The federal administration has asked the Supreme Court to consider an end to the ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy of the Trump era. It has forced thousands of immigrants to remain trapped in Mexico, as they awaited a solution to their request for US asylum.
President Biden has repeatedly sought to dump the policy of his predecessor right after he took over office. But Missouri and Texas filed suits and a federal court ruled for it to be reestablished. Later a court of appeals agreed with the ruling.
The ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy, officially called the Migrant Protection Protocols, was started by former President Trump. Under the law immigrants seeking asylum could be made to wait for years south of the border for a court date in the US instead of waiting in the US for their hearings.
The ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy was decried by Biden even during his election campaign. Immigration advocates said that many migrants were victims of crimes that included kidnapping trapped in the unsafe border cities of Mexico.
Republican Leaning Judged Have Regularly Frustrated Attempts To Overturn ‘remain In Mexico’
A federal judge ruling led the federal administration to re-issue a memo dismissing it expecting to overcome legal hurdles. But the 5th Circuit Court, packed with conservative-leaning judges, differed and said that merely posting a fresh document was not enough.
3 judged appointed by the Republicans upheld the lower courts ruling that the termination of the ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy by the homeland security department was not proper. Trump-appointed judge Andrew Oldham said that the homeland department proposed approach was both illogical and unlawful.
The Biden administration has requested the highest court to decide whether the policy should be allowed to continue and if the appeals court has erroneously concluded that the memo issued by the federal administration had no effect.
The Justice Department has noted that if the ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy is allowed to remain as related by the 5the Circuit, then previous administrations dating back to 1997 had violated federal laws when the specific section of the code became effective.
