The Supreme Court announced on Friday that it will review the legality of the Trump administration’s policy of categorically denying asylum claims from people crossing the southern border, taking up another major test of the president’s immigration agenda.
On President Trump’s first day back in office, he effectively shut down the ability of people fearing torture and persecution to apply for asylum protections at the border and then remain in the United States, declaring there was an “invasion” along the southern border. In a proclamation, he invoked what he called “the inherent right and duty of the executive branch to defend our national sovereignty.”
Immigration rights group quickly challenged the proclamation, and lower courts have found it to be illegal. But it has still largely been in force under a temporary court order. The Supreme Court case is expected to be the culmination of years of litigation over the ability of the government to prohibit migrants from claiming asylum at the border.
This Supreme Court term, which began in October and will conclude next summer, is shaping up to be dominated by Mr. Trump’s aggressive immigration policies. In December, the court will review the administration’s efforts to deport immigrants to so-called third countries where they have no ties, including nations that have faced allegations of human rights abuses. Next year, the court will consider the administration’s policy of indefinitely detaining immigrants who crossed the border illegally years ago.
In the asylum case the justices accepted on Friday, a central question is whether the president can override immigration law set by Congress. During the first Trump administration, officials struggled to come up with restrictive asylum policies at the border that would survive judicial scrutiny.
In his second term, the president adopted the prohibition on asylum claims at the border and has been fighting over the policy in court. D. John Sauer, the solicitor general, told the justices in court filings that their intervention was “urgently warranted” in part because the policy was Mr. Trump’s “main tool for stemming an unprecedented crisis of uncontrolled illegal entry.”
Source: www.nytimes.com
