Supreme Court hands Biden a victory paving way to end 'Remain in Mexico' policy
Texas Lt. Gov.: SCOTUS Ruling in Biden’s Favor on Remain in Mexico Is ‘Devastating for the United States’
(CNSNews.com) – In a 5 to 4 decision, the Supreme Court on Thursday sided with the Biden administration in Biden v. Texas, allowing the administration to lift Title 42 and end the Remain in Mexico Policy also known as Migrant Protection Protocols, which requires migrants to seek asylum from the United States and wait in Mexico while their cases are adjudicated.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the majority.
Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said the decision means that by the time that Biden’s term in office is over, the United States will have let in more illegal immigrants during those four years than the population of New York and Los Angeles combined.
Paxton told Fox News’s “America’s Newsroom” that he’s “very disappointed in the decision” and the fact that Roberts and Kavanaugh “sided with the liberals on this.” He called it “devastating for the United States of America” and “a crisis that most people in America really don't have their arms around.”
To put in perspective, under the four years of Biden, based on the numbers we already have seen and the numbers projected over his last 2.5 years, we will have allowed more people into this country illegally that do not share our values and our principles.
They are not highly educated in many areas, that have health issues that impact our entire economy in every state. We are going to see more people here illegally than live in the two largest cities in America – New York and Los Angeles combined or five times the number of people who live in Houston, which is the fourth largest city in the country.
We’ll be approaching 40-50 million people here illegally since the 1990s. And the question that has to be asked, what happens to these people when they get here? They don't just disappear. They do disappear from sight but what do they do? If they go to school, they are three or four grades behind. You can’t put a 15-year-old in the fourth grade, so they drop out of school.
What future do they have? They don't have a work permit. They don't have citizenship. They go to our emergency rooms and clog our hospitals. Fentanyl is pouring across the border with them, because as you crowd people into the border, the drugs come the other direction where Border Patrol are not, and we’re doing everything--- and now that’s the leading cause of death in America for young people 18 to 45, so this is a terrible decision for America.
This is a terrible decision for Texas, and we alone in Texas are spending $4 billion this year in border security. We normally spend about $400 million. A $4 billion. That's more than some states have a total budget. This is only going to allow Biden to thump his chest and say, ‘See, I'm right,’ and the floodgates are going to be open.
We’re approaching by the time his term ends -if you look at the MIT report from 2016, which said 26 million people were here illegally, and add his numbers, we are going to be somewhere near 40-50 million people here illegally. We cannot absorb that in our cities and our counties and our states. It's a tremendous burden on the taxpayers. It’s dangerous for America.
People are coming here from 150 countries. One last stat to give you a sense of how big this is in America. The border with Mexico and Texas is longer than the mileage from Atlanta, Georgia, to Maine.
That is about 1100 miles. We have almost 1300 miles of border with Mexico and a zigzag way down the Red River and now the Supreme Court has just opened the doors, but we’re not going to suggest packing the court.
We’re not going to try to burn down the cities because we don’t like the decision. We’re not going to change the filibuster rule. We are going to respect this decision and fight to overturn it.
As to what legal recourse Paxton has, he said that they’re “doing everything we can up into the letter of the law.”
We will be coming back into session in January, and it is my intention as lieutenant governor who does control the agenda with the Senate majority in the Texas Senate to pass legislation that we can get back to the Supreme Court like Arizona did, but they lost their case in 2012, to bring a case that says we have to have control over our border, not just the federal government, because it’s impacting the lives of 29 million Texans, and we should have a say in that.
You had an earlier guest talking about going back to states’ rights, and that's what we need, Dana. My number one responsibility is to the Constitution of Texas and America but to the safety of our citizens and the federal government is allowing people to come into this country, which has a tremendous impact in so many areas on America, but on Texas.
That's my responsibility and I should have a right to protect my citizens and not have the federal government not do their job. Our founders never thought we would have a president this incompetent who would open up the border and allow this invasion.
I don't think our founders ever dreamed that we’d have a president that says, ‘Just come on in, just flood America’ without checking anyone for anything. We don't know who these people are. We don't know where they go, as I said, and they just go into our society.
That's a tremendous burden on the taxpayers and as Henry Cuellar said earlier, those who have actually gone to court, which are very few, 90% of the cases show that they are not here a legal asylum reasons. This was a policy that Trump put into place. It worked, and we had control of the border his last year of the presidency, and in terms of those poor souls in the back of that 18-wheeler. as I said to yesterday - I think when I was with you - it's been a long 24 hours - that no one should have to come to America and die in the back of an 18-wheeler to get here.
We need legal immigration reform. We need control of the border. We have to protect our citizens, but this presidency is a culture of death. They don't care about the babies in the womb. They don't care about the people in the back of the trailer. They didn't care about our soldiers in Afghanistan. They don’t care about our kids and young people dying of fentanyl. You never hear any compassion from this president about anything when it comes to human life, and this is going to continue now and we are going to everything we can to stop it.
We’re going to be on the wall doing everything we can, building the wall, but I'm going to look for a law that we can go back to the Supreme Court and challenge them that the state has to have the permission to protect its citizens when the federal government will not. That's my duty. That's my obligation. I believe that's what Texans and Americans want.
SCOTUS Delivers Blow to ‘Remain in Mexico,’ But Court Battle Continues
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled that President Joe Biden’s administration can end the Migration Protection Protocols (MPP), commonly known as the “Remain in Mexico” program, but is sending a key part of the case back to a lower court.
In a 5-4 decision, SCOTUS ruled that the Biden administration did not violate the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) when it sought to end the Remain in Mexico program, which was first imposed by former President Trump’s administration.
The Remain in Mexico program allows the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to quickly return border crossers to Mexico while they await their asylum and immigration hearings in the United States — effectively eliminating the practice commonly known as “Catch and Release.”
A district court and a court of appeals had both previously held that the Biden administration violated the INA when it sought to end Remain in Mexico. The district court also held that the administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the Court’s opinion, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Brett Kavanaugh. Justice Kavanaugh also wrote a concurring opinion.
Justice Samuel Alito filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch. Justice Amy Coney Barrett filed a dissenting opinion that Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch joined except for one sentence.
The Court’s opinion reads in part:
As we recently held in Garland v. Aleman Gonzalez, 596 U. S. ___ (2022), section 1252(f )(1) “generally prohibits lower courts from entering injunctions that order federal officials to take or to refrain from taking actions to enforce, implement, or otherwise carry out the specified statutory provisions.” [Emphasis added]
The District Court’s injunction in this case violated that provision. [Emphasis added]
…
We now turn to the merits. Section 1225(b)(2)(C) provides: “In the case of an alien . . . who is arriving on land . . . from a foreign territory contiguous to the United States, the [Secretary] may return the alien to that territory pending a proceeding under section 1229a.” Section 1225(b)(2)(C) plainly confers a discretionary authority to return aliens to Mexico during the pendency of their immigration proceedings. This Court has “repeatedly observed” that “the word ‘may’ clearly connotes discretion.” [Emphasis added]
The use of the word “may” in section 1225(b)(2)(C) thus makes clear that contiguous-territory return is a tool that the Secretary “has the authority, but not the duty,” to use. [Emphasis added]
…
For the reasons explained, the Government’s rescission of MPP did not violate section 1225 of the INA, and the October 29 Memoranda did constitute final agency action. 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. [Emphasis added]
The ruling means that SCOTUS holds that the district court did not have jurisdiction to previously stop the Biden administration from ending Remain in Mexico but also left open the possibility that the court does have the power to vacate the administration’s ending of the program.
In that regard, the case will be sent back to the district court for another hearing.
In his dissent, Justice Alito wrote:
In fiscal year 2021, the Border Patrol reported more than 1.7 million encounters with aliens along the Mexican border. When it appears that one of these aliens is not admissible, may the Government simply release the alien in this country and hope that the alien will show up for the hearing at which his or her entitlement to remain will be decided? [Emphasis added]
Congress has provided a clear answer to that question, and the answer is no. By law, if an alien is “not clearly and beyond a doubt entitled to be admitted,” the alien “shall be detained for a [removal] proceeding.” [Emphasis added]
And if an alien asserts a credible fear of persecution, he or she “shall be detained for further consideration of the application for asylum,” §1225(b)(1)(B)(ii) (emphasis added). Those requirements, as we have held, are mandatory. [Emphasis added]
Congress offered the Executive two—and only two—alternatives to detention. First, if an alien is “arriving on land” from “a foreign territory contiguous to the United States,” the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) “may return the alien to that territory pending a [removal] proceeding.” Second, DHS may release individual aliens on “parole,” but “only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or a significant public benefit.” [Emphasis added]
Due to the huge numbers of aliens who attempt to enter illegally from Mexico, DHS does not have the capacity to detain all inadmissible aliens encountered at the border, and no one suggests that DHS must do the impossible. But rather than avail itself of Congress’s clear statutory alternative to return inadmissible aliens to Mexico while they await proceedings in this country, DHS has concluded that it may forgo that option altogether and instead simply release into this country untold numbers of aliens who are very likely to be removed if they show up for their removal hearings. This practice violates the clear terms of the law, but the Court looks the other way.
[Emphasis added]…
I agree with the majority that the injunction entered by the District Court in this case exceeded its “jurisdiction or authority to enjoin or restrain the operation of ” the relevant statutes. [Emphasis added]
The ruling ensures that the case is not over and will go back to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The lower courts could help restore Remain in Mexico and could make the case a critical issue in 2024, as it could end up before SCOTUS again.
Alito wrote in his dissent:
The District Court should assess, among other things, whether it is “arbitrary and capricious” for DHS to refuse to use its contiguous-territory return authority to avoid violations of the statute’s clear detention mandate; whether the deterrent effect that DHS found MPP produced in reducing dangerous attempted illegal border crossings, as well as MPP’s reduction of unmeritorious asylum claims, is adequately accounted for in the agency’s new decision; and whether DHS’s rescission of MPP is causing it to make parole decisions on an unlawful categorical basis rather than case-by-case, as the statute prescribes. [Emphasis added]
If the Fifth Circuit appeals court affirms such an order from the district court, then Remain in Mexico would remain in force at least until SCOTUS decides to hear an appeal for that decision, making it possible that any such final decision from SCOTUS would not come down until the first half of 2024, in the middle of the next presidential campaign.
If the district court finds the Biden administration’s ending Remain in Mexico to be arbitrary and capricious on the issues raised by Alito, the program will be reinstated. If that occurs before July 31, the program might even never be terminated, remaining in force while the Justice Department appeals to the Fifth Circuit appeals court.
Depending on the timing of the appellate court’s decision, all of this might put the case back on track to be heard by SCOTUS in the fall of 2023, with a decision coming down in the first six months of 2024. The November 2024 presidential election will then take place, and depending on the incoming administration in January 2025, Remain in Mexico could be reimplemented for the entirety of this time except for roughly six months between the 2024 SCOTUS decision and a new president taking the helm.
The case is Biden v. Texas, No. 21–954 in the Supreme Court of the United States.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
President Biden says U.S. to boost military presence in Europe
"This is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the Mexican Militant. This is a common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN, belonging to Mexicans, which is taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and California through a LA Raza educational program funded by American Tax Payers via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA $800,000.00 in March of 2009!
No longer golden, California is the center of the universe for homelessness. At 4.3%, the state’s unemployment is worse than in all but seven states, the poverty rate is higher than in any other state, blackouts are becoming more rule than exception, soft-on-crime policies have shown up in ugly street crimes, a politically created drought has a distinct Third World feel, and personal freedom is on the decline while economic freedom has been near rock bottom for more than two decades.
California Makes History: First State in U.S. Giving Food Stamps to Illegal Aliens
The sanctuary state of California will make history by becoming the first state in the nation to give food stamps to illegal aliens.
This week, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) announced a budget deal with Democrat state legislators that includes providing food stamps, paid for by California’s taxpayers, to illegal aliens 55 and older — the first initiative of its kind in the United States.
An executive with the group Nourish California told the Fresno Bee that the policy is historic for the state, saying, “California is once again making history by removing xenophobic exclusions to our state’s safety net.”
Expansion of the state’s CalFresh food stamps program will cost California’s taxpayers more than $35 million and about 75,000 illegal aliens are expected to enroll every year.
The move comes as Newsom’s budget deal will also ensure that California is the first state in the nation to provide taxpayer-funded health insurance to all of its 3.3 million illegal aliens.
Offering taxpayer-funded health insurance to its entire illegal alien population, the largest in the nation, is expected to cost California’s taxpayers about $2.4 billion annually. The plan is scheduled to begin in 2024.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
Biden’s border policy uses American taxpayers to ‘enrich’ cartels: Rep. Scott Perry
BIDEN PARTNERS WITH MEXICO TO ORCHESTRATE ANOTHER MASSIVE MEX INVASION OF DEM VOTING ILLEGALS.
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2020/11/the-biden-amnesty-and-mexicos-planned.html
"Mexican president candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador called for mass immigration to the United States, declaring it a "human right". We will defend all the (Mexican) invaders in the American," Obrador said, adding that immigrants "must leave their towns and find a life, job, welfare, and free medical in the United States."
"Fox’s Tucker Carlson noted Thursday that Obrador has previously proposed granting AMNESTY TO MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS. “America is now Mexico’s social safety net, and that’s a very good deal for the Mexican ruling class,” Carlson added."
"Many Americans forget is that our country is located against a socialist failed state that is promising to descend even further into chaos – not California, the other one. And the Mexicans, having reached the bottom of the hole they have dug for themselves, just chose to keep digging by electing a new leftist presidente who wants to surrender to the cartels and who thinks that Mexicans have some sort of “human right” to sneak into the U.S. and demographically reconquer it." KURT SCHLICHTER
As in 2016, Democrats advance a corrupt ruling-class candidate. Like the dead man Gary Ernst, Democrats want people to vote for Joe Biden so they can swap him out for Kamala Harris, already a beneficiary of voter fraud and with the exception of Xavier Becerra possibly the worst attorney general in California history.
Mexico Gives Travel Permits to 3000 Caravan Migrants Headed to U.S.
Mexico’s government issued approximately 3,000 travel permits to members of a migrant caravan that arrived over the weekend in Chiapas. Rather than trying to stop the group, authorities issued permits and allowed them to continue north in a fragmented manner.
The caravan arrived at Mexico’s southern border on Friday and members of Mexico’s National Immigration Institute (INM) began issuing a series of travel permits that give migrants 30 days to travel freely through the country, a prepared statement from INM revealed.
Over the weekend, INM agents issued approximately 3,000 permits in their office in Huixtla, Chiapas. According to INM, the move was done to disrupt the caravan so individual migrants could move freely through Mexico.
The caravan has since disbanded but the migrants with travel permits will continue to make their way north. The U.S. government is seeing record-setting numbers of migrants reaching its southwest border. Cartel-connected human smugglers are actively promoting a notion that U.S. immigration courts are capable of handling swells of new migrant claims.
The move by Mexico’s INM is a direct contrast to prior approaches dating back to the Trump era, where authorities would meet caravans with riot shields and batons. Last year, human rights activists accused INM agents of using excessive force against migrants.
Ildefonso Ortiz is an award-winning journalist with Breitbart Texas. He co-founded Breitbart Texas’ Cartel Chronicles project with Brandon Darby and senior Breitbart management. You can follow him on Twitter and on Facebook. He can be contacted at Iortiz@breitbart.com.
Brandon Darby is the managing director and editor-in-chief of Breitbart Texas. He co-founded Breitbart Texas’ Cartel Chronicles project with Ildefonso Ortiz and senior Breitbart management. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook. He can be contacted at bdarby@breitbart.com.
Luisana Moreno is a contributing writer for Breitbart Texas.
Diversity,’ Illegal Immigration and
Destroying America
By Frank Gaffney, Jr.
Center for Securi
Now that official Washington’s political oxygen is being consumed by the latest school shooting, it’s easy to forget abiding disagreements about immigration policy. Yet, until supplanted by the current children’s crusade for gun control, it was the so-called “DACA kids” who had to be accommodated with a massive amnesty.
Just as we seem determined to ignore factors in mass murders like the pop culture’s role in inculcating a lust for violence – the more, the better, what passes for debate about illegal aliens is increasingly unmoored from any discussion of their impact on American society.
It’s time to reprise a 2003 warning by Democratic former Colorado governor Dick Lamm about a “secret plan” that is destroying our country through the combined effects of unchecked immigration, the “diversity” agenda and abandoning our national principle of “out of many, one.” This lunacy must end.
. . .
No comments:
Post a Comment