In a 5-4 ruling Tuesday, the Supreme Court granted a GOP petition to postpone the phasing down of Title 42 pandemic border restrictions and agreed to decide in February whether 19 states that oppose the policy may intervene in its defence in the lower courts.
Three liberals and Neil Gorsuch Dissented
“The present border problem is not a COVID situation,” he said in his dissent. “Courts should not continue administrative edicts from one emergency because elected politicians failed to solve another.”
Many migrants are deported under Title 42 without a chance to request asylum or other U.S. safeguards. Former President Donald Trump’s government issued the public health decree in March 2020 as COVID-19 began to spread.
Also read: Future Asylum Rules-Suspense Builds In Texas at U.S.-Mexico Border
The Supreme Court halted the Biden administration’s pandemic restrictions on Tuesday.
White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre said the Biden administration will “comply with the decision and prepare for the Court’s review.”
Emmet Sullivan Declared It Illegal
“We are progressing with our plans to administer the border in a safe, orderly, and humanitarian fashion when Title 42 ultimately lifts and will continue increasing legal paths for immigration,” she added.
Title 42 ended on December 21 after Federal District Judge Emmet Sullivan declared it illegal in November.
The Supreme Court halted that judgement on Dec. 19. On Tuesday, the court upheld the regulation while the legal challenge proceeds, assuring that Title 42 limitations will last for months.
Designed to Deny Asylum-Seekers Rights
Republican attorneys general from 19 states requested the court to maintain the limits in place because eliminating them would certainly increase illegal immigration.
Also read: US Border Cities Strained Ahead of Expected Migrant Surge
Immigration supporters claim Title 42 was designed to deny asylum-seekers rights under the guise of public health.
“Keeping Title 42 would mean more suffering for desperate asylum-seekers, but hopefully this proves merely to be a temporary setback in the legal case,” said ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt, who has been litigating Title 42 for years.
Source: https://www.kpcc.org/
