PolitiFact - Explaining the Supreme Court immigration ruling on ‘Remain in Mexico’

Indonesia Berita Berita

PolitiFact - Explaining the Supreme Court immigration ruling on ‘Remain in Mexico’
Indonesia Berita Terbaru,Indonesia Berita utama
  • 📰 PolitiFact
  • ⏱ Reading Time:
  • 95 sec. here
  • 3 min. at publisher
  • 📊 Quality Score:
  • News: 41%
  • Publisher: 71%

The Supreme Court ruled the Biden administration could end a Trump-era program that sent some migrants seeking asylum back to Mexico to await their immigration court proceedings. The ruling limits the power of federal courts in other immigration cases.

A migrant from Haiti waits with others at a clinic for migrants in Tijuana, on Monday, May 23, 2022. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Biden administration properly ended a Trump-era policy forcing some U.S. asylum-seekers to wait in Mexico. The Supreme Court ruled that the Biden administration could end a Trump-era program called “Remain in Mexico” that sent some migrants seeking asylum back to Mexico to await their immigration court proceedings.

The Trump administration created the Migrant Protection Protocols or "Remain in Mexico" program in January of 2019 via aThe Biden administration suspended all new enrollments in January 2021. By June 2021, DHS published a memo terminating the program. But in August 2021, a federal court ordered the administration to implement it again, after Texas and Missouri sued DHS. The case made it up to the Supreme Court.

The law says an immigrant "shall" be detained while their immigration case is pending. But DHS has never had the capacity to detain all immigrants awaiting proceedings. Instead, DHS prioritizes which immigrants to detain. Following the lower court’s ruling that DHS had to reinstate the program, the Biden administration began negotiations with the Mexican government. In December 2021, DHS implemented a series of changes to the original Trump-era program.the group of people included in the "Remain in Mexico" program to all Western Hemisphere nationals, excluding Mexicans, as opposed to nationals of Spanish-speaking countries and Brazil. But the program also included more individual exceptions.

The court sent the issue back to DHS, at which point the agency had two options. It could either provide a more detailed explanation for ending the program, or it could take a new agency action to terminate it. ending the program. This is what happened in the "Remain in Mexico" case. DHS ended the program, and Texas sued the government. The lower court issued an injunction ordering the federal government to reinstate the policy while the case was under litigation.This decision allows lower courts to rule on whether an immigration program is illegal but limits their ability to take action to provide relief, said Andrew Arthur at the Center for Immigration Studies, a think tank that favors low immigration levels.

Berita ini telah kami rangkum agar Anda dapat membacanya dengan cepat. Jika Anda tertarik dengan beritanya, Anda dapat membaca teks lengkapnya di sini. Baca lebih lajut:

PolitiFact /  🏆 17. in US

Indonesia Berita Terbaru, Indonesia Berita utama

Similar News:Anda juga dapat membaca berita serupa dengan ini yang kami kumpulkan dari sumber berita lain.

Mississippi Abortion Clinic Involved In Recent Supreme Court Decision Shuts DownMississippi Abortion Clinic Involved In Recent Supreme Court Decision Shuts DownAbortion access has become increasingly limited across wide swaths of the U.S. as conservative states enact restrictions or bans that took effect when the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that legalized abortion nationwide.
Baca lebih lajut »

How the Supreme Court Could Approach Federal Laws Upholding—or Banning—AbortionHow the Supreme Court Could Approach Federal Laws Upholding—or Banning—AbortionThe Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade has implications for legal readings of constitutional clauses regarding commerce and due process, among other topics.
Baca lebih lajut »

Independent California truckers scramble after Supreme Court refuses to hear AB5 caseIndependent California truckers scramble after Supreme Court refuses to hear AB5 caseA law designed to force gig-economy companies like Uber, Lyft and DoorDash to accept workers as employees is also having a profound impact on the trucking industry.
Baca lebih lajut »

The Supreme Court Needs an UpgradeThe Supreme Court Needs an UpgradeOn the latest What Next: President Biden has called the current Supreme Court “extremist.” What can he do about it?
Baca lebih lajut »

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court to rule on immunity in sex trafficking caseWisconsin’s Supreme Court to rule on immunity in sex trafficking caseWisconsin’s Supreme Court is set to decide Wednesday whether a sex trafficking victim accused of homicide can argue at trial that she was justified in killing the man who trafficked her, a ruling that could help define the extent of immunity for trafficking victims nationwide.
Baca lebih lajut »



Render Time: 2025-03-01 04:07:47