Is Border Patrol out of control? Study points to abuse of migrants.

Critics say the study confirms that the Border Patrol lacks meaningful oversight. The growth of the Border Patrol and its potential role in immigration reform has brought the issue to the fore.

Ross D. Franklin/AP/File
Border Patrol agents patrol the border fence, in Naco, Ariz., in this file photo.

A new study is adding to long-standing concerns that the Border Patrol is subject to inadequate oversight, with border-crossers claiming mistreatment and abuse at the hands of agents.

The issue has grown in importance as the Border Patrol itself has more than doubled in size during the past decade to more than 21,000 agents. The Border Patrol recorded 1.67 million apprehensions on the Southwest border form 2009 to 2012. With border enforcement central to immigration reform proposals in Washington, the Border Patrol's footprint could grow even further.

About 1 in 10 migrants detained for crossing the border illegally reported some form of physical abuse – such as hitting, kicking, and pushing – at the hands of border agents, according to the study, released this week by the Immigration Policy Center, a liberal think tank in Washington. And about 1 in 4 reported that while in custody they were yelled at, threatened, or verbally abused, some with nationalistic or ethnic slurs.

"This is an agency that has almost total impunity in many, many areas," says David Shirk, a border expert and political scientist at the University of San
 Diego who was not involved in the study. "We need the Border Patrol to take criticisms, to respond thoughtfully and seriously to these kinds of questions and

Under current practices, if an agent is reported for bad conduct, he says, "It all stays within the agency, and it is not subject to outside scrutiny."

For its part, the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees Customs and Border Enforcement, which includes the Border Patrol, did not respond directly to the study, but released a statement saying it takes seriously the safety of detainees as well as complaints against its employees.

"Accusations of alleged unlawful conduct on or off duty, are investigated thoroughly and if substantiated, appropriate action is taken," the statement reads.

The new study is based on interviews with 1,110 migrants surveyed shortly after deportation in six Mexican cities – Mexico City and the border cities of Nogales, Ciudad Juárez, Tijuana, Nuevo Laredo, and Mexicali – from 2009 to 2012. About 1 in 3 migrants said they did not recover possessions taken from them while in custody; such as money, clothing, jewelry, and identification cards. In addition, a handful of women reported inappropriate touching during searches.

"They felt the way they were searched was taken too far," says Daniel Martinez, a sociologist at Georgetown University who was a co-author of the study.

Researchers say the lack of oversight and accountability goes far beyond the Border Patrol.

"This is not a question of a few bad apples, this is a systematic and consistent problem at the institutional level," says Jeremy Slack, a researcher at the University of Arizona in Tucson who worked on the study.

The findings echo complaints from human-rights groups and border-watch organizations. Indeed, criticism against the Border Patrol has escalated in recent years as confrontations between border-crossers and agents have left several migrants dead on both sides of the border. Calls for greater oversight of the agency, as well for agents to stop firing guns against rock-throwers, have grown louder.

After a September report by the DHS inspector general concluded that many border agents were unclear on when to use lethal force, Customs and Border Protection announced new guidelines that included enhanced training, better record-keeping and more nonlethal tactics.

But in November, the agency rejected a recommendation from the nonprofit Police Executive Research Forum, which reviewed agency practices and policies, to eliminate deadly force against rock attacks.

"We shouldn't have carve-outs in our policy and say, except for this, except for that," Border Patrol chief Mike Fisher told the Associated Press. "Just to say that you shouldn't shoot at rock-throwers or vehicles for us, in our environment, was very problematic and could potentially put Border Patrol agents in danger."

To Erik Lee, executive director of the North American Research Partnership, a think tank that looks at the strategic relationship of the US, Canada, and Mexico, the study shows there is a long way to go. It is too early to assess if the new guidelines are having an impact on an agency that is resistant to change, he adds.

"The large issues remain, and it takes time for any of these agencies to change."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to

QR Code to Is Border Patrol out of control? Study points to abuse of migrants.
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today