CNN
—
Biden administration told the Supreme Court on Tuesday Judge rejects emergency bid by Republican-led group of states to keep controversial Trump-era border restrictions in force pending legal challenge There is a need to.
But the court also sought to delay the end of Title 42 until at least December 27, citing the influx of immigrants and continued preparations for the upcoming holiday weekend.
The administration said states led by Arizona have no legal right to challenge a federal district court’s opinion that voided the program and ordered it to end by Wednesday.
Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily freeze the deadline On Monday, it asked the parties involved in the lawsuit, the Department of Justice and the American Civil Liberties Union, for their opinion.
There is no time limit for the courts until the Supreme Court makes an order, but orders can be made at any time but remain in power.
Since March 2020, Title 42 has allowed U.S. Border Patrol agents to immediately turn back migrants who illegally crossed the southern border, all in the name of Covid-19 prevention. Nearly 2.5 million people have been deported, most under the Biden administration, preparing for an influx of arrivals should authorities be lifted.
The last-minute legal dispute comes as federal officials and border regions prepare for an expected increase in migrant arrivals as early as this week as the immigration issue continues to ignite political divisions on both sides. increase. The Department of Homeland Security has a plan for ending the program that includes rushing resources to the border, targeting smugglers and working with international partners.
In court papers on Tuesday, Attorney General Elizabeth Preroger stressed that it is highly unusual for a court to allow a state to intervene at the last minute when it was not an official party to the dispute at hand.
“The government recognizes that the termination of the Title 42 Order may cause disruption and a temporary increase in illegal border crossings,” Prelogger wrote.
Large groups of immigrants cross to El Paso
“The government never intended to downplay the seriousness of the problem, but everyone now agrees that its solution to the immigration problem has lost its public health justification. It’s not about extending public health measures indefinitely,” she wrote.
ACLU attorneys representing Title 42 covered families also asked the judge to dismiss the state’s appeal.
“The record of this case chronicles the truly extraordinary terror that the Title 42 deportation is wreaking on non-citizens every day,” wrote Lee Gelernt, the bereaved family’s attorney.
“The state’s argument effectively boils down to claiming that Title 42, with no hearings and no access to asylum, is a better immigration control system than the actual immigration laws enacted by Congress,” Gelernt added. I was. “But again, it’s Congress’ choice.”
The White House has been gearing up for the end of Title 42 in anticipation of the flow of immigrants across the U.S.-Mexico border. In the Del Rio district, for example, when Title 42 ends, the number of migrant encounters will double from 1,700 a day to 3,500 a day, potentially taxing resources overwhelmed in remote areas of the border. Authorities are predicting.
Despite the freeze by Roberts’ Monday decision, the administration is moving ahead with its plans, CNN reported.
“We are proceeding as if nothing has changed,” a senior U.S. Customs and Border Protection official told CNN, adding that the Nicaraguans, Haitians and Cubans who make up many of the encounters had other legal ramifications. It added that policy discussions to provide pathways are still underway.
A DHS spokesperson told CNN in an email that officials along the southern border moved more than 9,000 migrants from El Paso last week. The U.S. Border Patrol has also moved nearly 6,000 other migrants to other sectors, according to a spokesperson, adding, “In addition to several measures introduced over the past six months as part of the DHS plan, immigration has been placed in immigration procedures for security and preparation of the southwest border.”
CNN’s Ed LaVandera, reporting from El Paso on Tuesday, explained that the Texas National Guard has placed fences and barbed wire in areas where immigrants have crossed. I am looking for a warehouse space to use as a temporary shelter.
Across the border from El Paso in Ciudad Juarez, CNN’s David Culver spoke with migrants who traveled hundreds of miles over the course of weeks, often on foot.
As for what happens Wednesday if the expiration date is still pending, one official said there may be a “small surge”.
“I think some people probably didn’t get the message and won’t get it until they cross,” the official said. “Some have already committed to cross.”
Late Friday night, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled against the state for waiting an “exorbitant” amount of time before engaging in the lawsuit. The order resulted in an urgent application in the High Court, addressed to Roberts.
Arizona Attorney General Mark Brunovich – who led the state – said on monday “Removing Title 42 would recklessly and needlessly endanger more Americans and immigrants by exacerbating the catastrophe unfolding on our southern border,” it added. It is estimated that such crossings will surge from 7,000 to 18,000 per day.
Texas shelters working overtime to keep up with surge in immigrants crossing U.S. border
04:07
– Source: CNN
Brnovich had told the judge in court papers that the lower court’s ruling should be set aside. Alternatively, the judge could issue an “immediate” temporary injunction to maintain the status quo, skip the Court of Appeals, and consider whether he agrees to hear discussion on the merits of the issue itself. He said he needed to.
“Not allowing people to stay here would cause irreparable and massive damage to the state, especially since the state bears many of the consequences of illegal immigration,” Brunovich argued.
In the case, six families who illegally crossed the U.S.-Mexico border and were subject to the Title 42 process filed initial complaints.
In court documents, the ACLU has previously argued that Covid-19 has always been a thin veil to tighten immigration controls. “There is no legal basis for using public health measures purportedly to replace immigration law even after the public health justification has expired.”
Meanwhile, the Biden administration opposes state attempts to intervene in the ongoing controversy and says it is prepared to allow the program to be terminated, but the district court is seeking to preserve the government’s authority to impose public health. I am appealing the opinion of the… future orders.
This story has been updated with additional details.
