The Supreme Court Agrees To Rehearing Of Case Involving Biden’s Attempt To Reverse The ‘Remain In Mexico’ Border Policy

Photo Sources: Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk (Left) YouTube/Senator Sheldon Whitehouse & Joe Biden (Right) YouTube/Joshua Gray

The United States Supreme Court has decided to reconsider the Biden administration’s request to abolish a Trump-era immigration policy.

Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, has twice sought to withdraw the Migrant Protection Protocols, often known as former President Donald Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy, but both times his efforts have been thwarted by federal judges.

In December, the Supreme Court decided that the Biden administration had improperly terminated the program, in violation of Administrative Procedures Act rules, and ordered DHS to restart it.

According to USA Today, the court expects to re-hear the case in April. The Migrant Protection Protocols were introduced by the Trump administration in January 2019 as part of its effort to reduce legal and illegal immigration at the US-Mexico border and halt what opponents term “catch and release” policy. According to court filings, the Trump administration had registered 68,000 people in the program by the end of 2020.

“The program permitted U.S. authorities to send migrants, including those from Central America, to Mexico while they waited for an immigration judge to review their case. A federal district court in Texas found that the policy acted as a deterrent, leading to a significant reduction in enforcement encounters along the nation’s southern border,” USA Today reported.

Two states, Texas and Missouri, claimed that the administration did not properly discontinue the program, claiming that federal law requires only a small number of migrants who cross the border illegally to be permitted to stay in the nation while their cases are evaluated.

According to the administration, the great majority of incoming immigrants should be freed in this manner, the states claimed in their filings to the court. As a result, the government undertakes a thorough rewrite of the statute.

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued an injunction against the Biden administration, finding that “during the course of the program, border interactions increased during certain periods and decreased during others.”

Furthermore, he stated that in reaching his conclusion, he shared with the states the belief that the United States as a nation can only manage migration in an effective, responsible, and long-term way if it approaches the issue comprehensively, looking beyond its own frontiers.

“At the very least, the Secretary was required to show a reasoned decision for discounting the benefits of MPP. Instead, the June 1 Memorandum does not address the problems created by false claims of asylum or how MPP addressed those problems. Likewise, it does not address the fact that DHS previously found that ‘approximately 9 out of 10 asylum claims from Northern Triangle countries are ultimately found non-meritorious by federal immigration judges,’ and that MPP discouraged such aliens from traveling and attempting to cross the border in the first place,” he added.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: