial categories, and citizenship status and uses our clients' stories to map the cumulative, compounding, and subterranean harms of traffic stops that culminate in the emotional, social, and sometimes legal exclusion of noncitizens and families. The Article concludes by proposing new approaches to counseling, policy reform, and coalition building informed by the lens of slow deportation.

Duke Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Series No. 2025-18,

By David J. Bier

America traditionally had few immigration restrictions, but since the 1920s, the law has banned most aspiring immigrants. Today, fewer than 1 percent of people who want to move permanently to the United States can do so legally. Immigrants cannot simply get an exception to immigrate any more than restaurateurs in the 1920s could simply get an exception to sell alcohol. Instead, just as Prohibition granted only a few exemptions for religious, industrial, or medical uses of alcohol, people seeking an exception to immigration prohibition must also fit into preexisting carve-outs for a select few. Many Americans have the false impression that these carve-outs are realistic options for potential immigrants to join American society, but the government’s restrictive criteria render the legal paths available only in the most extreme cases. Even when someone qualifies, annual immigration caps greatly delay and, more frequently, eliminate the immigrant’s only

chance to come to the United States. Legal immigration is less like waiting in line and more like winning the lottery: it happens, but it is so rare that it is irrational to expect it in any individual case. This study provides a uniquely comprehensive, jargon-free explanation of U.S. rules for legal permanent immigration. Some steps are simple and reasonable, but most steps serve only as unjustified obstacles to immigrating legally. For some immigrants, this restrictive system sends them into the black market of illegal immigration. For others, it sends them to other countries, where they contribute to the quality of life in their new homes. And for still others, it requires them to remain in their homeland, often underemployed and sometimes in danger. Whatever the outcome, the system punishes both the prospective immigrants and Americans who would associate, contract, and trade with them. Congress and the administration can do better, and this paper explains how.

Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2023. 88p.

By Eric P. Baumer, Min Xie

Research Summary

Our understanding of how immigration enforcement impacts crime has been informed exclusively by data from police crime statistics. This study complements existing research by using longitudinal multilevel data from the National Crime Victimization Survey for 2005–2014 to simultaneously assess the impact of the three predominant immigration policies that have been implemented in local communities. The results indicate that the activation of Secure Communities and 287(g) task force agreements significantly increased violent victimization risk among Latinos, whereas they showed no evident impact on victimization risk among non-Latino Whites and Blacks. The activation of 287(g) jail enforcement agreements and anti-detainer policies had no significant impact on violent victimization risk during the period.

Policy Implications

Contrary to their stated purpose of enhancing public safety, our results show that the Secure Communities program and 287(g) task force agreements did not reduce crime, but instead eroded security in U.S. communities by increasing the likelihood that Latinos experienced violent victimization. These results support the Federal government's ending of 287(g) task force agreements and its more recent move to end the Secure Communities program. Additionally, the results of our study add to the evidence challenging claims that anti-detainer policies pose a threat to violence risk.

Criminology & Public Policy, 22, 417–455. 2023, 39p.

By Christian Ambrosius and David A. Leblang

The forced return of migrants is an important part of migration policy toolkits. An increased risk of deportation, politicians argue, will deter subsequent irregular migration. We explore this argument for the case of forced removals from the United States and find that rather than operating as a deterrent for future migrants, this policy had a boomerang effect. The forced return of migrants with a track record of crime generated negative externalities in the form of higher violence in their countries of origin, counteracting the deterrence effect of higher deportation risk. We apply mediation analysis to a panel of Latin American and Caribbean countries and decompose the effect of deportations on emigration into three coef­fi­cients of interest: a total effect of deportations on later emigration, an effect of deportations on the mediator variable of violence, and an effect of violence on emigration. We address the endogeneity of our key explanatory variables—deportations and violence—using migrants’ exposure to the unequal and staggered implementation of policies intended to facilitate deportations at the level of U.S. states as a source of exogenous variation. We show that migration intentions and asylum requests increase in response to deportation threats. This effect is mediated through increased violence and is strongly driven by dynamics in Central America. Although the total number of apprehensions at the U.S. southern border in response to deportation threats does not show a clear pattern, we observe an increase in the share of unaccompanied minors and the share of entire family units among those apprehended, suggesting a shift in migration strategies and composition.

Demography (2025) 62(2):419–439 DOI 10.1215/00703370-11863789 © 2025

By Silvia Carta

In 2024, PICUM’s media monitoring confirmed a growing trend: at least 142 individuals faced criminal or administrative proceedings for acting in solidarity with migrants in the EU. Additionally, our media monitoring found that at least 91 migrants were subjected to criminalisation, mostly under counter-smuggling legislation. But we know that this number is an undercount, as other organisations recorded many more cases1 in their own work. Furthermore, news articles highlighted several forms of non-judicial harassment directed at human rights defenders and civil society organisations within the EU. Due to the significant gap in statistical and official public data2 regarding individuals accused, charged, or convicted for smuggling and related offenses, this briefing relies on a media alert system and desk research, which may not comprehensively capture all relevant incidents reported across EU countries. Consequently, the figures presented likely underestimate the true extent of such occurrences. In addition, it is likely that many cases, particularly regarding people who are migrants, go unreported by the media.3 Beyond the continuously high number of people who have been criminalised in 2024, this report highlights different trends. Under the current legal system, charges of facilitation and smuggling can be used to criminalise migrants or people without regular residence and those acting in solidarity with them. Despite numerous and protracted judicial proceedings, actual convictions remain low. This report also looks at the several cases of people and organisations across Europe that have experienced non-judicial harassment. Moreover, the findings of our media monitoring in 2024 seek to shed light on the criminalisation of people crossing borders irregularly, which has grown of at least 20% in comparison to monitoring in 2023,4 but remains a relatively hidden phenomenon. A comparison between PICUM’s findings and existing research reveals a tendency for the media to underreport the criminalisation of migrants.5 Yet, the majority of cases analysed by PICUM align with research indicating that migrants, including children, often face unfounded accusations, endure harsh legal processes and face years of pre-trial detention for the sole fact of migrating   

Brussels: PICUM, 2025. 29p.

By Maricela Sanchez

In 2023, we worked with local partners and a brave set of detained leaders to create the California Immigration Detention Database (“Database”). The purpose of the Database was to expose and document the daily conditions of life in California immigration detention by tracking formal grievances sent to us by those inside. “When people try to be heard by staff through their grievances, [they] are ignored. These facilities are not safe, and staff are not held responsible for misconduct.” – Jose Ruben Hernandez Gomez Since the inception of this project, detained immigrants in California have launched widespread labor strikes and hunger strikes and have filed multiple lawsuits and administrative complaints to put a spotlight on the abuse and neglect they suffer. As part of this effort, people in custody have continued to send us copies of the grievances they file through Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (“ICE’s”) internal system. As of July 2024, we have received 485 grievances across six immigration detention facilities in California. Together, these grievances reveal a persistent and disturbing pattern of abuse that pervades ICE’s detention regime in California. • Hazardous Facilities and Inhumane Treatment: Inadequate facility management was the most common reason for a grievance, making clear that ICE’s immigration detention facilities in California are consistently unfit for human habitation. ICE also fails to meet the minimum standards of its own policies, like ensuring people have edible food, clean water, and the opportunity to go outside for fresh air and sunshine • Medical neglect: We have received 94 grievances related to inadequate medical care, lack of COVID-19 protections, and denial of medication. Many people in the detention facilities suffer from chronic conditions. Some develop new health problems, sometimes because of hazardous materials or abusive treatment they experience while detained. But requests to see a doctor are left languishing, and ICE and facility staff regularly leave medication unfilled, or otherwise disregard the prescribed treatment. Likewise, during the pandemic, ICE showed a remarkable indifference to the safety of the people it incarcerates. More recently, ICE has withheld potentially life saving treatments, like Paxlovid, from people who contract COVID. • Retaliation: The most common outcome of filing a grievance isn’t change. It’s retaliation. The grievances we’ve received include 56 complaints of bullying and harassment by detention facility staff, 13 complaints related to sexual assault, 15 complaints related to sleep deprivation, and 59 complaints related to other forms of retaliation, such as punitive and extended use of solitary confinement. As part of its regular practice, ICE does not proactively release information about the grievances it receives from people in detention. Based on our conversations with detained people and with local partners who regularly engage in detention-related work, we believe that our records represent the most consistent issues in the detention facilities. This report is intended to support the advocacy and resistance of the people trapped inside ICE’s detention facilities. It includes data, stories, and background that document the ongoing harms of immigration detention. Taken together, it is unequivocally clear that ICE and the private companies it contracts with cannot be trusted to care for the people they detain. The grievance system, which is supposed to offer an avenue for redress, ends up making things worse for those it’s intended to help. Existing oversight mechanisms are inadequate, and human rights violations are rampant. It is our conclusion that the immigration detention system is irredeemable and infected by greed, racism, and impunity

San Francisco: UCLA of Northern California, 2024. 34p.

By Sana Singh

For years, countless immigrant Californians have been calling attention to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s (CDCR) discriminatory practices that assist in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) deportation efforts. CDCR staff identify individuals in their custody, whom CDCR assumes to be born outside of the U.S., report them to ICE, and deny them valuable rehabilitation, education, and credit-earning opportunities. In 2022, the ACLU of Northern California filed a major public records request seeking communications between CDCR and ICE. Over the past several months, the ACLU of Northern California, Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus, Asian Prisoner Support Committee, and Root & Rebound have analyzed over 2,500 CDCR records and emails between August and September 2022. Step by step, the team pieced together a more detailed view than ever before into how CDCR voluntarily goes to horrifying lengths to illegally discriminate against Californians born outside the U.S. and against anyone CDCR officers unilaterally perceive or assume to be born outside the U.S. Dozens of previously unseen emails show how California’s largest public agency is using public resources to operate a system of double punishment that rips apart immigrant and refugee families and communities, in direct conflict with California’s values of equality, fairness, and justice. In their zeal to collude with ICE, CDCR is not only targeting people who have served their time and are set to return home for detention and deportation but is also sweeping up U.S. citizens and Green Card holders, relying on racist assumptions and ignoring their own records. CDCR’s practices are also increasingly out of step with the rest of California and statewide officials’ own commitments to their constituents. Many counties across California, including Los Angeles, San Joaquin, Santa Cruz, Humboldt, San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara, have already stopped facilitating transfers of people to ICE after they have served their time in jail or prison. Governor Newsom has recently called on California to “be in the homecoming business,” and CDCR Secretary Macomber has stated his intentions to “create a space focused on preparing individuals for successful returns to the community.” CDCR’s practices raise urgent legal and policy questions and implicate the fundamental rights of numerous Californians in CDCR custody, adding further to the agency’s deeply troubling record of medical abuse and neglect, warehousing of people in long-term solitary confinement, racist and antisemitic social media comments, and forced sterilizations, among other concerning practices. The human costs of CDCR’s collusion with ICE are severe, as revealed in disturbing email records in the report that follows. By proactively offering people up to ICE, CDCR has engineered a two-tiered system of justice that brings trauma to those in their custody The emails reviewed by the investigative team and described below are communications from August and September 2022. Despite the narrow timeframe of these records, the records we have received paint a disturbing picture. In just the two months the below communications span, CDCR transferred over 200 people from CDCR facilities to ICE custody. What follows is a description of the practices that CDCR uses to collude with ICE, and examples of discrimination, indiscretion, resource mismanagement, and anti-immigrant behavior by department staff, as revealed in disturbing email records. We conclude with a summary of the harms caused and the need for legislative action. and to their loved ones. The impact of such discriminatory practices is felt widely in California, which is home to the largest immigrant population in the country. In 2021, over a quarter of Californians were foreign-born and almost half of the children in the state had at least one immigrant parent. In 2023, California lawmakers can take immediate action to hold CDCR accountable to the state’s values and laws. AB 1306 authored by Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo, otherwise known as the HOME Act, harmonizes state immigration policy with existing, broadly-supported criminal justice reforms, ensuring immigrant Californians who earn their release from state prison through these measures are not transferred to ICE. The legislation offers a simple fix to one form of CDCR’s discrimination against immigrants and refugees and takes important strides toward enacting equal treatment for all who call California home

San Francisco: ACLU of Northern California, 2023. 22p.

Planned and Edited by Ruth Nanda Anshen

Although this work amounts to a philosophical essay, it was conceived as an introduction to a history of freedom. For this purpose I found it necessary to consider freedom in relation to culture as a whole, not merely to the state. I have likewise viewed it in a considerably longer, wider perspective than thinkers were able to before this century, in which there has been a vast deal of research in history, sociology, and anthropology. In such a perspective the subject of freedom grows more complex, and does not readily permit the logical rigor and precision to which many philosophers aspire; but I must hope that it is also illumined. My main concern has been the basic, not the immediate issues of freedom, and my main purpose an objective analysis, not a prescription or a call to arms. Inevitably, however, I have written with the immediate issues in mind. I continually refer to them, in part for the sake of concrete illustration, but also for their own sake. And I make no pretense of utter objectivity, given a subject in which we all have deep commitments. My analysis has been influenced by preconceptions, my conclusions come down to a credo. I should maintain only that I have endeavored to lay on the table, face up, all the premises of my commitments, and that my preconceptions are not mere prejudices, unconscious or unreasoned.

WORLD PERSPECTIVES • Volume Twenty-three, 1960, 181p.

By Emmanuel Arthur - Ewusie

Ghana's child street crime is a complicated issue that calls for striking a careful balance between protecting national security, respecting human rights, and applying the law. The term "streetism" describes the situation where children live and labor on the streets, frequently without access to basic supplies and at risk from different sources. To address the underlying causes of streetism, safeguard vulnerable children, and maintain social well-being, it is imperative to strike a balance between these objectives. The basic idea of human rights is at the center of the problem. Every child is entitled to education, a secure and supportive home, and defense against abuse and exploitation. But these rights are frequently violated by child streetism in Ghana, where children are put at risk of exploitation, abuse, and neglect. As a result, the protection and realization of children's rights must be given top priority in any strategy to combat streetism, and this strategy should be informed by both Ghanaian law and international human rights norms. Regarding child streetism, criminal law is also very important. It's important to distinguish between criminal behavior and the circumstances that lead to streetism, even though some youngsters may participate in criminal activity while living on the streets. Penalties by themselves may worsen the cycle of poverty and vulnerability and are insufficient to address the root causes of streetism. Instead, social initiatives that deal with family dissolution, poverty, and limited access to healthcare and education should be used in conjunction with criminal law enforcement. In addition, when tackling child streetism, national security implications are considered. Streetism has the potential to worsen social unrest and jeopardize public safety, especially in cities where a high proportion of youngsters live on the streets. Thus, combating streetism involves preserving community stability and security in addition to upholding individual rights. But rather than using punitive tactics, security measures must be put into place in a way that upholds human rights and encourages long-term solutions. This essay aims to present a thorough examination of youth street crime in Ghana, looking at its effects on national security, criminal law enforcement, and human rights. It attempts to contribute to a fuller knowledge of the complex issues faced by child streetism and to inform evidence-based methods for addressing this important issue in Ghana by examining legal frameworks, policy responses, and grassroot activities. In Ghana, the issue of children living and working on the streets creates difficult problems where criminal law, national security, and human rights intersect. This study looks at the causes, prevalence, and effects of child street behavior, considering how it affects children's rights and welfare, the application of the law, and maintaining national security. The research investigates legislative frameworks, policy responses, and grassroots activities targeted at resolving child streetism in Ghana using a multidisciplinary analysis. Additionally, it assesses the efficacy of the current strategies and makes recommendations for a fair and rights-based strategy that puts the child's best interests first while maintaining public safety and security.

Unpublished Paper 2024. 19p.

By Brenda Scheuermann, Kathy Martinez-Prather, Anthony Petrosino,

The research tested the use of a multi-faceted, school-based law enforcement (SBLE) framework to determine how it contributes to multiple outcomes for 25 middle and high schools. Outcomes measured pertained to student victimization and delinquency, the use of exclusionary discipline practices, school climate, and student-officer interactions. Reliable findings were disseminated for implementation and further research in schools nationwide. The impact research questions are provided in this report. The framework for implementing school policing is provided.

San Marco, TX: Texas State University , 2022. 43p.

By Gilbert Munoz Cornejo

This study investigates the incidence and characteristics of cybersecurity data breaches across U.S. rural and urban hospitals from 2016 to 2022, employing a two-stage design. Stage 1 used logistic regression to determine whether a hospital had a breach, controlling for key variables. Stage 2 analyzed the subset of 212 hospitals that experienced a breach, focusing on breach type, and breach location. The results revealed that 3.46% of hospitals experienced a breach, with urban facilities showing a slightly higher rate (3.84%) than rural ones (2.64%). Larger, non profit, and non-affiliated hospitals and those in the Northeast faced higher breach odds. Once breached, no significant rural–urban differences emerged regarding breach characteristics, but year of breach, ownership type, and membership affiliation played key roles in how incidents manifested. These findings underscore the importance of targeted cybersecurity strategies, informing healthcare administrators, policymakers, and cybersecurity professionals in safeguarding patient data across diverse hospital settings.    

Security Journal, 2025, 21p.

 By Goroga Oabile  and · France Maphosa 

For a long time, universities applied the principle of in loco parentis, when dealing with issues relating to students’ welfare on campus, including the provision of security. Standing in the place of parents, universities could decide on issues that affected students without consulting them. However, students are increasingly demanding their rights as adults, including the right to be consulted in decisions that affect them. The students’ demand for their rights has, however, often militated against universities’ efforts to provide security on campus which they are mandated to do. Using a sample of 60 students from the University of Botswana, selected through the purposive cluster sampling method, this study found that the most important demand for students is to be consulted when decisions that afect them are being made including decisions on. Students are prepared to relinquish some of their rights in exchange for their security if consulted. However, the primary responsibility for providing security on campus is for university authorities. 

Security Journal, 2025, 20p.

By Elina Treyger, Maya Buenaventura, Ian Mitch, Laura Bellows, John S. Hollywood

Between 2020 and 2024, increasing volumes of aliens sought entry at the southwest U.S. border without valid entry documents. Several policies adopted since 2020 have sought to incentivize aliens — particularly those who have intentions of seeking asylum — to present themselves at ports of entry (POEs) and disincentivize crossing unlawfully between POEs. These trends and policies raise a question of the capacity of U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP's) Office of Field Operations (OFO) to process such aliens and unaccompanied alien children (UACs) through POEs. A congressional request sought an analysis that could shed light on whether and how well OFO would be able to process increased volumes and the resources it would need to do so. This report is the result of that analysis.

Key Findings

There are multiple pathways for processing likely asylum seekers and UACs through POEs. This is a function of several factors, such as whether the alien arrives with a CBP One appointment; whether they are a member of a family unit, a UAC, or a single adult; whether derogatory information is discovered about the alien; and detention facility capacity.

OFO's capacity to process this population varies across time and POEs and is constrained by a mix of individual case characteristics; staffing; infrastructure and equipment; capacity; the capacity of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services; and operational demands.

The authors infer that OFO's effective monthly capacity to process likely asylum seekers and UACs in a safe, humane, and orderly manner at the level of resources present as of May 2023 is around 47,000–48,000 aliens.

Substantially increasing OFO processing capacity such that all or most likely asylum seekers and UACs (based on levels observed between October 2022 and February 2024) are processed at POEs would be extremely challenging at best.

Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2025, 109p.

By Michael E. Clements and Gretta L. Goodwin

This Study Drug and human trafficking are longstanding and pervasive problems. Federal law enforcement agencies have noted the use of online marketplaces, such as social media sites and messaging platforms, in drug and human trafficking. Further, agencies have expressed concern about traffickers’ increased use of virtual currencies—that is, digital representations of value that are usually not government-issued legal tender. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 includes a provision for GAO to review how a range of methods and payment systems, including online marketplaces and virtual currencies, are used to facilitate drug and human trafficking. This report examines what is known about drug and human traffickers’ use of online marketplaces and virtual currencies, efforts by federal and state agencies to counter such trafficking, and benefits and challenges virtual currencies pose for detecting and prosecuting drug and human trafficking, among other objectives. GAO reviewed federal agency and industry documentation and GAO’s relevant body of past work; interviewed officials at federal and state agencies and industry and nonprofit stakeholders; and reviewed recently adjudicated cases involving the use of virtual currencies in drug or human trafficking.

  GAO-22-105101., Washington DC: U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2022. 57p.

By Nina Wilén | Kwesi Aning

Over the past decade, Western and multilateral security interventions in the Sahel have failed to stabilize the region, while national and local efforts, particularly in Mali and Burkina Faso, have remained largely militarized. These approaches have proven ineffective in addressing the underlying causes of instability, such as food insecurity, lack of basic services, and limited economic opportunities. The key lesson learned is that military action alone cannot resolve the Sahel’s security crisis—political engagement from local, national, and regional actors is crucial. Key Lessons Learned 1. Local Ownership is Essential – Sustainable security strategies must be designed primarily by national and regional actors. External support should enhance, rather than dictate, local approaches. 2. Partners Can Become Unreliable – Political shifts, particularly military coups, have led to abrupt changes in alliances, as seen in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, where governments expelled French and Western security forces in favor of Russian partnerships. Rapid changes need to be taken into account by external actors when engaging. 3. Risk of Equipment Falling into Wrong Hands – The withdrawal of international forces has often resulted in the unintended transfer of military equipment and infrastructure to juntas or non-state actors. Before providing new equipment to partners in the region, reflection is needed about what type of material, should be provided, when, and to whom

New York: Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung e. V. , Counter Extremism Project, 2025. 28p.

By  Talia A. Dunyak 

Over the past several decades, travel and tourism have become both more accessible and cheaper for people. Until the Covid-19 pandemic, tourism was projected to continue growing rapidly in popularity, with estimates that by 2030 more than 1.8 billion people would travel internationally every year. 2 The increase in international and domestic travel and tourism brings benefits such as expanded cultural understanding, economic growth, and preservation of local monuments and traditions. However, despite the benefits of tourism, there is a dark side to the industry: human trafficking. This report seeks to map out the intersections between human trafficking and tourism and focuses primarily on sex trafficking and labor trafficking’s presence within the tourism sector. The discussion of sex trafficking will include sex tourism, child sex tourism, and the use of hotels in the sex trade. The discussion of labor exploitation will include child labor and beggars, hospitality staff, construction staff, and labor trafficking in the supply chain. The report will also touch on how the Covid-19 pandemic has affected and changed modern slavery in the tourism industry. The report will conclude with mapping the current interventions and recommendations for combatting instances of human trafficking within the tourism industry. 

Human Trafficking Search,  2021 28p.

Dany Bahar, Rebecca J. Brough, and Giovanni Peri

The inflow of refugees and their subsequent integration can be an important challenge for both the refugees themselves and the host society. Policy interventions can improve the lives and economic success of refugees and of their communities. In this paper, we review the socioeconomic integration policy interventions focused on refugees and the evidence surrounding them. We also highlight some interesting topics for future research and stress the need to rigorously evaluate their effectiveness and implications for the successful integration of refugees.

WORKING PAPER 687 · MARCH 2024

Washington DC: Center for Global Development, 2024. 55p.