Mark Brnovich smiles as he speaks to people on the floor of the Arizona House of Representatives, at the Arizona Capitol in Phoenix.
Ross D. Franklin/AP
hide captions
switch captions
Ross D. Franklin/AP
Mark Brnovich smiles as he speaks to people on the floor of the Arizona House of Representatives, at the Arizona Capitol in Phoenix.
Ross D. Franklin/AP
The Supreme Court this week blocked the White House from lifting Title 42 – a public health order issued by the Trump administration in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic for public health reasons. Title 42 allows Customs and Border Protection to deny migrants at the border in an attempt to prevent the spread of the virus.
Since it was implemented in March 2020, more than 2 million people, asylum seekers, have been deported from the United States or denied at the border. That number includes people who have repeatedly attempted to enter the United States
A federal judge ruled in November that Title 42 was illegal and set it to end on December 21. But the Supreme Court halted that ruling on December 19. Nine days later, The Supreme Court said the policy would remain in place while the legal challenge took place.
In a dissenting opinion, Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that “the current border crisis is not a COVID crisis. And the courts should not be up to the task of upholding administrative orders designed for an emergency just because elected officials did not. failed to resolve another emergency. We are the courts of law, not the policymakers of last resort.”
The judges will hear arguments in the case when their next terms begin in February.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in the spring that it plans to lift Title 42 in May “after reviewing current public health conditions and the increasing availability of tools to against COVID-19.”
Attorneys general from 19 Republican-led states have petitioned to keep the rule in place, saying their states will be hit hard by an expected surge in migration into the country. Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, one of the leaders in the effort to keep Title 42 in place, spoke to NPR’s A Martinez about why it should exist.
Featured interview
Why keep Title 42 in place for immigration control?
Brnovich argued that in revoking Title 42, President Joe Biden failed to comply with the law requiring notice and comment from those affected by his actions.
“We as states tried to intervene to protect our interests, and the Biden administration disagreed, saying the states had no interest,” he said. “I think the events of the last two years, whether it’s the cost of health care, whether it’s the cost of incarceration or it’s the cost of lost people – Every state in the US now Both are border states, and we all have an interest in making sure we have a secure border.”
Brnovich admits that Title 42 isn’t “in the end it’s all.”
“It’s not a permanent policy. It was never meant to be. But it’s one of the few tools we have left in our toolbox that is preventing more people from re-entering any real estate. legal.”
Why did the Supreme Court decide to uphold this policy?
The question in court was whether the states had the legal standing to contest upholding the policy, and the majority agreed that they did.
I think the answer to that from a constitutional legal perspective is, yes, the states are affected, Brnovich said. “And yes, states should be allowed to step in when the federal government isn’t doing its job.”
A migrant helps two Venezuelan children cross the Rio Grande River from Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua state, Mexico to El Paso, Texas to apply for political asylum.
Herika Martinez/AFP via Getty Images
hide captions
switch captions
Herika Martinez/AFP via Getty Images
A migrant helps two Venezuelan children cross the Rio Grande River from Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua state, Mexico to El Paso, Texas to apply for political asylum.
Herika Martinez/AFP via Getty Images
Is Title 42 still necessary for public health reasons?
He argued that by imposing COVID restrictions on other countries like China, the current administration undercuts their argument for lifting Title 42.
“From a legal perspective, the president and his administration are taking actions that say there is a pandemic, and they are actually taking actions to try to mitigate and control it,” said Brnovich. speak. “If they’re going to try to rule out people coming from China, and then they test negative for COVID, and they want to argue that there’s still things the government has to do about this pandemic – oh my god. , one of the things they should absolutely do is keep Title 42 intact.”
Why not go back to Title 8, federal immigration law that allows for the prosecution of people crossing the border illegally?
“The Biden administration is not prosecuting people who enter and re-enter our country illegally. They are literally letting people apply for asylum and then releasing them into our country. And sometimes, you know, they’re required to report to probation officers for years to come,” he said. “You can see the data on how long it takes, but it’s like an indictment against our federal immigration system, which everyone agrees is broken.”
Asylum seekers try to warm up next to a small fire as they wait to be processed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers near the U.S.-Mexico border fence near Somerton, Arizona.
AFP via Getty Images
hide captions
switch captions
AFP via Getty Images
Asylum seekers try to warm up next to a small fire as they wait to be processed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers near the U.S.-Mexico border fence near Somerton, Arizona.
AFP via Getty Images
Why do you blame Biden for the border crisis?
The attorney general said that Biden’s policies encouraged people to try to cross the border.
“From day one, when Joe Biden was sworn in, he began to despise and encourage people who immigrate or illegally enter this country,” Brnovich said. “There’s interim guidance in which the Biden administration refuses to deport people with deportation orders, where we have to file lawsuits. He stopped building the wall where taxpayers have to pay for the wall not allowed. You know, the ‘Stay in Mexico’ policy – the list goes on and on.”
Brnovich said that people from all over the world are crossing the southern border and that “they’re going to tell you, ‘Hey, we heard that Joe Biden isn’t prosecuting anyone, and people can stay where they are. come here.’ And the fact is, that’s exactly what’s happening.”
How will you fix the system?
Brnovich says rolling back restrictions shouldn’t be a priority.
“The first thing you have to do is actively enforce existing laws. You have to gain control of the southern border,” he said. “And then when you do that, you can start the discussion.”
He pointed to then-President Obama’s rise to deal with the influx of migrants at the southern border in 2014. “They actively sent federal judges and prosecutors to our southern border. us to aggressively prosecute entry and re-entry cases. And even under the Obama administration, they were able to stem the flow of immigrants.”
He said other countries have systems that work and can serve as models for US policy.
“I understand why people want to come to this country, but I also believe there has to be a process,” Brnovich said. “There are countries like Canada and Australia that have an immigration system based on merit and grades. … If they needed, you know, more nurses or gardeners in Australia, you know, they would. allowing people to come and become citizens and get those jobs. And so I think there are other systems that we can look at that don’t create chaos.”
Lilly Quiroz and Olivia Hampton produced and edited the audio of this interview. Majd Al-Waheidi edited the story digitally.
