Are people being prevented from leaving the US via the land borders of canada and mexico?

1. What the official rules say: inbound limits and “essential travel” are the stated policy

Department of Homeland Security notices and CBP extensions repeatedly frame land‑border actions as limits on inbound travel into the United States — temporary restrictions to “limit the travel of individuals from Canada and Mexico into the United States at land ports of entry” and extensions permitting only “essential travel” across U.S. land borders ^{[1] [2]}; U.S. government guidance historically treats air travel separately and typically exempts or treats it differently than land crossings ^[2].

2. New screening and biometric collection change the crossing experience — not an outright exit ban

Reporting and government pages document an expansion of biometric entry/exit requirements (photographs, fingerprints, facial recognition) that will apply at land borders and other ports, and which will add friction, data collection, and potentially longer processing times for travelers entering and leaving the U.S. ^{[3] [4] [5]}. Those are enforcement and screening tools intended to control and track movement, not explicit legal prohibitions on departure by land in the sources provided ^{[3] [5]}.

3. Who is being affected: foreign nationals from designated countries and non‑essential travelers

Canada’s travel advisories note that a U.S. proclamation restricting the entry of certain foreign nationals is in effect and may affect visa access for nationals of designated countries ^[6], and Travel & Tour World coverage and other summaries emphasize visa tightening, fee increases, and targeted limits that complicate travel from certain countries or dual‑national travelers ^{[3] [7]}. These measures primarily target entry eligibility rather than a blanket bar on approved travelers or U.S. citizens attempting to leave.

4. Practical impacts seen in data and historical precedent: fewer inbound crossings but trade and essential movement continue

Border crossing data show fluctuations in volumes (e.g., truck entries declined in October 2025 versus 2024), indicating that restrictions and pandemic or policy responses can and do reduce crossings; however, data and guidance also make clear that essential movements — commerce, workers with cross‑border employment, and U.S. citizens — have been carved out of closures in past implementations ^{[8] [9]}. Historical Reuters coverage of COVID‑era closures similarly described temporary limits on non‑essential inbound travel rather than permanent exit bans ^[10].

5. Competing narratives and incentives: security rhetoric vs. tourism/commerce concerns

Government sources justify measures as security and public‑health precautions (DHS/CBP notices), while travel industry pieces emphasize the negative effect on tourism and cross‑border commerce, and may highlight fees and operational hassle to draw attention or clicks ^{[1] [3] [7]}. Legal and business advisories (e.g., Fragomen) point to extensions of “essential travel” rules that balance security aims with economic continuity, suggesting an implicit agenda to minimize trade disruption even while tightening entry criteria ^[2].

6. Bottom line and limits of the reporting

Based on the provided sources, the United States has implemented temporary restrictions and heightened screening that restrict who may enter the U.S. from Canada and Mexico by land and has expanded biometric collection at land ports, but none of the cited documents establish a general prohibition on people leaving the United States for Canada or Mexico by land; the reporting instead documents inbound limits, essential‑travel carveouts, procedural hurdles, and more intensive screening that can delay or complicate crossings ^{[1] [2] [3]}. This analysis is limited to the supplied reporting; if there are isolated operational orders or local practices preventing departures that are not in these sources, they are not reflected here.