Trump asks U.S. Supreme Court to allow full enforcement of asylum crackdown

By Andrew Chung

 

U.S. President Donald Trump waves as he boards Air Force One upon departure after the G7 summit in Biarritz, France, August 26, 2019. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

 

(Reuters) - President Donald Trump's administration on Monday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to lift a court order preventing the government from fully enforcing a new rule that would curtail asylum applications by immigrants at the U.S.-Mexico border.

 

California-based U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar last month issued a nationwide injunction blocking the rule, which requires most immigrants who want asylum to first seek safe haven in a third country they had travelled through on their way to the United States.

 

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Aug. 16 upheld Tigar's injunction but limited it to the nine Western states over which it is has jurisdiction. Only two of those nine, California and Arizona, are on the border with Mexico. That left open the possibility that the rule could be applied in the two other border states, Texas and New Mexico.

 

The rule, unveiled on July 15, would bar almost all immigrants from applying for asylum at the southern border. It represents the latest effort by Trump's administration to crack down on immigration, a signature issue during his presidency and his 2020 re-election bid.

 

One of the Republican president's main objectives has been to reduce the number of asylum claims primarily by Central American migrants who have crossed the U.S.-Mexico border in large numbers during his presidency.

 

The rule drew legal challenges including from a coalition of groups represented by the American Civil Liberties Union.

 

In the administration's request to fully enforce the rule, U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco asked the Supreme Court to issue a stay blocking the injunction while litigation over the issue proceeds because the judge's order interferes with the government's authority to establish immigration policy.

 

The administration said the rule screens out asylum claims that are unlikely to succeed and "deters aliens without a genuine need for asylum from making the arduous and potentially dangerous journey from Central America to the United States."

 

The Supreme Court last December rebuffed a bid by the administration to implement a separate policy prohibiting asylum for people crossing the U.S.-Mexican border outside of an official port of entry, with conservative Chief Justice John Roberts joining the four liberal justices in denying the request.

 

(Reporting by Andrew Chung; Additional reporting by Daniel Trotta; Editing by Will Dunham)

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-08-27

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

How about manning up the immigration judges and adjudicating the asylum claims so you stop making us look like a bunch of racist aholes and conform with the present laws?

Edited August 26, 20196 yr by Tug

2 hours ago, Tug said:

How about manning up the immigration judges and adjudicating the asylum claims so you stop making us look like a bunch of racist aholes and conform with the present laws?

you mean as xenophobic as thailand where no farang gets anything even working here for 20+ years ?

That's nice, they want to take care of the asylum seekers and prevent them making an arduous and dangerous journey.

 

At least be honest.

Asylum and Trump in the same sentence, has a ring to it.

 

 

America has a RIGHT to decide who enters their country. It's not up to the feel-good, guilt-ridden leftists who want to give away our country to invaders.

15 minutes ago, howbri said:

America has a RIGHT to decide who enters their country. It's not up to the feel-good, guilt-ridden leftists who want to give away our country to invaders.

Yes, and it's done by laws and the law says it is legal to seek asylum.   

 

3 hours ago, Tug said:

How about manning up the immigration judges and adjudicating the asylum claims so you stop making us look like a bunch of racist aholes and conform with the present laws?

 

Don't worry there are plenty of federal appointments for judges coming and most likely one more SCOTUS appointment.

9 minutes ago, Credo said:

Yes, and it's done by laws and the law says it is legal to seek asylum.   

 

For valid reasons. 

24 minutes ago, howbri said:

America has a RIGHT to decide who enters their country. It's not up to the feel-good, guilt-ridden leftists who want to give away our country to invaders.

 

It's becoming retarded. Look at the immigration threads regarding Europe and what is said it isn't half as liberal. The debate at this point has become open borders and no enforcement at all and that Is simply guano crazy. 

1 hour ago, Cryingdick said:

 

It's becoming retarded. Look at the immigration threads regarding Europe and what is said it isn't half as liberal. The debate at this point has become open borders and no enforcement at all and that Is simply guano crazy. 

That's a very liberal view of facts, didn't know you were leaning that way ????

1 hour ago, Boon Mee said:

1 hour ago, Credo said:

Yes, and it's done by laws and the law says it is legal to seek asylum.   

 

For valid reasons. 

and not fail to appear at asylum hearing(s)

Any of you have homes in So Cal? you might change your mind on immigration if you see whats happening there.

 

5 hours ago, howbri said:

America has a RIGHT to decide who enters their country. It's not up to the feel-good, guilt-ridden leftists who want to give away our country to invaders.

Mmmmm... you make a good point... Americans should indeed be heard on this matter. That includes guilt ridden leftists, I believe... remind me again.... which political affiliation won the popular election? 

6 hours ago, justin case said:

you mean as xenophobic as thailand where no farang gets anything even working here for 20+ years ?

You want the USA to copy Thailand ????

14 hours ago, Credo said:

Yes, and it's done by laws and the law says it is legal to seek asylum.   

 

I’m curious as to what exactly they are seeking asylum from?  Economic conditions, low wages, can’t find a job, their husband beats them?  

 

Now on on the other hand you talk about Cuba, then yes, seek asylum by all means. 

 

 

14 hours ago, howbri said:

America has a RIGHT to decide who enters their country. It's not up to the feel-good, guilt-ridden leftists who want to give away our country to invaders.

Do you remember the Americans who sought asylum in Sweden during the Vietnam war?

8 minutes ago, oldhippy said:

Do you remember the Americans who sought asylum in Sweden during the Vietnam war?

No, but did they let those enlightened people in and give them housing and a monthly stipend?

Troll post removed.   It's a discussion forum.   Meme's may be a part of a discussion, but it takes more than a meme to make it a discussion.

 

1 hour ago, HLover said:

No, but did they let those enlightened people in and give them housing and a monthly stipend?

No, the Swedes told them to sleep in the streets and beg for money if they (the enlightened Americans) were hungry.

PS. I am always at your service if you want more lessons in modern history.

 

International treaties signed by the President and ratified by Congress are adopted as and have the force of Federal law. Including those treaties relating to refugees and asylum seekers.

 

It’s in the Constitution.

 

Once again Trump and and his Illiberal supporters are keen to change the Constitution in order to suppress the rights of others.

 

 

21 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

For valid reasons. 

That’s why we need to man up the immigration judges to go through the cases send the fakes home allow the valid ones to stay it’s heartining to see we finally agree on something