Court blocks Trump administration’s attempt to crackdown on fake asylum-seekers

(Photo by Mani Albrecht/U.S. Customs and Border Protection via Getty Images)

 

At every turn, there is a court ruling that prevents the Trump administration from taking action to resolve the crisis on the southern border.

It’s bad enough that an inept Congress refuses to take action to address the overrun border, but the courts are proving to be a greater adversary for President Trump — a complicit media aside.

On Monday, a three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the administration’s policy allowing for the indefinite detention of certain asylum-seekers, refusing to overturn a lower court ruling temporarily blocking it, according to The Hill.

“The government failed to show a likelihood of success on the merits of its underlying argument that the government may indefinitely detain the plaintiffs without affording bond hearings at all,” the ruling stated.

The panel includes Carter appointees Judges Mary Schroeder and William Canby, and Obama appointee Judge Morgan Christen.

More on the ruling from The Hill:

In the ruling, the judges said the Department of Justice did not make a “persuasive showing that it will suffer irreparable harm if it is required to provide bond hearings pending the outcome of this appeal in the same way it had done for several years.”

However, the appeals court did not allow a district judge’s order requiring the government to release some asylum-seekers within a certain amount of time after immigration proceedings begin, saying it “would impose short-term hardship for the government and its immigration system.”

[Attorney General William] Barr first issued the order earlier this year, determining that asylum-seekers who pass a “credible fear” test and go on to full deportation proceedings aren’t entitled to bond hearings.

 

The problem with releasing illegal immigrants into the United States, where they are all but assured of not being deported, thanks in large part to the Democratic Party, is that an overwhelming majority never return for their court date.

The Associated Press reported in early June that since Dec. 1, over 200,000 migrant families have been released into the country — this being the result of court rulings and our archaic immigration laws.

The initial court ruling, by District Judge Marsh Pechman, a Clinton appointee, was denounced by White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham, who said it’s “at war with the rule of law.”

Grisham said in a statement that the ruling by “a single, unelected district judge,” will only motivate “smugglers and traffickers, which will lead to the further overwhelming of our immigration system by illegal aliens,” according to The Hill.

Deputy Press Secretary Steven Groves was critical of Monday’s ruling.

“[T]he Ninth Circuit… allowed a radical decision from a district judge to go into effect during the pendency of the government’s appeal, which had held unconstitutional a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act,” Groves said in a statement. “Based on the unprecedented theory that illegal aliens who recently entered the country have a constitutional right to be released on bond into the United States, the district court struck down a statute passed by bipartisan majorities in Congress during the Clinton administration specifically requiring certain aliens to be detained pending their asylum proceedings.”

In a rare win from the 9th Circuit, the appeals court ruled two weeks ago in favor of the Trump administration, saying the Department of Justice could withhold federal grants to cities that offer “sanctuary” to illegal immigrants.

Comments

Latest Articles