DOCSLIB.ORG

Insight TF Nstlr

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Insight TF Nstlr November 2005 ■ No. 7 SUMMARY Beginning with immigration inspectors who patrolled on horseback, border US Border Enforcement: enforcement traditionally has focused on the Southwest border. The issue From Horseback grew in prominence during the 1970s following the implementation of per- to High-Tech country limits on legal immigration and the earlier termination of the US- Deborah Waller Meyers Mexican Bracero program. Border Patrol funding has grown more than I. Introduction 500 percent over the last two decades, as legislative and policy Borders are a concrete representation of a nation’s statehood, changes (including 1986 immigration as each state seeks to control entries into its sovereign terri- reform and a new 1994 border tory. Indeed, the ultimate responsibility of a government is to control strategy of “prevention safeguard the security and well-being of its citizens. In the through deterrence”) specified minds of the American public, the term “border enforce- concentrated and enhanced personnel ment” conjures images of Border Patrol agents in green uni- and technological resources. During forms, trying to prevent the entry of drugs, thugs, and illegal this time, immigration control and immigrants along a relatively uncontrolled, and at times drug enforcement efforts at the chaotic, US-Mexico border. And for most of the 20th century, border became intertwined, and that was an accurate characterization, as enforcement military tactics and equipment were resources were allocated in that manner. adapted for both efforts. Genuine border enforcement, however, consists of integrating The scope of border enforcement the work, resource allocation, and information capacity of all efforts widened approaching the ports of entry—including northern and southern land bor- millennium to include the northern ders, airports, and seaports—as well as the territory between border, airports, and seaports. It official ports of entry and US consulates abroad in an effort to expanded with unprecedented protect the country. Though some components of this broader intensity and magnitude in the definition were in the minds of key policymakers by the mid- aftermath of 9/11, incorporating 1990s, only in the last few years has this holistic approach to overseas consulates in efforts to push border enforcement become more widely accepted as a new the border outward and promoting paradigm for serious policy discussions in this arena. inter-agency and inter-governmental coordination to increase information- This Insight provides an overview of border enforcement and sharing and enhance homeland how it has changed since the passage of the Immigration security. Nevertheless, questions Reform and Control Act (IRCA) nearly two decades ago. remain about the effectiveness of During this period, border enforcement has variously sought border enforcement, as well as to prevent the smuggling of alcohol and drugs, the flow of its consequences. illegal immigrants, criminal violence in the With a few exceptions,3 border enforcement border region, and threats posed by terrorists. failed to rise again to national prominence in At the same time, border control has also policy debates until the late 1970s. In part, evolved from a low-tech, one-agency exercise inattention reflected the fact that the majority focused strictly on the Southwestern border of Mexico-US migration from 1942-1964 was itself, to a far more encompassing concept legal under the Bracero Program, and most including multiple agencies, the extensive use unauthorized migrants returned home season- of technology, and a broad geographic focus ally.4 Furthermore, Mexicans were able to which not only includes the entire US border enter the United States without quantitative and coastline but also projects to transit states limits prior to the 1965 amendments to the and countries of origin. Immigration and Nationality Act (implemented in 1968). And it was not until 1976 that the II. Historical Background Congress extended the strict 20,000-per-coun- try limit and preference system to countries in Seventy-five immigration inspectors on horse- the Western Hemisphere, including Mexico.5 back first began enforcing immigration laws on the US-Mexico border in 1904, a border By the late 1970s, with the US economy in that was not even formalized until the 1848 recession and the country facing an energy Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the crisis, migration pressures mounted in Mexico Mexican-American war. An independent due to the new numerical restrictions. Border Patrol was first established by Apprehensions and deportations increased Congress as part of the restrictive Immigration dramatically from earlier in the decade to Act of 1924, with 450 employees deployed more than one million annually. Boatloads of along both US land borders in response to ille- Vietnamese refugees began arriving in 1976, gal entries and alien smuggling. By 1930, the and President Jimmy Carter introduced a plan Border Patrol’s size had nearly doubled, and in 1977 to address illegal immigration that additional growth ensued during World War II included enhanced enforcement efforts at the based on national security concerns.1 US-Mexico border.6 By 1978, the Congress had appropriated funds for 2,580 Border The mission of the Border Patrol, working Patrol staff, accounting for one-quarter of total between official inspection stations, was to Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) exclude “illegal aliens,” including Asian and staff at that time.7 Although a stalemated European immigrants trying to circumvent Congress failed to act on President Carter’s newly established entry quotas through illegal plan, it did create the Select Commission on entry along the US-Mexico border. Yet as pro- Immigration and Refugee Policy (SCIRP) in hibition went into effect, resources were 1979 to study and make recommendations on diverted to stem the illicit flow of alcohol illegal immigration and immigration reform.8 It (particularly along the Canadian border). The was the recommendations of the Select 1933 repeal of Prohibition coincided with the Commission, created only a few years after Great Depression and reduced flows of unau- imposition of the per-country limits and pref- thorized labor into the United States, decreas- erence system on Mexico, that became the ing the demand for border enforcement during basis of policy debate and legislation through- this period.2 out the 1980s. 2 Insight In the interim, 125,000 Cuban refugees and legalizing the existing unauthorized, and tens of thousands of Haitians arrived on US enforcement at the border.12 The law also pro- shores, and apprehensions of unauthorized vided a significant infusion of resources to immigrants along the US-Mexico border con- enhance the Border Patrol’s existing approach tinued to climb (see Table 1), further con- to the detention and apprehension of illegal tributing to public perceptions that immigra- entrants.13 In particular, Section 111 of IRCA tion was out of control. At the same time, stated that an essential element of immigration President Reagan formalized and continued control would be “an increase in the border Richard Nixon’s “War on Drugs,” which patrol and other inspection and enforcement peaked in intensity in February 1985 with the activities of the Immigration and Naturalization kidnapping and slaying of a US Drug Service and of other appropriate Federal agen- Enforcement Administration (DEA) Special cies in order to prevent and deter the illegal Agent in Mexico.9 entry of aliens into the United States and the violation of the terms of their entry.”14 Thus, III. IRCA and Its Aftermath: the bill called for a 50 percent increase in 1986-1992 Border Patrol personnel in Fiscal Years 1987 and 1988. The Border Patrol also was tasked After many years of debate, Congress passed with assisting in employer sanctions, employer the Immigration Reform and Control Act of education, and the apprehension and removal 1986 (IRCA). The basic concepts of IRCA, as of criminal aliens. exemplified by the first three titles of the bill, were: “Control Illegal Immigration,” At the time of IRCA’s passage, Congressional “Legalization,” and “Reform of Legal appropriations had increased to fund nearly Immigration.”10 They were based on the 3,700 Border Patrol staff, over 30 percent of Select Commission’s conclusions that: total INS personnel. IRCA raised it to more than 5,500 in 1987 with appropriations for • Lawful immigration served a positive benefit; Border Patrol nearly double what they had • Illegal immigration was a serious problem been only five years earlier.15 Moreover, the that needed to be addressed prior to any Border Patrol received an influx of new equip- expansion of legal immigration; ment, including twenty-two helicopters for all • Legal admissions should continue to be nine sectors (up from a total of two helicopters based on family connections, employment, in one sector) and hundreds of night-vision and humanitarian needs; scopes, night vision goggles, and surveillance • Immigration policies shouldbe non- systems. Additional Border Patrol stations and discriminatory. checkpoints and new detention centers were also built.16 Thus, the Commission’s proscribed approach was to “close the back door and open the Border enforcement received a disproportion- front door.”11 ate percentage of the resulting financial resources: 57 percent ($70.5 million) of the IRCA’s attempt to control and reduce illegal supplemental funds for IRCA’s implementa- immigration focused on imposing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Trumpfronterizo the Influence of Trumpism on Socio-Economic Cross-Border Flows in the San Diego – Tijuana Bi-National Metropolitan Area
    Trumpfronterizo The influence of Trumpism on socio-economic cross-border flows in the San Diego – Tijuana bi-national metropolitan area Nadim van Minnen Radboud University Nijmegen | s4801431 1 Trumpfronterizo The influence of Trumpism on socio-economic cross-border flows in the San Diego – Tijuana bi-national metropolitan area Front page background sources: Autodesk, 2018. Own figure, 2017. Wikimedia Commons, 2017. Master thesis Nadim van Minnen Radboud University Nijmegen | Nijmegen School of Management Department of Geography, Planning and Environment MSc. Programme Human Geography: Globalisation, Migration and Development Thesis supervisor: Dr. Lothar Smith Nadim van Minnen [s4801431] [email protected] 10 July 2018 Radboud University Nijmegen 2 PREFACE This thesis was written as an integral part of the Master program of Human Geography and the track Globalisation, Migration and Development at Radboud University Nijmegen. This master thesis is the final assignment that needed to be completed in order finish this study, and therefore to receive my degree as a Master of Science. As can be seen in the methodology chapter and the conclusion, as well as annex 4, there were some small problems while doing this research, mostly due to the bi-national nature of this research. However, everything turned out alright in the end as I gathered plenty of information in order to make valid and informed statements regarding the issues at play in this thesis. A major thank you therefore goes out to my informants and expert interviewees for sacrificing their valuable time, their expertise and their willingness to participate. Without them and the useful information they provided me, I would not have gotten what I wanted out of this research.
    [Show full text]
  • La Gran Marcha: Anti-Racism and Immigrants Rights in Southern California
    La Gran Marcha: Anti-Racism and Immigrants Rights in Southern California Jenna M. Loyd1 Department of Geography, Syracuse University 144 Eggers Hall, Syracuse, NY 13244-1020 USA Email: [email protected] Andrew Burridge Department of Geography, University of Southern California, 416 Kaprielian Hall, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0255 USA Email: [email protected] Abstract Millions of people across the United States took to the streets in spring 2006 to protest repressive immigration legislation, demand just immigration reform, and seek justice in daily life. This article has two aims. First, we seek to intervene in the popular immigration debate, which denies racism and claims to be concerned only with law-and-order. Second, we analyze (im)migration politics in relation to national racial formations. That is, racialized immigration policies do not exist apart from a racially stratified citizenry. We rely on the concept of social death to trace state policies of immigration and criminalization as key sites of interracial and transnational struggles against racism and for justice and liberation. Thus, we seek to elucidate possibilities for anti-racist alliances and social change. We conclude with a discussion of the ways in which we see the immigrants rights movement connecting with other struggles for social justice, and the implications that 1 © Jenna M. Loyd and Andrew Burridge, 2007 La Gran Marcha: Anti-Racism and Immigrants Rights in Southern California 2 concepts of national racial formation and social death have for the movement against global apartheid. KEY WORDS: immigrants rights, racism, national racial formation, social death, criminalization, militarization, United States “Immigration politics also surfaced in California’s gubernatorial race … with Gov.
    [Show full text]
  • Border Security: the San Diego Fence
    Order Code RS22026 Updated May 23, 2007 Border Security: The San Diego Fence Blas Nuñez-Neto Analyst in Domestic Security Domestic Social Policy Division Michael John Garcia Legislative Attorney American Law Division Summary This report outlines the issues involved with DHS’s construction of the San Diego border fence and highlights some of the major legislative and administrative developments regarding its completion; it will be updated as warranted.1 Congress first authorized the construction of a 14-mile, triple-layered fence along the U.S.-Mexico border near San Diego in the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996. By 2004, only nine miles had been completed, and construction was halted because of environmental concerns. The 109th Congress subsequently passed the REAL ID Act (P.L. 109-13, Div. B), which contained provisions to facilitate the completion of the 14-mile fence. These provisions allow the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive all legal requirements determined necessary to ensure expeditious construction of authorized barriers and roads. In September 2005, the Secretary used this authority to waive a number of mostly environmental and conservation laws. Subsequently, the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-367) removed the specific IIRIRA provisions authorizing the San Diego fence and added provisions authorizing five stretches of two-layered reinforced fencing along the southwest border. While the specific authorization of the San Diego fence was deleted, the project appears permissible under a separate, more general authorization provision of IIRIRA. In the 110th Congress, S.Amdt. 1150, the Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Reform Act of 2007, which has been proposed in the nature of a substitute to S.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record United States Th of America PROCEEDINGS and DEBATES of the 106 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
    E PL UR UM IB N U U S Congressional Record United States th of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 106 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION Vol. 145 WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1999 No. 158 House of Representatives The House met at 10 a.m. R E V I S E D N O T I C E If the 106th Congress, 1st Session, adjourns sine die on or before November 17, 1999, a final issue of the Congressional Record for the 106th Congress, 1st Session, will be published on December 2, 1999, in order to permit Members to revise and extend their remarks. All material for insertion must be signed by the Member and delivered to the respective offices of the Official Reporters of Debates (Room HT±60 or S±123 of the Capitol), Monday through Friday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. through December 1. The final issue will be dated December 2, 1999, and will be delivered on Friday, December 3, 1999. If the 106th Congress does not adjourn until a later date in 1999, the final issue will be printed at a date to be an- nounced. None of the material printed in the final issue of the Congressional Record may contain subject matter, or relate to any event that occurred after the sine die date. Senators' statements should also be submitted electronically, either on a disk to accompany the signed statement, or by e-mail to the Official Reporters of Debates at ``Records@Reporters''. Members of the House of Representatives' statements may also be submitted electronically by e-mail or disk, to accom- pany the signed statement, and formatted according to the instructions for the Extensions of Remarks template at http:// clerkhouse.house.gov.
    [Show full text]
  • Border Enforcement Developments Since 1993 and How to Change CBP
    Border Enforcement Developments Since 1993 and How to Change CBP Daniel E. Martínez The University of Arizona Josiah Heyman The University of Texas at El Paso Jeremy Slack The University of Texas at El Paso August 24, 2020 CMS Essays, https://cmsny.org/publications/border-enforcement-developments-since-1993- and-how-to-change-cbp/ Executive Summary Enforcement along the US-Mexico border has intensified significantly since the early 1990s. Social scientists have documented several consequences of border militarization, including increased border-crosser deaths, the killing of more than 110 people by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents over the past decade, and expanded ethno-racial profiling in southwestern communities by immigration authorities. Less attention has been paid to the pervasive and routine mistreatment migrants experience on a daily basis in CBP custody. This paper traces major developments in border enforcement to three notable initiatives: the “prevention-through-deterrence” strategy, the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Consequence Delivery System, initiated in 2011. Despite the massive buildup in enforcement, CBP has operated with little transparency and accountability to the detriment of migrants. The paper provides an overview of the findings of nongovernmental organizations and social scientists regarding migrant mistreatment while in CBP custody. It then highlights important shifts in migration patterns over the past decade, as well as changes in border enforcement efforts during the Trump administration. It discusses how these transformations affect migrants’ everyday encounters with CBP officials. The paper concludes by providing specific recommendations for improving CBP conduct. Its core theme is the need to emphasize and inculcate lessons of appropriate police behavior, civil rights, and civil liberties in training and recruiting agents and in setting responsibilities of supervisors and administrators.
    [Show full text]
  • Migraciones Internacionales 22.Indd
    Opinión de los polleros tamaulipecos sobre la política migratoria estadounidense Simón Pedro IZCARA PALACIOS Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas Resumen Desde el comienzo de los años noventa, la política migratoria estadounidense ha centrado la atención en el control de la frontera, mientras las sanciones a los em- pleadores, la vigilancia de los lugares de trabajo y otras formas de control del inte- rior han permanecido desatendidas. Sin embargo, un resguardo más estricto de la frontera ha sido incapaz de contener el flujo de inmigrantes indocumentados. En la medida en que Estados Unidos ha reforzado la vigilancia fronteriza, los inmigrantes se han tornado más dependientes de los contrabandistas de indocumentados. Este artículo analiza qué opinión tienen los polleros tamaulipecos sobre la estrategia es- tadounidense de control de la inmigración centrada en la vigilancia de la frontera y cómo ha afectado esto el contrabando de indocumentados. Palabras clave: 1. guía de migrantes, 2. política migratoria, 3. cruce fronterizo, 4. Tamaulipas, 5. Estados Unidos. Tamaulipas Coyotes’ Views on U.S. Immigration Policy Abstract Since the early 1990s the overwhelming emphasis in U.S. immigration policy has been on border enforcement while employer sanctions, worksite enforcement and other forms of interior control have remained notoriously weak. However, border enforcement proved to be a poor deterrent to the unauthorized fl ow of immi- grants. As the United States has tightened border controls, migrants have become increasingly dependent on people smugglers. Th is article analyzes the views of Tamaulipas’ smugglers on U.S. immigration control which focuses on border sur- veillance, and how it has aff ected illegal immigrant smuggling.
    [Show full text]
  • The Model Minority Myth and Unauthorized Asian Immigrants
    An Invisibility Cloak: The Model Minority Myth and Unauthorized Asian Immigrants Denny Chan* Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1281 I. The Case for Unauthorized Immigration as a Latino Issue ............................... 1282 A. Evidence from the World Wide Web ..................................................... 1283 B. Legislative Evidence ................................................................................... 1283 C. Public Commentary .................................................................................... 1287 II. Reasons Why Latinos and the Unauthorized Are Conflated ........................... 1288 A. Powerful Numbers and Rapid Growth ................................................... 1288 B. Geographic Proximity ................................................................................ 1290 C. Economic Factors ....................................................................................... 1290 D. Classism and Colorism .............................................................................. 1291 III. Asian Americans and Unauthorized Immigration ............................................ 1293 A. Discrimination Against Asian Americans and Asian Immigrants ...... 1293 B. Asian Immigrants with Unauthorized Status ......................................... 1295 C. The Model Minority Myth at Work ......................................................... 1298 Conclusion: Thoughts on Interracial
    [Show full text]
  • Characteristics of Chinese Human Smugglers: a Cross-National Study, Final Report
    The author(s) shown below used Federal funds provided by the U.S. Department of Justice and prepared the following final report: Document Title: Characteristics of Chinese Human Smugglers: A Cross-National Study, Final Report Author(s): Sheldon Zhang ; Ko-lin Chin Document No.: 200607 Date Received: 06/24/2003 Award Number: 99-IJ-CX-0028 This report has not been published by the U.S. Department of Justice. To provide better customer service, NCJRS has made this Federally- funded grant final report available electronically in addition to traditional paper copies. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF CHINESE HUMAN SMUGGLERS ---A CROSS-NATIONAL STUDY to the United States Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grant # 1999-IJ-CX-0028 Principal Investigator: Dr. Sheldon Zhang San Diego State University Department of Sociology 5500 Campanile Drive San Diego, CA 92 182-4423 Tel: (619) 594-5449; Fax: (619) 594-1325 Email: [email protected] Co-Principal Investigator: Dr. Ko-lin Chin School of Criminal Justice Rutgers University Newark, NJ 07650 Tel: (973) 353-1488 (Office) FAX: (973) 353-5896 (Fa) Email: kochinfGl,andronieda.rutgers.edu- This document is a research report submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice. This report has not been published by the Department. Opinions or points of view expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The State of America's Border Security
    THE STATE OF AMERICA’S BORDER SECURITY Senator Ron Johnson, Chairman Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs United States Senate 114th Congress November 23, 2015 MAJORITY STAFF REPORT Table of Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................3 Key Highlights .....................................................................................................................7 Part I: The U.S. – Mexico Border ...............................................................................................15 Physical Barriers and Technological Detection Capabilities in the Sectors ..................................16 Fencing and Infrastructure ................................................................................................17 Technologies ......................................................................................................................22 Experiences on the Border .............................................................................................................28 Border Patrol .....................................................................................................................28 Local Law Enforcement .....................................................................................................29 Local Landowners ..............................................................................................................30 Transnational Crime at the Southwest Border
    [Show full text]
  • Mexico Border
    In Harm’s Way: Family Separation, Immigration Enforcement Programs and Security on the US- Mexico Border Jeremy Slack University of Texas, El Paso Daniel E. Martínez George Washington University Scott Whiteford University of Arizona Emily Peiffer University of Arizona Executive Summary The Consequence Delivery System (CDS) is a suite of border and immigration enforcement programs designed to increase the penalties associated with unauthorized migration in order to convince people not to return (Rosenblum 2013). Despite its inauguration in 2011, many aspects of the CDS are not new. CDS does however, mark a shift from the deterrent strategy that, in the 1990s that relied heavily on the dangers of the natural terrain to dissuade unauthorized border crossers, to one that actively punishes, incarcerates, and criminalizes them. This article presents findings from the Migrant Border Crossing Study, a random sample survey of 1,100 recently deported migrants in six cities in Mexico conducted between 2009 and 2012. It examines the demographics and family ties of deportees, their experiences with immigration enforcement practices and programs under the CDS, and how these programs have reshaped contemporary migration and deportation along the US-Mexico border. The article covers programs such as criminal prosecutions of illegal entries under Operation Streamline, and the Alien Transfer and Exit Program (ATEP) or lateral repatriation program which returns immigrants to different locations from where they illegally entered. In relationship to these programs, it considers issues of due process and treatment of deportees in US custody. It also examines interior enforcement under Secure Communities, which, during the study period, comprised part of the overarching border security plan, and screened virtually everybody arrested in the United States against © 2015 by the Center for Migration Studies of New York.
    [Show full text]
  • GGD-98-21 Illegal Immigration: Southwest Border Strategy Results
    United States General Accounting Office Report to the Committee on the GAO Judiciary, U.S. Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives December 1997 ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION Southwest Border Strategy Results Inconclusive; More Evaluation Needed GAO/GGD-98-21 United States General Accounting Office GAO Washington, D.C. 20548 General Government Division B-276689 December 11, 1997 The Honorable Orrin G. Hatch, Chairman The Honorable Patrick J. Leahy Ranking Minority Member Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate The Honorable Henry J. Hyde, Chairman The Honorable John Conyers, Jr. Ranking Minority Member Committee on the Judiciary House of Representatives Illegal immigration has been a long-standing problem. The U.S. Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) estimated there were about 5 million illegal aliens residing in the United States in October 1996, and their numbers increased at an average rate of about 275,000 per year between October 1992 and October 1996. Congress and states with large illegal immigrant populations have raised concerns about illegal immigrants’ fiscal impact on government programs, participation in criminal activities, and overall effect on local economies. In February 1994, the Attorney General announced a broad, five-part strategy to strengthen enforcement of the nation’s immigration laws (see app. I). The strategy’s first priority was to deter illegal entry by strengthening border enforcement, particularly along the southwest border of the United States. Since February 1994, the Justice Department and INS—the primary Justice Department agency charged with enforcing the nation’s immigration laws—have issued various documents and produced strategies intended to reinforce and better define the Attorney General’s overall strategy to deter illegal entry.
    [Show full text]
  • US Border Patrol Abuses, Undocumented Mexican Workers
    U.S. Border Patrol Abuses, Undocumented Mexican Workers, and International Human Rights JORGE A. VARGAS* TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 3 A. Long Journey From the South to "El Norte" Seeded with Hope and Dangers.............................................................. 5 1. History, Geography,and Economics: The Three FundamentalReasons for Mexican Migration...................... 5 * Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law. Visiting Scholar, Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies, University of California, San Diego, Fall 1999; Visiting Scholar, New York University School of Law, International Global Program, October 1999. LL.B., summa cum laude, Mexico's National Autonomous University, Mexico City; LL.M. and J.S.D. (Candidate), Yale Law School. Prof. Vargas served as Legal Advisor to Mexico's Secretariat of Foreign Affairs; Secretary, Mexican Section, International Boundary and Water Commission between Mexico and Guatemala; Professor at Iberoamericana, UNAM and Anldhuac Law Schools; founder and former Director of USD's Mexico-United States Law Institute 1983-1987. Lecturer, Fulbright Border Lectureship Program in 1992. The author would like to express his personal thanks to Professor Daniel B. Rodriguez, Dean of the University of San Diego School of Law, for his generous research grant for the preparation and completion of this article. The author would also like to extend his personal recognition to Maureen Arnn, Angela Mullins and Carlos Guzman, USD law students, for their diligent research assistance to this article, and to Ms. Magali Garcfa, who efficiently prepared the final version of this work. The author verifies the accuracy of the Spanish language cites and all English translations. Since 1995, Prof. Vargas has maintained a website on Mexican Law, available at http://www.mexlaw.com.
    [Show full text]