Sunday, August 4, 2019

Federal Judge Strikes Down Trump Asylum Ban On Migrants Who Illegally Cross Border

President Trump’s push to limit the number of asylum seekers flooding across the border suffered another defeat in the courts on Friday, when a federal judge ruled that the government cannot stop migrants from claiming asylum in the U.S., even if they have crossed the border illegally.
The decision concerned a policy announced by Trump in November that bars migrants who entered the U.S. across the southern border from being eligible for asylum unless they presented themselves at a port of entry. Trump has said he was acting in response to caravans of migrants making their way to the border.
But the policy was temporarily blocked last year by a federal appeals court, which said it was inconsistent with federal law and was an attempt to bypass Congress. The Supreme Court later blocked the immediate enforcement of the policy in a 5-4 decision in December.
On Friday, Judge Randolph Moss said that the president had determined that the influx of migrants across the border poses a “particular problem for the national interest,” but Moss ruled that the assessment “is neither sufficient to override a statutory mandate permitting all aliens present in the United States to apply for asylum” whether or not they arrived at a designated port of entry.
The judge was referring to the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which defines who may apply for asylum, and says that any one physically present in the U.S. may do so regardless of whether or not they entered via a designated port of entry.
The case was brought by 19 asylum seekers from Central America, who entered the U.S. between ports of entry and claimed that the president's restrictions were illegal on a number of counts -- including that it is inconsistent with the INA. 
According to the ruling, the government argued that while the INA says that illegal immigrants may "apply" for asylum, the rule does not stop them from applying but instead makes them "ineligible" for asylum. Judge Moss dismissed this argument as a distinction without a difference.
Read the rest of the story HERE.

If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.

No comments: