Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Trump ‘Remain in Mexico’ Asylum Rule Continues, Supreme Court Stays Lower Court Injunction

    Trump ‘Remain in Mexico’ Asylum Rule Continues, Supreme Court Stays Lower Court Injunction

    Feared border surge avoided, as Wuhan coronavirus spreads

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuNPCqcsInQ

    The Supreme Court, once again, has put on hold a lower court injunction trying to prevent Trump from exercising his lpower over who enters the country.

    Amy Howe reports:

    Today the Supreme Court granted the Trump administration’s application for permission to enforce the Migrant Protection Protocols, colloquially known as the “remain in Mexico” policy, while it appeals to the Supreme Court. Announced in December 2018, the policy allows the Department of Homeland Security to return immigrants seeking asylum to Mexico while they wait for deportation proceedings. Justice Sonia Sotomayor was the only justice to note publicly that she would have denied the government’s request.

    The Trump administration came to the Supreme Court last week, after a federal district court in California blocked the government from enforcing the policy anywhere in the United States. The policy, the district court ruled, is likely inconsistent with both federal immigration law and the doctrine of international law barring the return of asylum seekers to countries where they may be in danger. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld the district court’s decision and barred the government from enforcing the policy in California and Arizona; the 9th Circuit’s order was scheduled to go into effect tomorrow.

    The Order provides:

    19A960 WOLF, SEC. OF HOMELAND, ET AL. V. INNOVATION LAW LAB, ET AL.

    The application for stay presented to Justice Kagan and by her referred to the Court is granted, and the district court’s April 8, 2019 order granting a preliminary injunction is stayed pending the timely filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari. Should the petition for a writ of certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event the petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court.

    Justice Sotomayor would deny the application.

    The so-called ‘Remain in Mexico’ order is of particular importance with the Wuhan coronavirus spreading, as if the rule were removed, people claiming asylum — even frivolously — would have been able to stay almost indefinitely in the U.S. There was a fear that if the rule were removed, there would be a border surge complicating public health efforts.

    A judicial flip-flop is causing chaos at the southern border.

    US authorities shut down a bridge in El Paso, Texas, late Friday after a federal appeals court dealt a sharp blow to President Trump’s border-enforcement strategy — then suspended its order hours later.

    A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a program that requires Central American migrants to wait outside the US while their asylum cases are pending.

    More than 100 migrants stormed the Ciudad Juarez-El Paso border bridge as word of the ruling spread in the Mexican camps where at least 25,000 asylum-seekers are waiting, authorities said.

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments



     
     0 
     
     2
    healthguyfsu | March 11, 2020 at 6:41 pm

    This is good news, but the race mongers will be back when things are clamer. Most of the country will never know this happened at such a crucial time for border security (when a health challenge presents itself).


     
     0 
     
     8
    puhiawa | March 11, 2020 at 7:11 pm

    Trump was correct when he reminded Mexico that international provided that refugees were only entitled to stay in the first country they arrive at, no pick and choose who has the better welfare program.

    I recall being tested for a number of communicable diseases BEFORE I was qualified for my immigrant visa and granted entry into the US.

    I also had to prove that I had the means to support myself and did not have ties to politically radical groups.

    Lawful immigration and comprehensive screening never struck me as xenophobic or a partisan issue.


     
     0 
     
     3
    CorkyAgain | March 11, 2020 at 10:41 pm

    The policy, the district court ruled, is likely inconsistent with both federal immigration law and the doctrine of international law barring the return of asylum seekers to countries where they may be in danger.

    These eminent legal scholars apparently failed high school geography, since they can’t tell the difference between the various countries south of our border.

    A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down a program that requires Central American migrants to wait outside the US while their asylum cases are pending.

    Got that? The migrants are fleeing Central America, not Mexico.


     
     0 
     
     0
    oldscribe | March 12, 2020 at 5:49 pm

    The Ninth Circus rides again. PDJT needs to keep salting that Fools Gold mine with Conservative judges and put that LIEberal snake pit out of business once and for all.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend