Written by practitioners and academics, from Mexico and the United States, the purpose of Binational Human Rights. The U.S.–Mexico Experience is to explain an apparent paradox: Mexico has a conducive environment for human rights (democracy, civil society, human rights commissions and a relatively successful economy), and yet human rights abuses are widespread. To resolve this paradox, the editors of the book resort to the idea of a perfect storm; that is, the imperfections of the Mexican model, political and economic, and some pervasive attitudes. A traditional authoritarian political culture, income inequality, little chance for upward mobility for many Mexicans, corruption, patriarchy and misogyny, displacement of peoples, and large segments of society involved in illicit activities lead to violation of the human rights of the most vulnerable. This is explained by ‘states of exception’: the absence of law, or ‘too much law’. Structural violence excludes many individuals from the protection of the law, or there is simply no law in some areas where extra-legal actors become very powerful, and act freely; alternatively, the law is strictly enforced in the militarised border, for example, where officers may act with impunity. There is, therefore, no longer a paradox. The book identifies two dimensions that coexist, unfortunately, in parallel: one that advances formally towards the protection of human rights, and another which escapes all efforts towards the establishment of the rule of law. The last is the subject of the book: the reality at the border.

Although not a theoretical book, the idea of states of exception gives the book consistency and unity; each chapter provides an example of a state of exception, most of them based on theoretical propositions and methodology. But the book does not provide a model or theory to test the Mexican case; in fact, Kathleen Staudt's chapter on femicides and transnational activist networks rightly questions Kathryn Sikkink, Margaret Keck and Thomas Risse's well-known models about advocacy networks.

The book is very valuable especially for the rigorous research and crucial information it offers to understand countless human rights violations of women and immigrants. Each chapter describes very fluently a social dynamic involving a diversity of social and economic actors, good and bad, and, of course, the US and Mexican governments. The book analyses three different kinds of human rights violations: the feminicidios in Ciudad Juárez, those committed against Mexican and Central American migrants in their way to the United States (with one chapter on the Mexico–Guatemala border), and those resulting from the war on drugs . Each author, in consequence, formulates a social explanation that links almost naturally all the chapters, and conveys a convincing general argument. It is also worth mentioning the attention most chapters give to the efforts of civil society in claiming justice and demanding changes to Mexico's official policies. Particularly interesting is Clara Jusidman's chapter on Ciudad Juárez. The fact that civil society plays a fundamental role only strengthens the book's case for the government's incapacity and unwillingness to efficiently address the human rights crisis in Mexico. Civil society groups, in the end, are also the victims of the paralysis of the Mexican government, and of organised crime.

There is one aspect of the book that may deserve a slightly critical mention, although perhaps undeserved: the role of US actors, including the government. These actors are always present: officers at the border, individuals ignoring or attacking migrants on US soil, firms establishing on Mexican soil as maquilas, the US government supporting Mexico's war on drugs through the Mérida Initiative, etc. However, after finishing the book, the reader has the impression that US actors are indeed of primary importance, but gross human rights abuses are really more a Mexican problem (never mind the title of the book). True, impunity and the lack of the rule of law may very well characterise Mexico's situation, but if the border becomes a region in itself and if Mexican drugs are massively consumed in the United States, would there not be any more to say about what happens in the United States? Simmons and Téllez's chapter on sexual violence against migrants provides a detailed description of the situation of migrants in drop houses in Phoenix and Tucson, clearly illustrating that actors in the United States are also deeply involved in the ‘migrant business’, by abusing women. One wonders if this kind of analysis could have not been replicated in other chapters regarding femicides or drugs. Are US actors not more actively involved in Mexican and US territory in the other cases examined in the book? If this is not the case, then the human rights should not be ‘binational’.

Despite this impression of an imbalanced analysis leaning towards the Mexican side (although Mexico is indeed the most troubled party), the book is a valuable contribution to the understanding of the situation of human rights in Mexico – not only at the border. Unfortunately, the book makes for unhappy reading, and does not leave much room for hope. In the conclusion, Simmons suggests that the 2012 election might represent a turning point; it did not. On the contrary, one might argue that human rights violations in Mexico have increased since then. ‘The human rights infrastructure will be in place when it is desired, perhaps when it can serve a political function’ (p. 231). Simmons suggests it all depends on political will; sadly, the Mexican government (and the US?) does not have that will yet.