Dec 27 (Reuters) – The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down a pandemic-era policy allowing U.S. officials to quickly deport migrants caught at the U.S.-Mexico border.
In a 5-4 vote, the court accepted a request by Republican state attorneys general to halt a judge’s decision invalidating the emergency public health order known as Title 42.
The 19 states argue that ending the policy could lead to an increase in already record border crossings and strain resources of the states where migrants arrive. The court said it will hear arguments on whether the states could step in to defend Title 42 in its February session.
A verdict is expected at the end of June.
President Joe Biden said the US government would have to enforce the order until the matter was resolved.
“But I think it’s overdue,” he said.
Chief Justice John Roberts, a member of the court’s 6-3 conservative majority, on Dec. 19 issued a temporary administrative stay preserving Title 42 while the court considered whether to maintain the policy for longer. Before his order, it was set to expire on December 21.
Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch joined the court’s liberal members – Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson – in a dissent, calling Tuesday’s order “unwise.”
He questioned why the court rushed to hear a dispute over “emergency decrees that have outlived their shelf life,” and said the only plausible reason was because the states claimed Title 42 would help mitigate against an “immigration crisis.”
“But the current border crisis is not a COVID crisis,” Gorsuch wrote in an opinion joined by Jackson. “And courts should not be in the business of perpetuating executive edicts designed for one crisis just because elected officials have failed to address a different crisis.”
Mexico’s foreign ministry had no immediate comment on the court’s decision.
MILLIONS EXPELLED
Aid group the International Rescue Committee said in a statement that Title 42 has been used to justify nearly 2. See the article : “Disappearing playgrounds increase lifestyle diseases in children”.5 million deportations since March 2020, and argued that US border policies have caused significant strain across the region, making migration routes more deadly.
[1/6] Members of the Texas National Guard stand guard on the banks of the Rio Bravo River, the border between the United States and Mexico, with the aim of strengthening border security and preventing the crossing of migrants to the United States, seen. from Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, December 27, 2022. REUTERS/Jose Luis Gonzalez
Title 42 was first implemented in March 2020 under Republican former President Donald Trump when the COVID-19 pandemic began.
Democrat Biden’s administration initially kept it in place, but sought to lift it after US health authorities said in April it was no longer needed to prevent the spread of COVID-19. However, the repeal was blocked by a federal judge in Louisiana — a Trump pick — in response to a Republican-led legal challenge.
Enrique Lucero, director of migration affairs in Tijuana, said it is “absurd” that Title 42 remains in place, noting that the city has a large backlog of US asylum seekers.
“This measure must disappear sooner or later,” he said.
Miguel Colmenares, a Venezuelan migrant in the Mexican border city of Tijuana, after hearing about the court’s decision, said he did not know what he would do.
“I have no money and my family is waiting for me,” said the 27-year-old.
“It breaks my heart that we have to keep waiting.”
A group of asylum-seeking migrants represented by the American Civil Liberties Union sued the US government over the policy, arguing that the deportations to Mexico exposed them to serious harm, such as kidnapping or attacks.
In that case, US District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington, on November 15, sided with the migrants and ruled that Title 42 was illegal.
Sullivan, appointed by Democratic former President Bill Clinton, said the administration had not shown that the risk of migrants spreading COVID-19 was a “real problem”. It also failed to weigh the harm asylum seekers would face from Title 42, he said.
The Biden administration has sought time to prepare for the end of the policy, at which point migrants will again be, as they were pre-pandemic, allowed to apply for asylum at the border. Sullivan gave it until December 21st.
Unhappy with the lower court’s decision, a group of Republican state attorneys general sought to step in to continue defending the policy in court. When a federal appeals court on December 16 refused to allow them to intervene and put Sullivan’s order on hold, they took the matter to the Supreme Court.
“It is disappointing that the Biden administration is willing to sacrifice the safety of American families for political purposes,” said Republican Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, who is leading the defense of Title 42.
Reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston and Lizbeth Diaz in Mexico City
Additional reporting by Dave Graham in Mexico City
Editing by Aurora Ellis and Rosalba O’Brien
