Supreme Court blocks Biden from ending Title 42 migrant expulsions

Via:  Just Jim NC TttH  •  3 months ago  •  17 comments

By:   John Fritze and Martina Stewart (USA TODAY)

Supreme Court blocks Biden from ending Title 42 migrant expulsions
The policy, which has been in place since the early days of the pandemic, must continue while courts assess a lawsuit filed by 19 states.

Leave a comment to auto-join group Americana



S E E D E D   C O N T E N T

John FritzeMartina StewartUSA TODAY

WASHINGTON - In a blow to the Biden administration's ability to set the nation's immigration policy, the Supreme Court on Tuesday said the government could not halt the expulsion of migrants for public health reasons under the controversial Title 42 program.

That program, which has been in place since the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, must continue while courts assess a lawsuit filed by Republican officials in 19 states who say that unwinding the Title 42 policy would unleash a national "catastrophe."

The emergency intervention from the high court came days after the Trump-era program was set to expire. The justices announced they will hear arguments about the program next year, but limited their review to whether the conservative states may intervene in the litigation. Oral arguments are expected in February. In the meantime, expulsions will continue.

The high court's unsigned order noted that Associate Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan would have denied the emergency request from the states and allowed the administration to lift the Title 42 policy.

Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch dissented from the court's ruling Tuesday, joined by Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. The court's decision on the states' emergency request was "unwise," Gorsuch wrote, adding. "The emergency on which those (Title 42) orders were premised has long since lapsed."

"The only plausible reason for stepping in," Gorsuch said, has to do with the states' concerns about immigration and the situation on the border.

"But the current border crisis is not a COVID crisis,'' Gorsuch added. "And courts should not be in the business of perpetuating administrative edicts designed for one emergency only because elected officials have failed to address a different emergency. We are a court of law, not policymakers of last resort."

While the decision was a legal loss for President Joe Biden, the political implications were less clear: The administration's effort to lift Title 42 has drawn sharp criticism from Republicans and uncertainty from some Democrats who fear border communities were not prepared for an influx of migrants. The Supreme Court's decision appeared to defuse that situation for now, even as it left thousands of migrants in limbo.

Title 42 permits Customs and Border Protection agents to expel migrants without the usual legal review to Mexico or to their home countries to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in holding facilities. Title 42 has been used to expel migrants more than 2.4 million times since its implementation in 2020 and has bottled up tens of thousands of migrants in Mexican border cities who are waiting to request asylum in the United States.

The Biden administration announced in April that it intended to wind down the Title 42 policy because vaccines and therapeutics had eased the impact of the virus. Separately, a federal court in Washington, D.C., ruled in November that the way the program was created violated the law and ordered the administration to end it by Dec. 21. That mandate was temporarily paused by the Supreme Court.

The legal wrangling set up a potential humanitarian crisis for the White House and sowed confusion on both sides of the border, where many migrants waited for word about whether they could seek asylum in the United States. Some migrants in Juarez told The El Paso Times they had heard the border would "close" on Dec. 21; others that it would "open." People staying in shelters shared stories of friends who had been expelled and others who had been able to stay in the U.S.

Debate over Title 42 made its way to the Senate floor Dec. 22, as lawmakers raced to approve a $1.7 trillion spending plan before the holiday weekend. Two last-minute amendments that would have extended the program failed.

Biden administration officials have said they have rushed resources to the border but have also called on Congress to spend more than $3 billion to speed up the processing of asylum claims and to move some migrants to less crowded facilities. "We need Congress to give us the funds we've requested to do this in a safe, orderly, and humane way," White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said.

The president, meanwhile, will travel to Mexico next month to meet with Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, the White House said, and attend the North American Leaders' Summit. The long-running tension between Washington and Mexico City over migrants traveling through Mexico to the U.S. is certain to come up.

Contributing: Lauren Villagran, El Paso Times;Sarah Elbeshbishi, Francesca Chambers, Maureen Groppe.


jrGroupDiscuss - desc
Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH    3 months ago


Professor Quiet
Senior Participates
1.1.1  GregTx  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1    3 months ago

Those articles are from earlier this month. You should try keeping up with current events. 

Professor Quiet
1.1.2  Ronin2  replied to  Ozzwald @1.1    3 months ago

Is this while Brandon the Human Fuck Up Machine talks about ending Title 42? And the administration and DOJ ask the Supreme Court to end it.

Brandon and the Democrats are fighting really damn hard to keep 42 in place- by asking the Supreme Court to end it.

Professor Quiet
1.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1    3 months ago

Just one word, GOOD!

Sean Treacy
Professor Expert
2  Sean Treacy    3 months ago

  Title 42 is a band aid and Biden's doing everything in his power to rip it off and remove all barriers to unlimited immigration. 

Pass a law. Do something more than lying about the "border being secure."

The border will be a large part of Biden's legacy.  He and his party have made it clear "open borders" is what he wants to be. 

Professor Principal
3  JBB    3 months ago

Let's be honest. The real headline says, "For now".

Senior Participates
3.1  GregTx  replied to  JBB @3    3 months ago

Let's be honest. The dissent says, "It's not the judiciaries job to make immigration policy or law. Do your job".

Professor Guide
3.2  1stwarrior  replied to  JBB @3    3 months ago

Let's be honest - learn to read -

Supreme Court keeps Title 42 border expulsions in place indefinitely

Note the word at the end of the headline - INDEFINITELY - not "for now" as the seeded article reads -

USA TODAY is featured on the   AllSides Media Bias Chart™ .

USA TODAY is a news media source with an AllSides Media Bias Rating™ of Lean Left.

Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @3    3 months ago

Asylum seekers cross the border, get processed, wait for a court date which now takes on average 4 years to schedule. Then they are released into the US. I can't imagine a worse system. 

Trump had the answer: Make the Remain-in-Mexico policy a federal law!

Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
4  Jeremy Retired in NC    3 months ago

Another failure for the Biden Administration.  Good.  At least somebody is trying to protect the country. We sure as hell know it's not the Biden Administration.

Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4    3 months ago

The Court can only do it for so long. Like Justice Gorsuch said "We can't be making policy."

Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
4.1.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1    3 months ago

Too many times have these idiots relied on the courts to make policy.  

Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.1    3 months ago

Oh yes, for years those activist courts took advantage of congressional gridlock.

Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
4.1.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.2    3 months ago

Reality of it is, to use the courts to set policy is sheer laziness.  The equivalent of throwing shit against the wall and running with what sticks.

Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.4  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @4.1.3    3 months ago

And it violates the separation of powers.

Just Jim NC TttH
Professor Principal
5  seeder  Just Jim NC TttH    3 months ago

And if for no other reason, shit like this................

  • A Wyoming sheriff wants a convicted illegal alien who raped an 8-year-old-girl to stay imprisoned, rather than face deportation because of the Biden administration’s immigration policies.
  • Sweetwater Sheriff John Grossnickle believes that the border is open to previously deported criminals under the Biden administration, as was the case with the recent rape, he told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
  • “During the Trump administration, we actively had federal authorities in our community working with us to enforce federal law, federal immigration law, simply on the basis of undocumented status, which is to say they came in because they were looking for someone who they knew was here illegally, and they were taking enforcement action on the basis of that immigration status in and of itself,” Grossnickle said.

The victim was just 8 years old when Luis Saavedra Villa kidnapped and viciously sexually assaulted her in Sweetwater County, Wyoming.

Saavedra Villa, 44, was a registered sex offender and a previously deported illegal alien from Mexico. He was convicted of sexual assault in 2001.


Who is online


26 visitors