Jump to content

U.S. court allows Trump to phase out immigrant humanitarian protections


webfact

Recommended Posts

U.S. court allows Trump to phase out immigrant humanitarian protections

By Ted Hesson

 

2020-09-14T173126Z_1_LYNXMPEG8D1T5_RTROPTP_4_USA-ELECTION-TRUMP.JPG

U.S. President Donald Trump dances to the song "YMCA" as he concludes a campaign rally with supporters in Henderson, Nevada, U.S. September 13, 2020. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Monday sided with President Donald Trump over his administration's decision to end humanitarian protections for hundreds of thousands of immigrants, many of whom have lived in the United States for decades.

 

In a 2-1 ruling, a panel of three judges in the California-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court decision that had blocked Trump's move to phase out so-called Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for people from El Salvador, Haiti, Nicaragua and Sudan.

 

The ruling is also expected to affect the status of people from Honduras and Nepal, who filed a separate lawsuit that was suspended last year pending the outcome of the broader case.

 

The appeals court ruling means that those immigrants will be required to find another way to remain in the United States legally or depart after a wind-down period at least until early March and longer in the case of El Salvador.

 

Judge Consuelo Callahan, an appointee of Republican former President George W. Bush, wrote in a 54-page opinion that the Trump administration decisions to phase out the protections were not reviewable and therefore should not have been blocked.

 

Callahan also rejected a claim by plaintiffs that Trump's past criticism of non-white, non-European immigrants influenced the TPS decisions.

 

"While we do not condone the offensive and disparaging nature of the president’s remarks, we find it instructive that these statements occurred primarily in contexts removed from and unrelated to TPS policy or decisions," she wrote.

 

An attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, which represents plaintiffs in the lawsuit, said on Monday that they planned to seek another "en banc" review of the matter by 11 of the appeals court's judges.

 

The attorney, Ahilan Arulanantham, called the decision "deeply flawed" during a call with reporters, and said the case eventually could be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, depending on the outcome of the request for a broader appeals court review.

 

The termination of TPS for Haitians is also subject to separate litigation in the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. The appeals court heard arguments in that case in June, but has not yet ruled.

 

Trump has made his tough immigration stance a hallmark of his presidency and 2020 re-election campaign against Democratic challenger Joe Biden.

 

TPS allows foreigners whose home countries experience a natural disaster, armed conflict or other extraordinary event to remain in the United States and apply for work permits. The status must be renewed periodically by the secretary of homeland security, who can extend it for six- to 18-month intervals.

 

The Trump administration has argued that most countries in the program have recovered from the related disasters or conflicts, while the status has been renewed for years beyond its need.

 

The Biden campaign has called the TPS decisions "politically motivated" and said that Biden would protect enrollees from being returned to unsafe countries.

 

Immigrants from El Salvador make up the largest group of TPS recipients, with an estimated 263,000 Salvadorans covered by the program, but a bilateral agreement will allow Salvadorans an additional year to stay in the United States if the courts ultimately uphold Trump's termination.

 

(Reporting by Ted Hesson and Mica Rosenberg; editing by Ross Colvin, Grant McCool and Jonathan Oatis)

 

reuters_logo.jpg

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-09-15
 
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Paul Henry said:

How come Trump didn't include his wife and her country.? OPS forgot two sets of rules one for the rich and one for the poor.Hopefully come March the new government will reverse the decision. Trumps racism once again shows through. Once America was an humanitarian country.

Melania Trump is a US citizen.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"But when Donald Trump—the U.S. president whose administration separates children from their families to deter asylum-seekers—says there is much to be learned from Australia’s immigration policies, it’s a fresh reminder of just how bad things have become.

Australia’s asylum policies—which see asylum-seekers languishing for years under inhumane conditions in offshore detention centers in Papua New Guinea and Nauru—are already a source of great shame for many Australians. Widely condemned by human rights groups and the United Nations, the policies contravene various human rights charters, including the 1951 Refugee Convention and even the Convention Against Torture. A U.N. report called on Australia to close the offshore centers, finding “inadequate mental health services, serious safety concerns and instances of assault, sexual abuse, self-harm and suspicious deaths; and about reports that harsh conditions compelled some asylum seekers to return to their country of origin despite the risks that they face there.” Just last week, a former detainee who spent six years on Manus Island begged the U.N. Human Rights Council to hold Australia to account, calling the centers—not just the circumstances they were fleeing—a humanitarian crisis."

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/07/trump-morrison-australia-immigration-manus-nauru.html

Talk about messed up human abuses against immigrants.

 

 

Edited by i84teen
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2020 at 12:24 AM, webfact said:

A U.S. appeals court on Monday sided with President Donald Trump over his administration's decision to end humanitarian protections for hundreds of thousands of immigrants, many of whom have lived in the United States for decades.

 

Thank goodness November is coming up quickly...don't normally wish my life away, but the sooner this man is removed from the White House the better

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LazySlipper said:

What are you on about bub?

You posted the link maybe you should read what you post.

 

By asking if you are an illegal immigrant they are actually confirming that there are some.

 

The link I provided countered a number of claims you made concerning 'illegals". Unless you can disprove via a credible source, I'm calling you out for posting false info.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2020 at 5:26 PM, simple1 said:

There are many who have resided in the US for years, have children who are US citizens and so on. Countries have ongoing strife with breakdown of law and order, death squads, endemic corruption and so on. it seems to me to be especially cruel for families with children who are US citizens. We can assume this matter will end up in the Supreme Court after trump has been removed from power - wonder if the ramification of the proposed legislation will be a negative for trump with Latino voters.

Why do people that know they only have temporary residence have children then? They should not, but they know that children born in the US are anchor babies.

If they choose to have children that should not affect their return as they can take the children with them.

The world is full of strife, but why is it that the US is seen as responsible for every person at risk?

Australia has the right policy.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Why do people that know they only have temporary residence have children then? They should not, but they know that children born in the US are anchor babies.

If they choose to have children that should not affect their return as they can take the children with them.

The world is full of strife, but why is it that the US is seen as responsible for every person at risk?

Australia has the right policy.

How is US government going to enforce contraception? Forcibly return children to a country they have never lived in? 

 

Never read people hold the US responsible for every person at risk - hyperbole. You're sounding more like trump every day...

Edited by simple1
  • Like 2
  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, simple1 said:

How is US government going to enforce contraception? Forcibly return children to a country they have never lived in? 

 

Never read people hold the US responsible for every person at risk - hyperbole. You're sounding more like trump every day...

I never said the government could. I said the illegal person should not, but that they do so IMO because they know the child can't be deported.

 

The US can't remove children born in the US but they can remove the illegal parent(s). Up to them if they take the child.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, simple1 said:

No doubt there are some who abuse the welfare system, such as working cash in hand, presumably enabled by citizen employers, but not all as you infer. Those born as citizens would defraud the welfare system, of whom there would be far larger numbers than immigrants being supported by tax payer funds.

 

You use the insulting language of the 'conservative', to claim you're not 'right wing' is laughable. About time for you to get off your bigoted soap box.   

Up to me employing an illegal would be a mandatory jail term for any legal citizen that does so. They are the worst sort of people as they exploit the vulnerable to save themselves money.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.







×
×
  • Create New...