Tuesday, August 24, 2021

This Texas Court Ruling Proves The Border Crisis Is Joe Biden’s Fault; Will the Supreme Court Reverse the Ruling? Supreme Court Temporarily Blocks Trump-Era ‘Remain in Mexico’ Reinstatement

This Texas Court Ruling Proves The Border Crisis Is Joe Biden’s Fault:
The court’s analysis provides a devastating indictment of the Biden administration, establishing the current invasion of the U.S. southern border is a self-inflicted wound.
Late Friday, a federal court ruled the Biden administration acted arbitrarily in ending the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) the Trump administration established to require aliens to remain in Mexico pending immigration proceedings. Not only is the decision a huge victory for the plaintiffs, Texas and Missouri, in their fight to force the federal government to secure the border, the opinion provides a perfect primer for Americans on immigration law and the border crisis.
The court’s analysis also provides a devastating indictment of the Biden administration, establishing the current invasion of the U.S. southern border is a self-inflicted wound. Here are the key highlights.
People Without Documents Should Be Sent Home
In a thorough 53-page opinion, federal Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Donald Trump appointee, began with a summary of the relevant immigration law and the history of the MPP. As Kacsmaryk explained, Section 1225 of U.S. immigration code establishes procedures for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to process aliens who are “applicant[s] for admission” to the United States, “whether they arrive at a port of entry or cross the border unlawfully.”
First, an immigration officer must determine whether an alien is entitled to be admitted. If the person is “not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted,” then the federal immigration statute provides that the alien “shall be detained” for removal proceedings.
The immigration statute further provides that aliens without valid entry documents, or individuals who misrepresent their identity, “shall” be removed without further proceedings, unless the alien has indicated an intent to apply for asylum or claimed a fear of persecution. Under federal law, such asylum applicants “shall be detained for further consideration of the application for asylum.”
As a matter of statutory interpretation, the word “shall” represents a mandatory command, meaning the DHS must detain aliens. However, as Judge Kacsmaryk explained in his opinion, there are two relevant exceptions to the detention requirement.
First, the DHS retains discretion to “parole,” or release, certain aliens “for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.” But such “parole” is available “only on a case-by-case basis,” and is not intended “to replace established refugee processing channels,” the court explained. Accordingly, the court held that “any class-wide parole scheme that paroled aliens into the United States simply because DHS does not have the detention capacity would be a violation of the narrowly prescribed parole scheme” contained in federal immigration code.
Second, rather than detain an alien in the United States, Congress has authorized the DHS to return an alien to the “foreign territory contiguous to the United States” from which the alien arrived, pending removal proceedings. --->READ MORE HERE
Associated Press
Supreme Court temporarily blocks Trump-era ‘Remain in Mexico’ reinstatement:
Justice Samuel Alito issued a temporary stay that will be in effect until Tuesday night so he and the other justices can review filings in the case
In a decision Friday night, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocked a judge’s order calling for the reinstatement of the Trump administration’s "Remain in Mexico" immigration policy following a halt by President Biden.
Justice Samuel Alito issued a temporary stay that will be in effect until Tuesday night so he and the other Supreme Court justices can review the filings submitted in connection with the case, The Associated Press reported.
Alito’s stay came one day after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in New Orleans denied a Biden administration request that the reinstatement of the Trump-era policy be delayed.
On Aug. 13 in Texas, a federal judge sided with the attorneys general from Texas and Missouri, who had filed a lawsuit seeking the reinstatement of "Remain in Mexico," which is also known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP).
The attorneys general had argued that the Biden administration’s move to end the Trump-era policy was a violation of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). --->READ MORE HERE

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


No comments: