How have cartel-controlled smuggling corridors shifted in Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas since 2020?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Since 2020 cartel smuggling corridors have shifted toward the western border (Arizona and California) for fentanyl and toward remote desert routes in Arizona and New Mexico for migrant and mixed smuggling, while Texas remains the principal corridor for bulk drug and cash flows in the east — CBP, academic and law‑enforcement reporting record sharp increases in fentanyl seizures in California/Arizona and re‑emergence of remote Arizona/New Mexico crossing points for migrants [1] [2] [3]. U.S. government operations and policy changes since 2023–25 (Operation Apollo/Hourglass, militarized “national defense” zones, FTO designations) have aimed at disrupting those corridors but reporting also links enforcement pressure to displacement of routes and growing cartel adaptation [2] [4] [5].
1. Western fentanyl concentration: a new “golden triangle” and ports of entry bottleneck
Customs and Border Protection and independent analysts show most recent fentanyl seizures concentrate in California and Arizona, tied to cartel production zones in Baja California, Sinaloa and Sonora and to use of ports of entry because of high daily traffic — roughly half of fentanyl seized at the Southwest border is caught via Arizona ports, with much of the rest in California [1] [6] [7]. The Wilson Center traces a 164% rise in fentanyl seizures on the Southwest border from 2020–2022 and notes CA/AZ dominance in seizures, while CBP’s targeted operations (Operation Apollo, Operation Hourglass) focused on California and Arizona corridors underscore official recognition of that western shift [1] [2].
2. Arizona and New Mexico: remote desert routes and migrant‑smuggling revival
Academic and investigative reporting documents that cartels and smugglers have re‑opened remote crossing corridors in Arizona and New Mexico to move migrants and use diversionary tactics that stretch Border Patrol resources — a tactic observed in 2023 and described again as groups were shuttled to Antelope Wells and Lukeville, forcing temporary port closures and resource diversion [3] [8]. UC Davis research ties increased border enforcement to a shift toward professional smugglers and riskier corridors, meaning enforcement can displace flows rather than eliminate them [9].
3. Texas remains the eastern workhorse for bulk flows and cash
Historical and regional drug‑market analyses show South Texas and the Lower Rio Grande Valley continue to be principal corridors for bulk shipments, cash flows, and markets serving the eastern United States; law‑enforcement and HIDTA reporting identify Brownsville–McAllen corridor hubs and long, sparsely populated stretches that cartels exploit [10]. Wilson Center and Justice Department sources show seizures in Texas and New Mexico lag far behind CA/AZ for fentanyl, reflecting different cartel footprints and product mixes across the border [1] [11].
4. Tactical adaptation: ports of entry, tunnels, and cross‑border logistics
Cartels adapt tactics to enforcement: they exploit busy ports of entry (passengers, personal vehicles, freight) because volume offers concealment, use tunnels and maritime routes where walls or militarized zones are expanded, and employ local networks or U.S. citizen couriers — long‑standing patterns reiterated in DOJ, CBP and investigative reporting [7] [12] [13]. The science and policy literature stresses corridors are chosen to minimize seizure risk and transaction costs, so interdiction in one area predictably shifts flows elsewhere [11].
5. U.S. policy and militarized responses have narrowed space but raised displacement risks
Since 2023–25 federal initiatives — expanded CBP operations (Apollo/Hourglass), temporary “national defense” land designations, and the controversial designation of cartels as terrorist entities — aim to choke cartel networks at key corridors, particularly in the West [2] [4] [5]. Reporting also shows Mexico–U.S. operational deals (extraditions/transfers) and troop deployments have disrupted some flows but analysts warn these moves push traffickers into quieter desert corridors and increase reliance on professional smugglers [14] [3] [5].
6. Competing perspectives and reporting limits
Law‑enforcement and CBP emphasize enforcement gains and concentrated disruptions in CA/AZ [2] [7]. Academic studies and independent reporting warn those gains translate into displacement to Arizona’s quieter stretches, New Mexico’s remote crossings, or exploitation of ports of entry rather than wholesale cessation [9] [3]. Available sources do not provide a unified, page‑by‑page map of cartel‑by‑cartel corridor control since 2020; granular, parcel‑level control claims are not present in current reporting (not found in current reporting).
7. What to watch next: indicators of further shifts
Monitor CBP seizure breakdowns by sector and port of entry, cross‑border migrant‑group patterns around Antelope Wells/Lukeville, and Mexican state‑level cartel violence/pressure that tends to reconfigure corridors; those datasets are the clearest early signals of re‑routing [1] [3] [9]. Also track whether U.S.–Mexico operational deals and interdictions reported in 2025 alter cartel leadership and thereby route preferences — sources signal major policy moves will continue to drive tactical migration of smuggling corridors [14] [5].
Limitations: this analysis uses available reporting and government summaries from 2020–2025 provided above; sources vary in scope (national reporting, academic studies, law‑enforcement summaries) and do not collectively offer granular control maps for every corridor or cartel (not found in current reporting).