New immigration policy already causing Biden legal headaches

President Joe Biden’s attempt to crack down on illegal immigration is already being leveraged in court by administration critics who favor an even tougher approach at the southern border. A lawyer for the state of Texas, which is fighting to maintain concertina wire along a stretch of the U.S.-Mexico border, argued in court Thursday that Biden’s sweeping executive order to suspend the right to make asylum claims undercuts previous administration legal arguments in a suit brought by Gov. Greg Abbott. Texas Solicitor General Aaron Nielson told a panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that Biden’s action, which prohibits most migrants from being permitted to claim asylum when certain conditions are met, was “flatly contrary” to legal arguments the Justice Department previously offered in the case. “They told the district court and this court and the Supreme Court, essentially the toehold theory: If you get one toe into the United States, you are entitled to the asylum process. That is not consistent with what the president said two days ago, that … they can turn off the asylum process, if too many people are trying to come into the country,” Nielsen said during the court session in New Orleans. Reactions to Biden’s executive action tightening the border SharePlay Video Under Biden’s plan, which went into effect at 12:01 a.m. Wednesday, the government will suspend the right to claim asylum, with few exceptions, if the number of people apprehended between the ports of entry exceeds 2,500 people for seven straight days. The suspension remains in effect until the number drops to 1,500. The initial conditions have already been met, so the U.S. has effectively stopped accepting new claims except at ports of entry. The executive order, announced Tuesday, does not apply to unaccompanied minors and allows the government to make exceptions in cases of urgent humanitarian need. Immigrant rights groups have vowed to challenge the new Biden rules as a violation of existing law and treaty obligations. It’s unclear precisely what form such legal challenges will take, since some existing asylum limits are already being litigated and some suits over Trump-era policies are still active or on appeal. However, the arguments Thursday at the 5th Circuit underscore the fact that Biden is also likely to face continued legal pressure from Republican state officials and their attorneys, who contend he’s still not doing enough to limit uncontrolled immigration from Mexico. Texas filed suit against the Biden administration last year for destroying concertina wire installed at the direction of Abbott in response to record numbers of people coming to the U.S.-Mexico border to seek asylum. At the court session, Justice Department attorney Melissa Patterson said the Texas lawyer’s claims about Biden’s new policy were inaccurate and that it does not completely foreclose asylum proceedings for everyone who is encountered by the Border Patrol after the daily quota is exceeded. “We simply lack–there is no turn-back authority,” Patterson declared. “Once someone is within the United States, once they have entered and are present to the United States, regardless of whether they have entered unlawfully or whether they’ve entered lawfully at a port of entry, [immigration law] gives folks the right to apply for asylum. Nothing about the proclamation and the rule that accompanied changed that.” “It imposed a limitation on eligibility. It’s going to be harder to get it–to get asylum for a lot of folks, but you still get to apply, you still get to be processed,” the DOJ lawyer said. The Biden administration has argued that the razor wire Texas national guard troops deployed last year interferes with the Border Patrol’s ability to monitor the border and to respond to medical emergencies such as drownings. In January, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 to lift a 5th Circuit ruling that prevented federal officials from cutting through the wire so they could easily reach the border. However, that was a one-time decision and did not preclude the 5th Circuit from granting similar or other relief to Texas as the litigation continued. For more information, visit us at https://www.beverlyhillsimmigrationlaw.com/.