Cartels control or influence most border crossings, including migrants from Honduras
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Available reporting shows that Mexican and regional criminal organizations exert substantial control and influence over many migrant routes — from the Darién Gap through southern Mexico to the U.S. border — and that Honduran migrants are routinely swept into those networks, but the degree of control varies by corridor and over time and no provided source quantifies “most” crossings as cartel-controlled [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. Cartels as gatekeepers on major transit routes
Multiple investigations and academic studies document that organized criminal groups act as de facto gatekeepers along migration corridors: in the Darién Gap the Gulf Clan imposes a system that forces most migrants to engage with it to pass through, and similar patterns of extortion, kidnapping and “protection” payments recur across Mexico’s southern and northern transit routes used by Honduran and other Central American migrants [1] [2].
2. How enforcement and competition boost cartel power
Research from UC Davis links heightened border enforcement to the near-impossibility of independent crossings, pushing migrants toward professional smugglers and turning migration into a lucrative revenue stream for criminal organizations — a dynamic that strengthens local criminal governance and fuels violent competition over territory and routes [3]. That competition, the study shows, increases predation: multiple checkpoints, collapsing smuggling networks, and shifts of crossings into more dangerous terrain [4] [3].
3. Violence and governance are not uniform — “control” looks different in different places
Scholars and reporters emphasize that single-cartel dominance can create fewer visible homicides yet still produce extortion and forced payments; conversely, contested zones produce sharper spikes in killings and abductions as groups fight over revenue streams from migrants and smuggling [4]. In short, “control” can mean bureaucratic-like taxation and passage rules in some corridors and chaotic violence in others — both forms harm migrants [4].
4. Signs of cartel influence at the U.S. border
U.S. Border Patrol agents and journalists have documented physical markers of cartel influence at crossing areas, notably wristbands that smugglers or criminal groups use to track payment status and “protection” of migrants, with discarded bands used as field evidence of organized tracking and control [5] [6]. Border officials and media reporting show that even when official encounter numbers fall, cartel-related activity — extortion, tracking, and migrant transfers — persists on the ground [5] [7].
5. Honduran migrants’ specific exposure
Hondurans, like other Northern Triangle nationals, commonly transit routes where cartels and local criminal groups intercept, extort, or kidnap migrants; reporting from AP and humanitarian agencies recounts Honduran migrants being handed to cartel-affiliated transporters in southern Mexico, then subjected to extortion and detention en route north [2]. International organizations’ plans and migration statistics reinforce that large flows from Honduras pass through cartel-influenced spaces such as Tapachula and the Darien corridor [8] [2].
6. Alternative explanations and political framing
Government sources and advocacy groups offer competing narratives: administrations emphasize policy success when apprehensions drop and claim reduced crossings [7] [9], while analysts warn that numbers alone don’t measure cartel influence or human cost, and that policy shifts (app changes, "third country" agreements) alter migrants’ vulnerability to criminal actors [10] [3]. Some think-tank pieces and partisan outlets argue criminal groups are the central crisis-driver and press for hardened border measures, an implicit agenda that prioritizes enforcement over humanitarian or root-cause responses [11] [12].
7. What reporting does not establish
The assembled sources document widespread cartel influence and offer local and regional case studies, but they do not provide a single, empirical measure demonstrating that cartels “control most border crossings” numerically; the degree of control is corridor- and time-specific and depends on enforcement, cartel consolidation, and local politics [4] [3] [1]. Existing studies and journalistic accounts point to pervasive influence, especially on Honduran-origin flows, but stop short of a definitive, continent-wide percentage or count [3] [2].