This site requires Javascript to function properly - please enable Javascript in your browser

Supreme Court denies motion to block Trump 'public charge' rule during pandemic

community » Discussions » Category » News & Politics » Discussion » Supreme Court denies motion to block Trump 'public charge' rule during pandemic

Category: News & Politics

Via: texan1211 • 6 years ago • 3 comments

By: Harper Neidig

Supreme Court denies motion to block Trump 'public charge' rule during pandemic

The Supreme Court on Friday denied a request to block the Trump administration's "public charge" rule during the coronavirus health crisis.A group of state attorneys general had asked the court to issue an injunction against the rule, which links a migrant's eligibility for legal status with the likelihood that he or she will rely on public assistance.The court had decided earlier this year to allow the rule to go into effect, but the group of...

Seems reasonable to me.

S E E D E D C O N T E N T

BB6QvJF.img?h=17&w=0&m=6&q=60&u=t&o=t&l= The Hill21 hrs agoHarper Neidig BB119EMr.img?h=169&w=300&m=6&q=60&o=f&l= © Greg Nash Supreme Court denies motion to block Trump 'public charge' rule during pandemic

The Supreme Court on Friday denied a request to block the Trump administration's "public charge" rule during the coronavirus health crisis.

A group of state attorneys general had asked the court to issue an injunction against the rule, which links a migrant's eligibility for legal status with the likelihood that he or she will rely on public assistance.

The court had decided earlier this year to allow the rule to go into effect, but the group of state officials, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James (D), had asked the justices to revisit the decision in light of the ongoing pandemic.

The court did not publish an opinion on its decision not to grant the request, nor did it publish a vote tally for the move.

But their order on Friday did leave open the possibility that the attorneys general could seek relief in the lower courts.

James, who was joined by her counterparts from Connecticut and Vermont and the corporation counsel for New York City, argued in her emergency motion earlier this month that the new administration rule is a threat to public health amid the coronavirus crisis.

"By deterring immigrants from accessing publicly funded healthcare, including programs that would enable immigrants to obtain testing and treatment for COVID-19, the Rule makes it more likely that immigrants will suffer serious illness if infected and spread the virus inadvertently to others-risks that are heightened because immigrants make up a large proportion of the essential workers who continue to interact with the public," they wrote in their brief.

While it's unknown how the justices voted on the emergency motion, the court ruled 5-4 along ideological line in the earlier petitions, with the conservative majority deciding that the administration could implement the rule while a legal challenge plays out in federal court.

The rule allows immigration authorities to consider applicants for legal status a public charge if they receive public assistance like food stamps or Medicare for 12 months in a three-year period.

James and other attorneys general challenging the rule have called it a "wealth test" for immigrants.

Go to MSN HomeAdChoicesAdChoices