[rmnunez]

Think about this: Sovereigns must, under International Law, maintain and reiterate their claim to any territory occupied and usurped by another or forsake any rights to said territory;

Mexico does claim the territory seized in a void contract with infamous gringan captive Santa Ana purportedly ceding vast tracts of Mexican territory;

The Mexican government has failed to properly maintain and adequately reiterate its claim to the territory usurped and occupied by the gringoes, under International Law;

If Mexicans who regularly cross the border without benefit of passports or customs are seen as expressing continuous control and are deigned "representative" of the government of Mexico's views (imigration as political expression)

-then couldn´t the migrant Mexican´s genuinely representative government claim they've continuously and reiteratedly failed to recognize the existence of a border separating them from the coercively conveyed property through the customary conduct of that government's citizens?