Supreme Court Rules Biden Administration Can End Trump-Era ‘Remain In Mexico’ Policy | Eastern North Carolina Now

On Thursday, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 5-4 in Biden v. Texas that the Biden administration can end the Migrant Protection Protocols — a Trump-era immigration policy also known as “Remain in Mexico.”

ENCNow
    Publisher's Note: This post appears here courtesy of the The Daily Wire. The author of this post is Tim Meads.

    On Thursday, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled 5-4 in Biden v. Texas that the Biden administration can end the Migrant Protection Protocols - a Trump-era immigration policy also known as "Remain in Mexico."

    "The Supreme Court ALLOWS the Biden administration to terminate the controversial Trump-era asylum policy known as 'remain in Mexico,'" SCOTUS Blog tweeted. "Red states argued that Biden was obliged to keep the policy, but SCOTUS says in a 5-4 ruling that the administration can end it."

    In 2021, President Joe Biden ordered an end to MPP, which required asylum seekers and other migrants who arrived at the U.S. southern border to remain in Mexico while they awaited their immigration trial. The states of Missouri and Texas sued, arguing that the Biden administration had violated the Administrative Procedure Act. Per order of the court, the Biden administration reinstated Remain in Mexico last December.

    In October, the Department of Homeland Security issued a new order ending Trump's signature immigration policy, and "sought expedited review as to whether federal immigration law requires it to maintain the policy and whether the October decision to end the policy has any legal effect," Oyez, a legal database, noted.

    Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion and was joined by Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Sonia Sotomayer, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan. Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, and Amy Coney Barrett dissented.

    "...the Government's rescission of MPP did not violate section 1225 of the INA, and the October 29 Memoranda did constitute final agency action," Roberts wrote. "We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. On remand, the District Court should consider in the first instance whether the October 29 Memoranda comply with section 706 of the APA."
Go Back

HbAD0

Latest Op-Ed & Politics

would allow civil lawsuit against judge if released criminal causes harm
"This highly provocative move was designed to interfere with our counter narco-terror operations."
Charlie Kirk, 31 years of age, who was renowned as one of the most important and influential college speakers /Leaders in many decades; founder of Turning Point USA, has been shot dead at Utah Valley University.
The Trump administration took actions against Harvard related to the anti-Israel protests that roiled its campus.
In remembrance of the day that will forever seer the concept of 'evil' in our minds, let's look back at that fateful morning, exactly 11 years ago today to that series of horrific events which unfolded before our unbelieving eyes......

HbAD1

faced 25 years in prison for "misgendering" a leftie tranny politician
illegal alien "asylum seeker" migrants are a crime wave on both sides of the Atlantic

HbAD2

It was a clear beautiful, royal blue sky day on Wall Street. The S & P futures were up markedly, awaiting a positive open, as I turn to get my first cup of coffee. I return to CNBC to get the morning business news, when I notice that the S & P futures are falling, and they're falling fast.
conservative youth leader was victim of political assassination
Harvard University is once again sending its students on delegations to China
In addition, Sheikha Al-Thani has "taken to promoting Mamdani’s mayoral candidacy on social media, boosting news of favorable polling on Instagram"

HbAD3

 
Back to Top