

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Members of a caravan of Central Americans who spent weeks traveling across Mexico walk from Mexico to the U.S. side of the border to ask authorities for asylum on April 29, 2018 in Tijuana, Baja California Norte, Mexico. (Photo: David McNew/Getty Images)
Saying the President Donald Trump had exceeded his presidential authority, a federal judge later Monday ruled against the president's attempt to restrict the abilities of refugees seeking asylum at the U.S. border and imposed a restraining order that directs the administration to resume accepting asylum claims from people regardless of where or how they enter country.
From CNN:
Judge Jon S. Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California said that a policy announced November 9 barring asylum for immigrants who enter outside a legal check point '"irreconcilably conflicts" with immigration law and the "expressed intent of Congress."
"Whatever the scope of the President's authority, he may not rewrite the immigration laws to impose a condition that Congress has expressly forbidden," Tigar wrote, adding that asylum seekers would be put at "increased risk of violence and other harms at the border" if the administration's rule is allowed to go into effect.
The temporary restraining order is effective nationwide and will remain in effect until December 19, when the judge has scheduled another hearing, or further order of the court.
The challenge against Trump's move to bar people from claiming asylum outside of designated points of entry, like border checkpoints, said the administration was violating both the Immigration and Nationality Act as well as the Administrative Procedure Act by doing so.
Immigrant rights groups praised the ruling.
"This ban is illegal, will put people's lives in danger and raises the alarm about President Trump's disregard for separation of powers," said Lee Gelernt of the ACLU, which along with the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Center for Constitutional Rights had challenged the president. "There is no justifiable reason to flatly deny people the right to apply for asylum, and we cannot send them back to danger based on the manner of their entry."
"This is a critical step in fighting back against President Trump's war on asylum seekers," Melissa Crow, senior supervising attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center, said in a statement. "While the new rule purports to facilitate orderly processing of asylum seekers at ports of entry, Customs and Border Protection has a longstanding policy and practice of turning back individuals who do exactly what the rule prescribes. These practices are clearly unlawful and cannot stand."
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. US voters have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. If you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
Saying the President Donald Trump had exceeded his presidential authority, a federal judge later Monday ruled against the president's attempt to restrict the abilities of refugees seeking asylum at the U.S. border and imposed a restraining order that directs the administration to resume accepting asylum claims from people regardless of where or how they enter country.
From CNN:
Judge Jon S. Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California said that a policy announced November 9 barring asylum for immigrants who enter outside a legal check point '"irreconcilably conflicts" with immigration law and the "expressed intent of Congress."
"Whatever the scope of the President's authority, he may not rewrite the immigration laws to impose a condition that Congress has expressly forbidden," Tigar wrote, adding that asylum seekers would be put at "increased risk of violence and other harms at the border" if the administration's rule is allowed to go into effect.
The temporary restraining order is effective nationwide and will remain in effect until December 19, when the judge has scheduled another hearing, or further order of the court.
The challenge against Trump's move to bar people from claiming asylum outside of designated points of entry, like border checkpoints, said the administration was violating both the Immigration and Nationality Act as well as the Administrative Procedure Act by doing so.
Immigrant rights groups praised the ruling.
"This ban is illegal, will put people's lives in danger and raises the alarm about President Trump's disregard for separation of powers," said Lee Gelernt of the ACLU, which along with the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Center for Constitutional Rights had challenged the president. "There is no justifiable reason to flatly deny people the right to apply for asylum, and we cannot send them back to danger based on the manner of their entry."
"This is a critical step in fighting back against President Trump's war on asylum seekers," Melissa Crow, senior supervising attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center, said in a statement. "While the new rule purports to facilitate orderly processing of asylum seekers at ports of entry, Customs and Border Protection has a longstanding policy and practice of turning back individuals who do exactly what the rule prescribes. These practices are clearly unlawful and cannot stand."
Saying the President Donald Trump had exceeded his presidential authority, a federal judge later Monday ruled against the president's attempt to restrict the abilities of refugees seeking asylum at the U.S. border and imposed a restraining order that directs the administration to resume accepting asylum claims from people regardless of where or how they enter country.
From CNN:
Judge Jon S. Tigar of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California said that a policy announced November 9 barring asylum for immigrants who enter outside a legal check point '"irreconcilably conflicts" with immigration law and the "expressed intent of Congress."
"Whatever the scope of the President's authority, he may not rewrite the immigration laws to impose a condition that Congress has expressly forbidden," Tigar wrote, adding that asylum seekers would be put at "increased risk of violence and other harms at the border" if the administration's rule is allowed to go into effect.
The temporary restraining order is effective nationwide and will remain in effect until December 19, when the judge has scheduled another hearing, or further order of the court.
The challenge against Trump's move to bar people from claiming asylum outside of designated points of entry, like border checkpoints, said the administration was violating both the Immigration and Nationality Act as well as the Administrative Procedure Act by doing so.
Immigrant rights groups praised the ruling.
"This ban is illegal, will put people's lives in danger and raises the alarm about President Trump's disregard for separation of powers," said Lee Gelernt of the ACLU, which along with the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Center for Constitutional Rights had challenged the president. "There is no justifiable reason to flatly deny people the right to apply for asylum, and we cannot send them back to danger based on the manner of their entry."
"This is a critical step in fighting back against President Trump's war on asylum seekers," Melissa Crow, senior supervising attorney for the Southern Poverty Law Center, said in a statement. "While the new rule purports to facilitate orderly processing of asylum seekers at ports of entry, Customs and Border Protection has a longstanding policy and practice of turning back individuals who do exactly what the rule prescribes. These practices are clearly unlawful and cannot stand."