Exclusive: US plans to fund deportations from Costa Rica, document shows
According to the document, the State Department will transfer money from its "economic support fund" - which is typically used to boost economic development in allied countries - to the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees immigration enforcement. DHS will then work with Costa Rican authorities to facilitate deportations from the Central American nation.
Earlier in the year, Costa Rica agreed to a Trump administration request that it accept 200 immigrants originating from Africa, Asia and Europe who were in the U.S. illegally. While the plan was for Costa Rica to send those immigrants back to their countries of origin, dozens remain in the Central American country.
Asked for comment, the State Department suggested that the new funds were mainly intended to help Costa Rica deport migrants passing through the country on the way to the U.S., rather than repatriate those immigrants deported from the United States.
"The program will build capacity of the Costa Rican immigration authorities to stop the flow of illegal migration through its borders, while also providing training and resources on asylum screening," a spokesperson said.
While the document gave details of the planned money transfer, it was not clear when the deportation effort will happen or if it could be subject to changes.
According to the document, the Costa Rica arrangement is modeled "in part" on a deal signed in 2024 between the administration of former U.S. President Joe Biden and Panama, under which the U.S. paid for Panama to detain and deport migrants moving through the country as they traveled from Colombia to the U.S.
Some migrant advocates and elected Democrats said at the time that the deal could essentially stop vulnerable populations from having access to the U.S. asylum system.
"The Department intends to support the Government of Costa Rica in conducting deportation operations of migrants that do not have international protections or other legal grounds to remain," reads the document, which was sent in recent weeks to some congressional offices.
"Activities would provide Costa Rica with technical advice and logistical support, including air transportation, for deportation procedures."
Costa Rica's ministries of public security and immigration referred questions to the president's office and the foreign affairs ministry. Neither entity responded to requests for comment.
Since U.S. President Donald Trump entered office in January, his administration has relied on a number of novel arrangements to facilitate deportations from the U.S.
These have included deals with other countries - including Costa Rica - to accept immigrants in the U.S. illegally, regardless of whether those migrants have any connection to the nations where they are sent. Some of the countries accepting deportees have weak institutions or poor human rights records, raising safety concerns.
While the arrangement outlined in the document is similar to the Biden administration's 2024 deal with Panama, there are differences between the situation in Costa Rica now and in Panama in 2024.
Northward migration through the Darien Gap from Colombia to Panama and onward to Costa Rica and the U.S. has slowed dramatically.
At the same time, some Venezuelan migrants have been transiting through Costa Rica on a southward journey, after giving up on entering the U.S. amid Trump's crackdown on unlawful migration and his elimination of Biden's humanitarian parole programs.
The document did not specify to what countries Costa Rica would deport the migrants, leaving open the possibility that some could be sent to a third-party country.
It was not clear if the Trump administration plans to set up similar programs to fund deportations from other Latin American nations.
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has traveled to several Latin American countries in recent months to discuss immigration issues, including Costa Rica, Panama, El Salvador and Chile.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
28 minutes ago
- Times
Yvette Cooper's fast-track asylum plan — as protests erupt again
The home secretary is set to introduce a new fast-track scheme to tackle the asylum backlog so that decisions can be made in weeks rather than years. As the pressure to cut the number of people waiting in hotels for asylum decisions grows, Yvette Cooper is expected to introduce a new law this autumn to overhaul the appeal system. It comes as the first 60 migrants were moved into the four-star Britannia International Hotel in Canary Wharf, east London, on Friday night under cover of darkness. There was a small anti-migrant protest outside the Britannia on Saturday afternoon, while much bigger groups of both anti-migrant and anti-fascist protesters congregated outside the Thistle City Barbican Hotel in central London, which also houses asylum seekers, and in the centre of Manchester where hundreds of people marched as part of a protest organised by Britain First, a far-right group. Home Office figures show that more than 25,000 migrants have attempted to cross the Channel to the UK in small boats this year — the earliest the figure has been reached. Cooper will also tighten the rules surrounding the interpretation of 'exceptional circumstances' in immigration cases and the use of Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which protects the right to family and private life. In an interview with The Sunday Times, Cooper said: 'We need a major overhaul of the appeal [process] and that's what we are going to do in the autumn … if we speed up the decision-making appeal system and also then keep increasing returns, we hope to be able to make quite a big reduction in the overall numbers in the asylum system, because that is the best way to actually restore order and control.' • Migrants kept in hotels despite losing claims for asylum A source familiar with the plans said the aim would be to compress the process so that decisions and returns could be 'made within weeks'. It is understood the system would look similar to a scheme Labour operated while last in government, which was abandoned after judges ruled it was 'structurally unfair' after about 99 per cent of claims were refused. Asylum seekers who are refused sanctuary in Britain are seeing their appeals take an average of 54 weeks to be heard. There were 50,976 outstanding appeals as of March, which is almost double the number compared with 2024 and seven times higher than in 2023, figures show. It is the highest the backlog has ever been and comes on top of the almost 79,000 asylum claims awaiting an initial decision. While they wait, many asylum seekers receive state support in the form of accommodation such as hotels — with a bill of £2.1 billion for the taxpayer in the year to March — and a weekly allowance of between £8.86 and £49.18 per person depending on other support. Those who register appeals are entitled to legal aid, at about £820 a case. Of those who received an initial asylum decision in the year to March, just under half (49 per cent) were granted asylum. In the year to March 2024, it was 61 per cent. The proposed changes will cap a series of announcements this summer aimed at restoring order and control in the system. This weekend, Cooper has announced plans to outlaw social media adverts promoting journeys on small boats to asylum seekers or jobs in the black market aimed at luring migrants to the UK. Offenders could receive up to five years in prison and a hefty fine. Home Office analysis shows that approximately 80 per cent of migrants arriving via small boats told officials that they used social media during their illegal journey to the UK, including to locate or communicate with an agent or facilitator associated with an organised crime group. Under an amendment to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill going through parliament, a new UK-wide offence will be introduced to criminalise the creation of material for publication online which promotes or offers services facilitating a breach of UK immigration law. This could include small boat crossings, the creation of fake travel documents like passports or visas or explicitly promising illegal working opportunities in the UK. Cooper said: 'Selling the false promise of a safe journey to the UK and a life in this country — whether on or offline — simply to make money, is nothing short of immoral. 'These criminals have no issue with leading migrants to life-threatening situations using brazen tactics on social media. We are determined to do everything we can to stop them — wherever they operate. 'We have to stay one step ahead of the ever-evolving tactics of people-smuggling gangs and this move, part of our Plan for Change to boost border security, will empower law enforcement to disable these tactics faster and more effectively, ensuring people face proper penalties.' The government's 'one in one out' deal with France is also expected to begin in the coming weeks, with people arriving in the UK via small boats being returned to France in exchange for the UK accepting an asylum seeker from France who can demonstrate a genuine family connection to Britain. According to The Times, the pilot scheme is expected to see only up to 50 asylum seekers a week being returned to France, with the same number coming in exchange to the UK. However, Cooper disputed the figure and said: 'We are not fixing numbers. We're very clear we want to operate this as extensively as possible.' • 'One in, one out' migrant deal: what are the key plans? Introducing a fast-track scheme to process asylum decisions is expected to require an injection of cash from the Ministry of Justice to increase the number of judges and court sitting days. Spelling out her ambition to the home affairs select committee in June, Cooper said: 'One of the things I have always been keen to do is to have a system for fast-track decisions and appeals. 'If people arrive from predominantly safe countries, they should not be sitting in the asylum system for a long time. We should be able to take those decisions really quickly, and make sure that those people go through the appeals system really quickly and are returned really quickly as well. That would mean a fast-track system alongside the main asylum system, and it would be really important in making sure that the system is fair. It will require legislation in order to be able to do that, as well as new system design … I think there should be faster tracks for those cases so that we can get them through the system really quickly.' Last week, as he arrived for a visit to Scotland, President Trump said the 'invasion' of migrants is 'killing' Europe and told politicians to 'get their act together'. Responding to his claims, Cooper blamed the previous Conservative government. 'We inherited a broken immigration system and a broken asylum system,' she said. 'And what we're doing is putting in place the foundations to restore order and control to both systems.'
The Independent
42 minutes ago
- The Independent
Blow for Trump's ICE raids as court upholds ban on snatching people based on appearance or job
The Trump administration suffered another blow to its mass deportation agenda on Friday after an appeals court upheld a lower court's ruling that prevents Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from detaining a person based on their appearance, native language, or job. A three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Los Angeles said the plaintiffs, a cohort of five individuals and three immigration advocacy organizations, were likely to succeed on their claim that ICE agents violated the Fourth Amendment by relying on four factors to form reasonable suspicion to support detention stops. Those four factors include apparent race or ethnicity, speaking Spanish or English with an accent, presence at a particular location such as a laborer pick-up site, and the type of work a person does. Three plaintiffs who are day laborers said in their original lawsuit against Trump administration officials that they were waiting to be picked up to go to a construction site job when ICE agents swooped in and intimidated them. The plaintiffs said the immigration law enforcement officers never identified themselves, stated they had arrest warrants, nor informed the plaintiffs of the bases for the arrests. The Ninth Circuit panel upheld a previous temporary injunction set by District Court Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong in June. In keeping with Trump's mass deportation agenda, immigration law enforcement officers were deployed throughout Southern California to begin conducting sweeping raids. Many of those raids, according to the lawsuit, were conducted at 'certain types of businesses' such as car washes, because immigration law enforcement officials determined those businesses were more likely to hire people without legal documentation. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit referred to those as 'roving patrols' and said they were being detained without reasonable suspicion. The Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable search and seizures. The raids, which led to protests in downtown Los Angeles back in May, have been challenged by multiple individuals and immigration advocacy groups. One plaintiff, Jason Brian Gavidia, said ICE agents stopped him in June after he stepped onto the sidewalk outside of a tow yard in Montebello, California. Gavidia, who is an American citizen, identifies as Latino and said ICE agents pushed him up against a chain-link fence and interrogated him. Even after Gavidia gave ICE agents his Real ID, they seemingly did not believe him. In her earlier ruling, Frimpong said Gavidia and other plaintiffs were likely to succeed 'in proving that the federal government is indeed conducting roving patrols without reasonable suspicion and denying access to lawyers.' Frimpong ordered immigration law enforcement not to rely solely on the four factors 'except as permitted by law.' While the appeals court panel upheld much of Frimpong's ruling, they did strike the 'except as permitted by law,' saying that language was too vague.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Reopen Alcatraz? Indigenous people say it's more than madness – it's historical erasure
When Donald Trump pledged to reopen the notorious Alcatraz prison as a detention center for immigrants and violent offenders, the idea was met with contempt and mockery. San Francisco leaders have called it Trump's 'stupidest idea yet' and threatened to cut off the island's sewage and garbage services if the president acts on his carceral ambitions. But for the Indigenous people of the San Francisco Bay Area, the idea was more than just laughable. It was an affront to their identity, and an attempt to erase the island's history as a site of Indigenous resistance. After the federal prison shut down in 1963, the island took on a second life as the scene of one of the most important acts of Native American resistance in modern history. Between November 1969 and June 1971, Indigenous activists occupied Alcatraz for 19 months, demanding rights and resources for Native people. Now, as Trump appears set on pushing ahead despite the extraordinary costs and logistical hurdles, tribal members are fighting to preserve a history that is still little-known beyond Indigenous circles. Alcatraz has always loomed large for April McGill. Growing up in Mishewal Wappo territory in California's Sonoma county, McGill, who is a member of the Yuki and Wappo tribes, frequently heard stories from the veterans of the occupation who lived in her community. Her aunt even babysat the children of Richard and Annie Oakes, who led the movement. When she moved to San Francisco as a teenager, the island's shadow grew – especially as McGill, who is now executive director of the city's American Indian cultural center, became increasingly involved in activism herself, and learned about the pivotal role the occupation played in maintaining Native sovereignty in California and nationwide. 'It holds a really personal, deep place to me,' McGill said. 'It symbolizes so much of our history.' McGill and other Indigenous leaders from the San Francisco Bay Area were appalled when the Trump administration confirmed its plans to reopen the island, even sending a delegation out to tour the shuttered facilities in July. Beyond erasing the historical significance the island holds for Native peoples, McGill says that the notion of using the site to pursue the president's anti-immigrant agenda hearkens back to the state's history of violence against Indigenous groups – and that any actions the administration takes will be met with pushback from the community. '[They want to use it as a] place to commit inhumane violence against people who are here trying to escape violence,' McGill said. 'It's very retraumatizing. It wasn't that long ago that we were violently displaced and put in camps. We see this as a repeat of that history.' Most of these criticisms of Trump's plan focuses on the cost of refurbishing the site, which was shuttered more than 60 years ago – instead becoming a historical landmark and tourist destination run by the National Parks Service since 1972 – precisely because the infrastructure had become too expensive to maintain. Estimates put the cost of modernizing the facility at as much as $2bn, to which San Francisco's Mayor Daniel Lurie responded that the city 'could use that funding to keep our streets safe and clean'. But for Indigenous leaders, the proposal's audacity goes beyond its hefty price tag. According to Virginia Hedrick, executive director of the California Consortium for Urban Indian Health, Trump's aims undermine Alcatraz's status as a 'beacon of resistance' for Indigenous people in California and nationwide. That's because the 1969 occupation was more than a symbolic act of defiance – it spurred meaningful changes in federal policy with regards to Native sovereignty and support for tribal nations. 'What came out of the occupation were tangible things,' Hedrick said, pointing to the development of California's Indian health delivery system, which she says was floundering before protesters on Alcatraz demanded better healthcare. 'This movement was about honoring the treaties, making the federal government make good on its promises.' It was in response to the occupation that President Richard Nixon shifted the federal policy on Native treaties from 'termination' to one of 'self-determination' for Native peoples, echoed the writer and film-maker Julian Brave NoiseCat, who grew up in the Bay Area and descends from British Columbia's Tsq'escen and Lil'Wat First Nations. As a teenager, NoiseCat spent Thursday evenings at East Oakland's Intertribal Friendship House practicing powwow drum and dance. At the end of the night, he said, participants would gather and sing the American Indian Movement song. 'We would sing that song to carry forward the movement that had begun at Alcatraz and that endures to this day,' he said. To NoiseCat and others, the lack of acknowledgment of these histories in current discussions about Alcatraz's future illuminates broader issues of Indigenous erasure. 'For me, Alcatraz represents the starting point of the Native rights movement,' he said, calling the occupation the 'Montgomery bus boycott of Indigenous rights', in reference to the seminal civil rights protest. That erasure extends to discussions of how federal dollars could be better spent. Core goals of the Alcatraz occupation included establishing an Indigenous cultural center and college, explained McGill. Today, the cultural center she runs can't afford a brick-and-mortar homebase in San Francisco, forcing it to operate virtually. 'Give that money to American Indian people so that we can have a cultural center, so we can create housing,' she said, adding that Indigenous people have among the highest rates of homelessness, health disparities, and incarceration in San Francisco. 'And yet, we're always the last at the table,' she said. For Hedrick, a member of California's Yurok tribe, that repeated dismissal is 'par for the course' considering the Ohlone people – the tribe indigenous to the lands of the Bay Area, including the island of Alcatraz – remain federally unrecognized. 'The federal government is proposing rebuilding, resurrecting a prison, estimated to cost hundreds of millions of dollars, while continuing to overlook the Ohlone people,' Hedrick said. 'That is complete Indigenous erasure right there.' Hedrick is committed to ensuring that the Indigenous ties to Alcatraz are central to the island's public perception. She makes a point of visiting the island at least a few times every year to teach about the American Indian Movement. And she emphasizes that the island is home to important cultural events, including a sunrise gathering that takes place every October for Indigenous Peoples Day. She says that if the administration moves forward with reopening the island as a prison, the community is prepared to fight back. 'We'll see communities gather again,' she said. 'We have attorneys, we movement-building organizations in California who will organize and work in lockstep. 'We've come a long way.'
