A federal appeals court suspended President Trump’s travel ban on Sunday morning, effectively re-opening the border to travelers from seven predominantly Muslim countries and all refugees. But for Tijuana-based attorney Nicole Ramos and her clients, the ruling doesn’t change anything.

For months, border patrol officials along the U.S.-Mexico border have been illegally preventing asylum-seekers from entering the country. According to a complaint filed by the American Immigration Council in early January, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials are turning away numerous adults, families, and unaccompanied children despite federal law allowing anyone fearing persecution to request a meeting with an asylum officer. Despite the federal ruling and numerous complaints, CBP officers continued rejecting asylum seekers on Sunday.

I traveled to Tijuana in December to attend one of Ramos’ legal clinics. There, immigration advocates and attorneys met with 10 Central Americans who’d been denied entry by CBP. There was a woman escaping domestic abuse, a man fleeing gang violence, and another fearing recruitment as a hit man. Although the migrants’ backgrounds were varied, all were attending the clinic for the same reason: when they presented themselves at the San Ysidro Port of Entry in Tijuana, they were told that CBP would not process asylum seekers. Instead, they were directed towards Mexican immigration officials for assistance.

But Mexican officials are refusing to meet with Central American refugees. According to the migrants at the clinic, the agency told them they needed a travel permit called an oficio de salida, which is reserved for those whose home countries don’t have an embassy in Mexico i.e. Haitians, Africans, etc. The result is a game of ping-pong, in which migrants bounce between Mexican and U.S. immigration officers trying to request asylum without success. Many are left without shelter or legal assistance — stranded in Tijuana with nowhere to turn.

According to the American Immigration Council report, this “alarming new trend” began during the summer of 2016. But reports of inadequate asylum procedures at the border are not new. The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom issued a series of recommendations for CBP in 2005, which detailed “serious implementing flaws [with expedited removal procedures] which place asylum seekers at risk of being returned from the U.S. to countries where they face persecution.” CBP officers were negligent in their paperwork, improperly encouraging asylum seekers to withdraw their applications for admission, and deporting migrants back to the countries where they may be persecuted.

In an email, CBP spokesperson Ralph DeSio told me, “CBP has collaborated with the Mexican authorities to improve the processing and humanitarian assistance of those individuals with no legal status to enter the U.S.” When asked about the increase of asylum seekers at the border, DeSio replied, “While CBP officials have made adjustments to port operations to accommodate the recent uptick in arriving individuals, CBP officials are accustomed to dynamic changes at our local ports of entry…and are able to flex resources to accommodate those changes.”

CBP seemingly has the resources to process refugees arriving in Tijuana, but are choosing to outsource to Mexican officials instead. According to the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act and the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, the United States must process anyone who says they fear returning to their home country. By referring asylum seekers to Mexican immigration officials, the United States contracts out its responsibility and bypasses international and federal obligations to process those who say they fear for their lives.

After the legal clinic, I accompanied one asylum seeker and Ramos to the San Ysidro Port of Entry. The exchange proceeded as expected: a CBP officer told us to go to Mexican immigration. However, after Ramos insisted that they were legally obligated to process the asylum seeker, a supervisor arrived and the asylum seeker was allowed to proceed.

Ramos says she gets calls from asylum seekers every day. She struggles to keep up with the demand for legal assistance. “I don’t know why [CBP] would turn away people fearing for their lives,” Ramos says. “Whether they have a valid claim for asylum is for the courts to decide.”