US top court to review Trump’s immigration policies

Bloomberg

The US Supreme Court agreed to hear the Trump administration’s defense of a policy that requires people seeking asylum at the southern border to remain in Mexico until their cases are decided.
The justices will review a federal appeals court decision that said the Migrant Protection Protocols policy runs afoul of US immigration law. The ruling aimed to let some people wait in the US while their asylum applications are being processed.
The administration has used the MPP, as the policy is known, to force 60,000 asylum-seekers to stay in Mexico, many in squalid tent camps. The Supreme Court signalled support for the policy in March, when the justices allowed continued enforcement as the litigation moves forward. Justice Sonia Sotomayor cast the lone public dissenting vote.
The coronavirus outbreak means the immediate impact of the case is likely to be limited. A March 20 order by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention closed the border to
asylum seekers, effectively superseding the MPP during the pandemic.
The administration has also suspended consideration of pending asylum requests.
The timing of the case could create an unusual dynamic. Under the court’s normal scheduling practices, the justices wouldn’t hear arguments until at least late February. That could mean Joe Biden inherits the case if he wins the November 3 presidential election.
But should Trump win re-election, a ruling in his favour would bolster his long-term border authority. By the time the court hears arguments, Amy Coney Barrett could be in place as the newest justice to provide a 6-3 conservative majority.
Before MPP, people seeking asylum had to either be detained in the US or released
inside the country. The administration argued in its appeal that the immigration system had become overwhelmed, with about 2,000 inadmissible immigrants arriving at the southern border every day and a growing number claiming they would be in danger if they were sent home.
“MPP has dramatically eased the strain on the United States’ immigration-detention system and reduced the ability of inadmissible aliens to abscond into the interior,” acting US Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall told the Supreme Court in the appeal.
Opponents represented by the American Civil Liberties Union say the asylum seekers are being exposed to kidnapping and assault in Mexico.
“Pursuant to MPP, the government returns asylum seekers to some of the most dangerous parts of Mexico — and the world,” the group argued.
“The State Department has designated parts of the border where MPP is applied as ‘Level 4: Do Not Travel To’ — the same threat level assigned to active-combat zones such as Syria and Iraq.”
The group said the policy violates federal immigration law, as well as US obligations under domestic and international law not to send people to places where they will suffer persecution or torture.
The Supreme Court last year backed Trump on a related border issue, clearing his administration to enforce a rule that sharply limited who can apply for asylum at all. That rule requires people who come from countries other than Mexico to first apply for protection from one of the countries they pass through along the way.