The Biden administration on Wednesday asked the Supreme Court to reconsider its case to end the Trump-era “stay in Mexico” policy.
Earlier this month, three Republican-appointed judges for the US 5th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the White House’s appeal to authorize an end to Migrant Protection Protocols (MPPs), also known as the Mexico Stay Policy, and upheld the lower court’s decision. that the termination of the policy by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under the Biden administration was inappropriate.
Shortly after taking office, the Biden administration sought to end the MPP, but Texas and Missouri sued in an attempt to keep the policy in place, calling it a ” common sense” of the right to asylum.
Immigration advocates, meanwhile, say the MPP violates US law as well as the country’s international obligations to give asylum seekers a safe place to wait while their applications are processed.
The 5th Circuit ruling was written by Trump-appointed judge Andrew Oldham, who said DHS’s proposed approach to the policy was “as illegal as it is illogical.”
In its petition to the Supreme Court, the Justice Department under the Biden administration said the Supreme Court should revisit the case because previous rulings against ending the MPP were made on ‘misinterpretations’ of federal laws – namely the Immigration and Nationality Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.
The Justice Department noted that the 5th Circuit ruled that the US code required DHS to maintain the stay-in-Mexico policy. The agency argued that if this is correct, then every other administration — including the Trump administration — has violated federal law since 1997, when the specific section of the code in question took effect.
The Justice Department further argued that the trial court erred in its ruling that Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’ decision earlier this year to end the MPP had no effect. no legal effect. The department said Mayorkas did “exactly” what he was supposed to do and that the 5th Circuit’s decision “ignored fundamental principles of administrative law.”
“In short, the lower courts ordered DHS to implement and enforce the controversial and short-lived MPP program in perpetuity. And they did so despite the determinations of the politically responsible executive branch that the MPP is not the best tool to deter illegal migration; that the MPP exposes migrants to unacceptable risks; and that the MPP is undermining the executive’s foreign relations efforts to manage regional migration,” the petition reads.
The Hill has removed its comments section, as there are many other forums for readers to join in the conversation. We invite you to join the discussion on Facebook and Twitter.