Asylum-seekers wait in line to receive breakfast outside a temporary shelter on November 24, 2018 in Tijuana, Mexico. (Photo: Mario Tama/Getty Images)
Dec 20, 2018
In what immigrant rights groups celebrated as a significant victory over President Donald Trump's xenophobic agenda, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the White House cannot automatically deny asylum to those who don't enter the country through an "official" border crossing.
"The Trump administration can no longer discriminate against asylum-seekers based on how they entered the country," RAICES, the largest immigration legal services non-profit in Texas, wrote on Twitter. "This government's policy of clogging ports of entry and then punishing those who cross outside is immoral. We're glad it's beginning to crumble."
\u201cBIG VICTORY: The Trump admin can no longer discriminate against asylum-seekers based on how they entered the country.\n\nThis gov's policy of clogging ports of entry & then punishing those who cross outside is immoral.\n\nWe're glad it's beginning to crumble. https://t.co/K8AQJhLbfw\u201d— RAICES (@RAICES) 1545425754
In its 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision that blocked the Trump administration's asylum rule from taking effect. Conservative Justice John Roberts joined the court's four liberal justices in denying the Trump administration's plea to allow the policy to move forward, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the White House.
As the ACLU noted in its legal brief to the Supreme Court, those "fleeing persecution" in their home countries are "desperate" and often have "no understanding of the option to apply for asylum at a port, are forced by gangs and others to enter away from designated ports of entry, or cannot realistically travel to such ports because of danger and distance."
While noting that the legal battle over the Trump administration's policy is far from over, Bloomberg observed that "the high court rebuff of Trump's request to block the order suggests skepticism about the administration's legal case."
"The disputed Trump policy, designed to apply for 90 days, would effectively require all asylum claims to be made at official ports of entry," Bloomberg noted. "Federal immigration law says people may apply for asylum 'whether or not at a designated port of arrival' and 'irrespective of such alien's status.'"
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
In what immigrant rights groups celebrated as a significant victory over President Donald Trump's xenophobic agenda, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the White House cannot automatically deny asylum to those who don't enter the country through an "official" border crossing.
"The Trump administration can no longer discriminate against asylum-seekers based on how they entered the country," RAICES, the largest immigration legal services non-profit in Texas, wrote on Twitter. "This government's policy of clogging ports of entry and then punishing those who cross outside is immoral. We're glad it's beginning to crumble."
\u201cBIG VICTORY: The Trump admin can no longer discriminate against asylum-seekers based on how they entered the country.\n\nThis gov's policy of clogging ports of entry & then punishing those who cross outside is immoral.\n\nWe're glad it's beginning to crumble. https://t.co/K8AQJhLbfw\u201d— RAICES (@RAICES) 1545425754
In its 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision that blocked the Trump administration's asylum rule from taking effect. Conservative Justice John Roberts joined the court's four liberal justices in denying the Trump administration's plea to allow the policy to move forward, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the White House.
As the ACLU noted in its legal brief to the Supreme Court, those "fleeing persecution" in their home countries are "desperate" and often have "no understanding of the option to apply for asylum at a port, are forced by gangs and others to enter away from designated ports of entry, or cannot realistically travel to such ports because of danger and distance."
While noting that the legal battle over the Trump administration's policy is far from over, Bloomberg observed that "the high court rebuff of Trump's request to block the order suggests skepticism about the administration's legal case."
"The disputed Trump policy, designed to apply for 90 days, would effectively require all asylum claims to be made at official ports of entry," Bloomberg noted. "Federal immigration law says people may apply for asylum 'whether or not at a designated port of arrival' and 'irrespective of such alien's status.'"
In what immigrant rights groups celebrated as a significant victory over President Donald Trump's xenophobic agenda, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday that the White House cannot automatically deny asylum to those who don't enter the country through an "official" border crossing.
"The Trump administration can no longer discriminate against asylum-seekers based on how they entered the country," RAICES, the largest immigration legal services non-profit in Texas, wrote on Twitter. "This government's policy of clogging ports of entry and then punishing those who cross outside is immoral. We're glad it's beginning to crumble."
\u201cBIG VICTORY: The Trump admin can no longer discriminate against asylum-seekers based on how they entered the country.\n\nThis gov's policy of clogging ports of entry & then punishing those who cross outside is immoral.\n\nWe're glad it's beginning to crumble. https://t.co/K8AQJhLbfw\u201d— RAICES (@RAICES) 1545425754
In its 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision that blocked the Trump administration's asylum rule from taking effect. Conservative Justice John Roberts joined the court's four liberal justices in denying the Trump administration's plea to allow the policy to move forward, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the White House.
As the ACLU noted in its legal brief to the Supreme Court, those "fleeing persecution" in their home countries are "desperate" and often have "no understanding of the option to apply for asylum at a port, are forced by gangs and others to enter away from designated ports of entry, or cannot realistically travel to such ports because of danger and distance."
While noting that the legal battle over the Trump administration's policy is far from over, Bloomberg observed that "the high court rebuff of Trump's request to block the order suggests skepticism about the administration's legal case."
"The disputed Trump policy, designed to apply for 90 days, would effectively require all asylum claims to be made at official ports of entry," Bloomberg noted. "Federal immigration law says people may apply for asylum 'whether or not at a designated port of arrival' and 'irrespective of such alien's status.'"
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.