A Border Patrol agent checks the passport of an asylum seeker after she turned herself in, in Eagle Pass, Texas, on December 19.
Veronica G. Cardenas/AFP via Getty Images
hide captions
switch captions
Veronica G. Cardenas/AFP via Getty Images
A Border Patrol agent checks the passport of an asylum seeker after she turned herself in, in Eagle Pass, Texas, on December 19.
Veronica G. Cardenas/AFP via Getty Images
The US Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling on Tuesday, accepted the GOP’s request to block the easing of pandemic border restrictions known as Title 42 – and agreed to decide decided during a debate in February whether the 19 states opposing the policy should be allowed to interfere in its defense in the lower courts.
Conservative justice Neil Gorsuch joined three court libertarians in dissent.
“The current border crisis is not a COVID crisis,” he wrote in his dissent. “And the courts shouldn’t be in the business of maintaining administrative orders designed for one emergency just because elected officials failed to deal with another emergency. We are the courts of legislation, not the ultimate policy maker.”
Under Title 42, immigration authorities can quickly deport many of the migrants they encounter — without giving them a chance to claim asylum or other protections under U.S. law. The restrictions were introduced by the administration of former President Donald Trump as a public health order in March 2020 when COVID-19 was just beginning to break out in the country.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court blocked the Biden administration’s plans to end pandemic restrictions, at least temporarily.
In a statement, White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre said the Biden administration would “comply with the order and prepare for the Court’s review.”
“At the same time, we are advancing preparations to manage our borders in a safe, orderly, and humane manner when Title 42 is finally lifted and will continue to expand legal avenues for border crossings.” immigration,” she said.
In November, Federal District Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled that Title 42 was illegaland set it to end on December 21. But the Supreme Court halted that ruling on December 19. On Tuesday, the court said the policy would remain in place while the legal challenge unfolded, all but ensuring that Title 42 restrictions would continue for at least the next several months.
It’s a victory for Republican attorneys general from 19 states that have asked the court to keep the restrictions in place, not because of the public health emergency, but because they say the removal of the restrictions. restrictions could cause a wave of illegal immigration.
Immigration advocates have argued that Title 42 is intended to prevent asylum seekers from accessing protections on the pretext of protecting public health.
“Withholding Title 42 will mean that desperate asylum seekers will suffer more, but hope,” said Lee Gelernt, the ACLU attorney who challenged Title 42 in court. this only proves to be a temporary setback in the court’s challenge.” .
Reality at the border
Meanwhile, migrants are continuing to arrive at the southern border in large numbers, and the Biden administration has yet to announce a long-term plan for asylum.
In El Paso, daily arrivals are declining, but shelters are still operating at full capacity. Hundreds of migrants ended up in the streets, and The mayor has declared a state of emergency.
The city is converting its convention center and two vacant schools into temporary shelters with the goal of providing 10,000 beds for migrants. However, the first priority is to move people out of the city quickly. Several nonprofits are transporting some migrants to larger Texas airports, which have more flights to destinations people are trying to reach around the country.
Texas Governor, Republican Greg Abbott, is also transporting migrants by bus, but reportedly only to so-called “sanctuary cities” such as Chicago and New York. And those cities are gearing up for an increase in arrivals.
KTEP’s Angela Kocherga contributed to this story.
