By mid-2023, the most important document at the southern border was not a visa or a passport. It was a smartphone appointment confirmation from CBP One, a government app that had quietly become the official front door to the United States for migrants waiting in Mexico. After Title 42 ended in May 2023, getting a CBP One appointment was, for most border arrivals, the difference between a lawful pathway and a presumption of asylum ineligibility. An app built for scheduling cargo inspections had become the gatekeeper of American border policy.
How CBP One took over
CBP One launched in 2020 as a multipurpose portal for various Customs and Border Protection functions. In January 2023 it took on a new role: migrants seeking exceptions to Title 42 could request appointments at ports of entry through the app. When Title 42 ended that May, the appointment function became central. Under the new asylum rule, presenting at a port with a CBP One appointment was one of the main ways to avoid the presumption of asylum ineligibility. The government steadily raised capacity to roughly 1,450 appointments per day across eight southwest ports, allocated by a daily lottery-style system open to migrants located in central and northern Mexico.
What worked, and what didn't
Give the concept its due: channeling arrivals to ports of entry, on a schedule, with identities and photos captured in advance, is genuinely better for security and order than mass crossings between ports. Agents know who is coming; vulnerable people avoid smugglers for the final stretch. But the execution produced a long list of problems:
- Demand crushed supply. Roughly 1,450 daily slots against hundreds of thousands of people waiting meant months of daily lottery attempts, with wait times in dangerous Mexican border cities stretching on and on.
- Tech friction. Early versions struggled with crashes, error messages, and facial-capture failures that reportedly worked worse for darker-skinned users; connectivity and smartphone access became de facto eligibility criteria.
- Cartel adaptation. Criminal groups sold phones, coached applicants, and extorted people waiting in queue cities, monetizing the wait the app created.
- No statutory basis. Congress never wrote a word about app-based entry. The entire structure existed as executive improvisation, challenged in court from both directions.
The deeper problem: an app is not a policy
Here is our core objection, and it is not to the technology. CBP One digitized a queue without answering the underlying question: how many people, under what criteria, does the United States admit at the land border? Congress sets immigration categories and numbers; that is how a nation of laws does it. Instead, the daily cap was an administrative choice, the eligibility rules lived in a regulation under litigation, and the people in line had no rights, only lottery odds. When admission to America depends on refresh speed and phone quality rather than legislated criteria, you have process without law. Meanwhile, roughly 1,450 daily appointments did little to change total flows, and crossings between ports still hit records in late 2023.
What this means for you
Most Open readers are pursuing visas, not border appointments, but CBP One's rise carries lessons for everyone. First, if relatives abroad are considering the journey, they should know the app queue is long, the wait occurs in Mexico, and skipping it can trigger asylum ineligibility; a family, work, or humanitarian visa route, where one exists, is safer and more durable. Second, expect the appointment-and-app model to keep changing with administrations and court rulings; nothing about it is guaranteed. Finally, treat any "agent" selling CBP One appointments or guaranteed slots as a fraud; the government never charged for appointments, and paying middlemen only funds the people exploiting the queue.
Not sure which visa fits your situation? Take the free 2-minute Open visa quiz and get your match instantly.
Join the conversation