A handcuffed and shackled Guatemalan migrant in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody waits to board a deportation flight in Mesa, Arizona. (Photo: John Moore/Getty Images)
Jul 21, 2022
In what one immigration campaigner blasted as "a radical, unprecedented decision," the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday blocked the Biden administration from resuming a policy limiting migrant deportations.
"The anti-immigrant judicial pipeline is gushing."
In a 5-4 vote the court rejected an emergency appeal from the administration and upheld an order from a Texas judge compelling the government to deport immigrants who have been convicted of serious crimes.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy director at the American Immigration Council, tweeted: "At stake in this case is a fundamental question; can a president choose who to target for deportation? For generations, the answer was yes. The Supreme Court repeatedly reaffirmed this point. But now that discretion is at risk of being stripped away."
Shortly after taking office, Biden, disavowing former President Donald Trump's "zero tolerance" immigration policy, issued guidance prioritizing the deportation of people deemed to pose the biggest risk to public safety.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined liberal justices Elena Kagan, Sonya Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in saying they would have granted the administration's request. It was Jackson's first public vote since joining the court.
The high court said it would hear oral arguments in the case, United States v. Texas, in December.
\u201cAbsolutely nonsensical. Every presidential administration in history has had immigration enforcement priorities. When Congress created DHS in 2003 it legally mandated that the DHS secretary set such priorities. Now a 5-4 SCOTUS has let a single judge in Texas overrule Mayorkas.\u201d— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@Aaron Reichlin-Melnick) 1658438878
Thursday's decision was a victory for Republican leaders in Texas and Louisiana who have sued the Biden administration over its guidance. Immigration campaigners, however, denounced the high court's vote.
"SCOTUS has basically just allowed a lone Trump-appointed judge in Texas the power to tell a president what immigration priorities it can and can't enforce," tweeted the advocacy group El Otro Lado. "Crazy."
Reichlin-Melnick noted that "the Supreme Court repeatedly granted the Trump administration emergency relief in situations that were far less extreme than this order."
\u201cThe anti- immigrant judicial pipeline is gushing. #SCOTUS predictably refuses to lift injunction on Biden\u2019s common sense #immigration enforcement priorities. Beware grammas & grandpas. ICE agents are gearing up to raid a home near you. https://t.co/pruI3GsuMK\u201d— David Leopold (@David Leopold) 1658441042
He continued:
This is a radical decision that makes clear that the Supreme Court is picking favorites, and it's not the Biden [Justice Department]. This means that for at least eight to 10 months, the secretary of homeland security has been effectively barred from instructing [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] and [Customs and Border Protection] agents how to carry out their duties, unless he can convince a single judge in Texas to okay his orders.
"This case was the perfect example of a situation where emergency relief should have been granted; a radical, unprecedented decision granting nationwide relief to restrict a core function of a cabinet officer, and in direct conflict with another appeals court," Reichlin-Melnick added. "Yet SCOTUS said OK."
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. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
rights & justicesonia sotomayorjoe bidenimmigrationamy coney barrettus supreme courtlouisianatexasus department of homeland security
In what one immigration campaigner blasted as "a radical, unprecedented decision," the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday blocked the Biden administration from resuming a policy limiting migrant deportations.
"The anti-immigrant judicial pipeline is gushing."
In a 5-4 vote the court rejected an emergency appeal from the administration and upheld an order from a Texas judge compelling the government to deport immigrants who have been convicted of serious crimes.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy director at the American Immigration Council, tweeted: "At stake in this case is a fundamental question; can a president choose who to target for deportation? For generations, the answer was yes. The Supreme Court repeatedly reaffirmed this point. But now that discretion is at risk of being stripped away."
Shortly after taking office, Biden, disavowing former President Donald Trump's "zero tolerance" immigration policy, issued guidance prioritizing the deportation of people deemed to pose the biggest risk to public safety.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined liberal justices Elena Kagan, Sonya Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in saying they would have granted the administration's request. It was Jackson's first public vote since joining the court.
The high court said it would hear oral arguments in the case, United States v. Texas, in December.
\u201cAbsolutely nonsensical. Every presidential administration in history has had immigration enforcement priorities. When Congress created DHS in 2003 it legally mandated that the DHS secretary set such priorities. Now a 5-4 SCOTUS has let a single judge in Texas overrule Mayorkas.\u201d— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@Aaron Reichlin-Melnick) 1658438878
Thursday's decision was a victory for Republican leaders in Texas and Louisiana who have sued the Biden administration over its guidance. Immigration campaigners, however, denounced the high court's vote.
"SCOTUS has basically just allowed a lone Trump-appointed judge in Texas the power to tell a president what immigration priorities it can and can't enforce," tweeted the advocacy group El Otro Lado. "Crazy."
Reichlin-Melnick noted that "the Supreme Court repeatedly granted the Trump administration emergency relief in situations that were far less extreme than this order."
\u201cThe anti- immigrant judicial pipeline is gushing. #SCOTUS predictably refuses to lift injunction on Biden\u2019s common sense #immigration enforcement priorities. Beware grammas & grandpas. ICE agents are gearing up to raid a home near you. https://t.co/pruI3GsuMK\u201d— David Leopold (@David Leopold) 1658441042
He continued:
This is a radical decision that makes clear that the Supreme Court is picking favorites, and it's not the Biden [Justice Department]. This means that for at least eight to 10 months, the secretary of homeland security has been effectively barred from instructing [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] and [Customs and Border Protection] agents how to carry out their duties, unless he can convince a single judge in Texas to okay his orders.
"This case was the perfect example of a situation where emergency relief should have been granted; a radical, unprecedented decision granting nationwide relief to restrict a core function of a cabinet officer, and in direct conflict with another appeals court," Reichlin-Melnick added. "Yet SCOTUS said OK."
In what one immigration campaigner blasted as "a radical, unprecedented decision," the U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday blocked the Biden administration from resuming a policy limiting migrant deportations.
"The anti-immigrant judicial pipeline is gushing."
In a 5-4 vote the court rejected an emergency appeal from the administration and upheld an order from a Texas judge compelling the government to deport immigrants who have been convicted of serious crimes.
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, policy director at the American Immigration Council, tweeted: "At stake in this case is a fundamental question; can a president choose who to target for deportation? For generations, the answer was yes. The Supreme Court repeatedly reaffirmed this point. But now that discretion is at risk of being stripped away."
Shortly after taking office, Biden, disavowing former President Donald Trump's "zero tolerance" immigration policy, issued guidance prioritizing the deportation of people deemed to pose the biggest risk to public safety.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined liberal justices Elena Kagan, Sonya Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson in saying they would have granted the administration's request. It was Jackson's first public vote since joining the court.
The high court said it would hear oral arguments in the case, United States v. Texas, in December.
\u201cAbsolutely nonsensical. Every presidential administration in history has had immigration enforcement priorities. When Congress created DHS in 2003 it legally mandated that the DHS secretary set such priorities. Now a 5-4 SCOTUS has let a single judge in Texas overrule Mayorkas.\u201d— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@Aaron Reichlin-Melnick) 1658438878
Thursday's decision was a victory for Republican leaders in Texas and Louisiana who have sued the Biden administration over its guidance. Immigration campaigners, however, denounced the high court's vote.
"SCOTUS has basically just allowed a lone Trump-appointed judge in Texas the power to tell a president what immigration priorities it can and can't enforce," tweeted the advocacy group El Otro Lado. "Crazy."
Reichlin-Melnick noted that "the Supreme Court repeatedly granted the Trump administration emergency relief in situations that were far less extreme than this order."
\u201cThe anti- immigrant judicial pipeline is gushing. #SCOTUS predictably refuses to lift injunction on Biden\u2019s common sense #immigration enforcement priorities. Beware grammas & grandpas. ICE agents are gearing up to raid a home near you. https://t.co/pruI3GsuMK\u201d— David Leopold (@David Leopold) 1658441042
He continued:
This is a radical decision that makes clear that the Supreme Court is picking favorites, and it's not the Biden [Justice Department]. This means that for at least eight to 10 months, the secretary of homeland security has been effectively barred from instructing [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] and [Customs and Border Protection] agents how to carry out their duties, unless he can convince a single judge in Texas to okay his orders.
"This case was the perfect example of a situation where emergency relief should have been granted; a radical, unprecedented decision granting nationwide relief to restrict a core function of a cabinet officer, and in direct conflict with another appeals court," Reichlin-Melnick added. "Yet SCOTUS said OK."
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.