October, 01 2021, 11:33am EDT

#WelcomeWithDignity: Court Ruling Will Endanger Families Seeking Safety; Biden Must End Title 42
Yesterday the D.C. Circuit Court granted the government's request for stay in Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas, allowing the Biden administration to continue expelling families and children to danger under its inhumane Title 42 policy. Two weeks ago a federal judge ruled Title 42 illegal, issuing an injunction that would have taken effect today. The Biden administration's decision to continue defending the policy in court has put that injunction on pause. The consequences for families and children seeking safety will be deadly.
WASHINGTON
Yesterday the D.C. Circuit Court granted the government's request for stay in Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas, allowing the Biden administration to continue expelling families and children to danger under its inhumane Title 42 policy. Two weeks ago a federal judge ruled Title 42 illegal, issuing an injunction that would have taken effect today. The Biden administration's decision to continue defending the policy in court has put that injunction on pause. The consequences for families and children seeking safety will be deadly.
Members of the #WelcomeWithDignity campaign, which include organizations serving people expelled under Title 42 and litigators in the Huisha-Huisha case, responded to the ruling:
"Once again, the Biden Administration has shown that it is more committed to defending Title 42 than upholding the human rights of asylum-seekers," said Amy Fischer, Americas Advocacy Director at Amnesty International USA. "The continued weaponization of the pandemic to expel people from our border will result in serious harm for the thousands who have been denied protection, including thousands of Haitians who have been brutalized and expelled under the policy in recent weeks. There is simply no way around it - Title 42 must end, and every day the Biden Administration fights to uphold it, they choose xenophobia and racism over protecting human rights."
"The Biden administration should have never appealed this case," said Tami Goodlette, Director of Litigation at Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services (RAICES) and co-counsel in the Huisha-Huisha case. "The lower court concluded Title 42 was illegal and should not be applied to exclude families from seeking asylum in the U.S. But rather than allow families to seek refuge in our country -- which is legal under U.S. law and international law -- the administration chose to further promulgate the Trump administration's racist and xenophobic policies by appealing the case, and then proceeding to expel thousands of Haitians from Del Rio, Texas under Title 42. The Biden administration has lost its way and needs to remember its promises from the election. Migrants deserve better. Our country deserves better."
"The Biden administration's embrace of Title 42 has exposed people seeking safety to untold violence and suffering," said Neela Chakravartula, Managing Attorney at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies and co-counsel in the Huisha-Huisha case. "The administration's decision to defend the policy in court is unconscionable, and a complete betrayal of the president's promise to restore access to asylum. Recent events have laid bare the tragic consequences of Title 42. In less than two weeks, the administration has expelled over 5,000 Haitians to a country plagued with widespread violence and insecurity - a human rights travesty, and no small operational feat. They could have used those resources to safely welcome Haitians seeking refuge. Instead, the president has adopted Trump's racist policy as his own, without regard for the families and children harmed as a result."
"All President Biden needed to do to stop applying Trump's Title 42 to families was not seek a stay or appeal, but they did," said Lindsay Toczylowski, Immigrant Defenders' Co-Founder and Executive Director. "Expelling families with kids and other asylum seekers back to the dangerous countries they have fled with no due process is now a Biden policy, one that the Biden Administration fought hard to keep."
"Abusing an obscure public health rule to shut down our asylum system is Stephen Miller's racist legacy. Every day that the Biden administration allows this policy to remain in place is a day that the government knowingly puts children and families in harm's way. What we witnessed at Del Rio last week is a stark reminder of just how violent this policy is. It's an insult to America's family values that within the past month thousands of Haitians -- including babies and toddlers -- have been expelled back to danger," said Paola Luisi, Director of Families Belong Together. "The Biden administration should live up to its promises and end Title 42 immediately. The world is watching Mr. President: we should be protecting children and families, not expelling them back to danger."
"The Biden Administration's embrace of Title 42 is so absolutely maliciously evil because they've done that political calculus that this obscure policy is just complex enough to never grip the mainstream media's and public's full attention so the government can just continue harming immigrants without being held accountable," said Jonathan Goldman, Executive Director of the Student Clinic for Immigrant Justice. "There is no excuse here. They are complicit in the harm started by Trump. The Biden Administration has not simply continued the policy, which would have been bad enough, but they've actively attempted to keep it alive."
"The Biden Administration's continued defense of Title 42 and its ongoing, devastating effects on human rights at the U.S-Mexico border, which includes over 5,400 Haitians unjustly and cruelly expelled pursuant to these policies within the last 11 days, is outrageous and unconscionable. We will not rest until these practices are eliminated and full reparations have been made to all those who have been affected by these serious human rights crimes," said Camilo Perez-Bustillo, on behalf of the leadership team of Witness at the Border.
"What we know about Title 42 after a year of witnessing its impact firsthand at the border is this: it puts vulnerable migrants in danger, it violates asylum law and it empowers criminal groups to take advantage of those who are expelled," said Dylan Corbett, Executive Director of Hope Border Institute. "Title 42 was the driving force behind the mass deportations of Haitian refugees, one of the largest mass expulsions in US history. The court's decision yesterday was a troubling denial of the reality at the border and the unnecessary suffering of the families we are putting in harm's way."
"Title 42 was a disgrace under the Trump Administration, and now, a disgrace under the Biden Administration." said Karen Tumlin, Founder and Director of Justice Action Center. "The unlawful and immoral policy has never been about protecting public health, but rather, the power to summarily expel asylum seekers back to the very danger they are fleeing. That the Biden Administration would deliberately pursue to uphold the application of Title 42 to children and families is particularly shameful, and immigrant communities and advocates will continue to call on President Biden to end this immoral and unlawful policy once and for all."
"The D.C. Circuit court's decision, which allows the Biden administration to continue to shut the door to people seeking protection and send them back to harm without due process, is beyond disappointing, it is devastating," said Luis Guerra, CLINIC's Strategic Capacity Officer. "We will continue to urge the Biden administration to take bold action at our border by creating safe and dignified pathways for those seeking protection and stop hiding behind and upholding the xenophobic policies of the prior administration. The continued use of Title 42 is shameful, unconscionable and simply inhumane; President Biden has the power and means to end it today. Continuing Title 42 is an absolute affront to our laws and our humanity."
"The Florence Project is dismayed that a court has granted the Biden administration's request to halt a court order that would have protected families seeking protection in the United States," said Chelsea Sachau, an attorney with the Florence Immigrant & Refugee Rights Project. "People we meet on the Arizona-Sonora border tell us every day that Title 42 puts them in extremely dangerous situations. Asylum seekers tell us that they want to abide by a safe, orderly asylum process. However, despite campaign promises to the contrary, the Biden administration has failed to give them one, even after nine months in office. In fact, they are fighting tooth and nail to defend this indefensible, Trump-era policy and as a result, to prolong the tremendous human suffering it causes. We can welcome asylum seekers safely and with dignity - the Biden administration is choosing not to at every single opportunity."
"The calls come daily, a young journalist in Nicaragua whose life is being threatened because of his political views, a mother and her two young children who watched her brother's murder by cartel and was told they were next, the thousands of people standing on the other side of a horrific wall seeking refuge from climate disasters, violence, and so much more, all turned away because of a public health law dug up by Stephen Miller to forward his racist agenda", said Laurie Benson, Founder of Madres e Hijos. "Every day that the Biden Administration fights to keep this policy in place is a day that they put politics before people, political agendas before humanity."
"The Biden administration's continued embrace of Title 42 expulsions defies domestic and international law, disregards experts' repeated advice on how to handle public health, and puts families and individuals in danger," said Andrew Geibel, Policy Counsel at HIAS. "Its continued use, including its use to deport over 5,000 vulnerable Haitians back to a country that cannot properly integrate them, shocks the conscience. The Biden administration should end this appeal immediately."
"The federal court of appeals ruling allowing the Biden Administration to continue migrant expulsions at the border under Title 42 is a major disappointment," said Joan Rosenhauer, Executive Director of Jesuit Refugee Service USA. "When President Biden campaigned in 2020, he promised he would repair our asylum process and rebuild it from the Trump Administration's attempts to dismantle it and prevent asylum seekers, as well as refugees and other immigrants, from entering the United States. Instead, he is continuing some of the Trump Administration's worst policies. Rather than defending and legitimizing President Trump's legacy, the Biden Administration should be putting more policies in place based on respect for international law and the United States' legacy of welcoming the stranger and providing safety for those fleeing persecution. Title 42 represents the complete opposite."
"While yesterday's decision from the court was disappointing, ultimately nothing is preventing the Biden administration from doing the right thing and choosing to end its use of Title 42 to expel families and adults seeking protection at our border," said Ursela Ojeda Senior Policy Advisor for Migrant Rights and Justice at the Women's Refugee Commission. "Title 42 is an unlawful and xenophobic Trump-era policy that weaponized public health to shut down access to protection at the border. We are outraged by the Biden administration's decision to continue such expulsions which summarily return vulnerable individuals and families to harm and perpetuate suffering and chaos at the border. We call on the administration to finally restore access to asylum, including by reopening ports of entry."
"Just days after witnessing images of the horrific abuses of Black migrants seeking safety at our borders under Title 42, it is disturbing that the Biden administration would continue to maintain and defend this callous policy harming people seeking refuge," said Avideh Moussavian, director of federal advocacy at the National Immigration Law Center. "That last night's ruling came on the same day that DHS issued new enforcement priorities that arbitrarily and unjustly label people as threats to borders security based solely on their attempt to enter the U.S. - often under the most vulnerable and desperate circumstances - speaks to this administration's deeply harmful focus on deterrence. We will continue to fight this policy and others that disproportionately impact Black and LGBTQIA+ asylum seekers and push to hold this administration accountable to its promise to build a 21st century immigration system that centers the dignity of everyone."
Amnesty International is a global movement of millions of people demanding human rights for all people - no matter who they are or where they are. We are the world's largest grassroots human rights organization.
(212) 807-8400LATEST NEWS
Judge Blocks Trump From Requiring Proof of Citizenship on Federal Voting Form
"Trump’s attempt to impose a documentary proof of citizenship requirement on the federal voter registration form is an unconstitutional power grab," said one plaintiff in the case.
Oct 31, 2025
A federal judge on Friday permanently blocked part of President Donald Trump's executive order requiring proof of US citizenship on federal voter registration forms, a ruling hailed by one plaintiff in the case as "a clear victory for our democracy."
Siding with Democratic and civil liberties groups that sued the administration over Trump's March edict mandating a US passport, REAL ID-compliant document, military identification, or similar proof in order to register to vote in federal elections, Senior US District Judge for the District of Columbia Colleen Kollar-Kotelly found the directive to be an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers.
“Because our Constitution assigns responsibility for election regulation to the states and to Congress, this court holds that the president lacks the authority to direct such changes," Kollar-Kotelly, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, wrote in her 81-page ruling.
"The Constitution addresses two types of power over federal elections: First, the power to determine who is qualified to vote, and second, the power to regulate federal election procedures," she continued. "In both spheres, the Constitution vests authority first in the states. In matters of election procedures, the Constitution assigns Congress the power to preempt State regulations."
"By contrast," Kollar-Kotelly added, "the Constitution assigns no direct role to the president in either domain."
This is the second time Kollar-Kotelly has ruled against Trump's proof-of-citizenship order. In April, she issued a temporary injunction blocking key portions of the directive.
"The president doesn't have the authority to change election procedures just because he wants to."
"The court upheld what we've long known: The president doesn't have the authority to change election procedures just because he wants to," the ACLU said on social media.
Sophia Lin Lakin of the ACLU, a plaintiff in the case, welcomed the decision as “a clear victory for our democracy."
"President Trump’s attempt to impose a documentary proof of citizenship requirement on the federal voter registration form is an unconstitutional power grab," she added.
Campaign Legal Center president Trevor Potter said in a statement: "This federal court ruling reaffirms that no president has the authority to control our election systems and processes. The Constitution gives the states and Congress—not the president—the responsibility and authority to regulate our elections."
"We are glad that this core principle of separation of powers has been upheld and celebrate this decision, which will ensure that the president cannot singlehandedly impose barriers on voter registration that would prevent millions of Americans from making their voices heard in our elections," Potter added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘It Does Not Have to Be This Way’: Child Hunger Set to Surge as Trump Withholds SNAP Funds
Two federal courts ruled Friday that the White House must release contingency food assistance funds, but officials have suggested they will not comply with the orders.
Oct 31, 2025
Though two federal judges ruled on Friday that the Trump administration must use contingency funds to continue providing food assistance that 42 million Americans rely on, White House officials have signaled they won't comply with the court orders even as advocates warn the lapse in nutrition aid funding will cause an unprecedented child hunger crisis that families are unprepared to withstand.
The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) is planning to freeze payments to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program on Saturday as the government shutdown reaches the one-month mark, claiming it can no longer fund SNAP and cannot tap $5 billion in contingency funds that would allow recipients to collect at least partial benefits in November.
President Donald Trump said Thursday that his administration is "going to get it done," regarding the funding of SNAP, but offered no details on his plans to keep the nation's largest anti-hunger program funded, and his agriculture secretary, Brooke Rollins, would not commit on Friday to release the funds if ordered to do so.
"We're looking at all the options," Rollins told CNN before federal judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ordered the administration to fund the program.
The White House and Republicans in Congress have claimed the only way to fund SNAP is for Democratic lawmakers to vote for a continuing resolution proposed by the GOP to keep government funding at current levels; Democrats have refused to sign on to the resolution because it would allow healthcare subsidies under the Affordable Care Act to expire.
The administration previously said it would use the SNAP contingency funds before reversing course last week. A document detailing the contingency plan disappeared from the USDA's website this week. The White House's claims prompted two lawsuits filed by Democrat-led states and cities as well as nonprofit groups that demanded the funding be released.
On Thursday evening, US Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) addressed her followers on the social media platform X about the impending hunger emergency, emphasizing that the loss of SNAP benefits for 42 million Americans—39% of whom are children—is compounding a child poverty crisis that has grown since 2021 due to Republicans' refusal to extend pandemic-era programs like the enhanced child tax credit.
"One in eight kids in America lives in poverty in 2024," said Jayapal. "Sixty-one percent of these kids—that's about 6 million kids— have at least one parent who is employed. So it's not that people are not working, they're working, but they're not earning enough."
"I just want to be really clear that it is a policy choice to have people who are hungry, to have people who are poor," she said.
Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, an economist at Georgetown University, told The Washington Post that the loss of benefits for millions of children, elderly, and disabled people all at once is "unprecedented."
“We’ve never seen the elderly and children removed from the program in this sort of way,” Schanzenbach told the Post. “It really is hard to predict something of this magnitude."
A Thursday report by the economic justice group Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) emphasized that the impending child hunger crisis comes four months after Republicans passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which slashed food assistance by shifting some of the cost of SNAP to the states from the federal government, expanding work requirements, and ending adjustments to benefits to keep pace with food inflation.
Meanwhile, the law is projected to increase the incomes of the wealthiest 20% of US households by 3.7% while reducing the incomes of the poorest 20% of Americans by an average of 3.8%.
Now, said ATF, "they're gonna let hard-working Americans go hungry so billionaires can get richer."
At Time on Thursday, Stephanie Land, author of Class: A Memoir of Motherhood, Hunger, and Higher Education, wrote that "the cruelty is the point" of the Trump administration's refusal to ensure the 61-year-old program, established by Democratic former President Lyndon B. Johnson, doesn't lapse for the first time in its history.
"Once, when we lost most of our food stamp benefit, I mentally catalogued every can and box of food in the cupboards, and how long the milk we had would last," wrote Land. "They’d kicked me, the mother of a recently-turned 6-year-old, off of food stamps because I didn’t meet the work requirement of 20 hours a week. I hadn’t known that my daughter’s age had qualified me to not have to meet that requirement, and without warning, the funds I carefully budgeted for food were gone."
"It didn’t matter that I was a full-time student and worked 10-15 hours a week," she continued. "This letter from my local government office said it wasn’t sufficient to meet their stamp of approval. In their opinion, I wasn’t working enough to deserve to eat. My value, my dignity as a human being, was completely dependent on my ability to work, as if nothing else about me awarded me the ability to feel satiated by food."
"Whether the current administration decides to continue to fund SNAP in November or not, the intended damage has already been done. The fear of losing means for food, shelter, and healthcare is the point," Land added. "Programs referred to as a 'safety net' are anything but when they can be removed with a thoughtless, vague message, or scribble from a permanent marker. It’s about control to gain compliance, and our most vulnerable populations will struggle to keep up."
On Thursday, the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) expressed hope that the president's recent statement saying the White House will ensure people obtain their benefits will "trigger the administration to use its authority and precedent to prevent disruptions in food assistance."
"The issue at hand is not political. It is about ensuring that parents can put food on the table, older adults on fixed incomes can meet their nutritional needs, and children continue to receive the meals they rely on. SNAP is one of the most effective tools for reducing hunger and supporting local economies," said the group.
"Swift and transparent action is needed," FRAC added, "to restore stability, maintain public confidence, and ensure that our state partners, local economies and grocers, and the millions of children, older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans who participate in SNAP are not left bearing the consequences of federal inaction."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Immigration Agents Cause Chaos In Chicago Suburb as New Report Documents 'Pattern of Extreme Brutality'
"Our message for ICE is simple: Get the hell out," said Evanston, Illinois Mayor Daniel Biss.
Oct 31, 2025
Officials in Evanston, Illinois are accusing federal immigration officials of "deliberately causing chaos" in their city during a Friday operation that led to angry protests from local residents.
As reported by Fox 32 Chicago, Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss and other local leaders held a news conference on Friday afternoon to denounce actions earlier in the day by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials.
"Our message for ICE is simple: Get the hell out of Evanston," Biss said during the conference.
In a social media post ahead of the press conference, Biss, who is currently a candidate for US Senate, described the agents' actions as "monstrous" and vowed that he would "continue to track the movement of federal agents in and around Evanston and ensure that the Evanston Police Department is responding in the appropriate fashion."
As of this writing, it is unclear how the incident involving the immigration officials in Evanston began, although witness Jose Marin told local publication Evanston Now that agents on Friday morning had deliberately caused a car crash in the area near the Chute Elementary School, and then proceeded to detain the vehicle's passengers.
Videos taken after the crash posted by Chicago Tribune investigative reporter Gregory Royal Pratt and by Evanston Now reporter Matthew Eadie show several people in the area angrily confronting law enforcement officials as they were in the process of detaining the passengers.
“You a criminal!” Evanston residents angrily confront immigration agents pic.twitter.com/t7jVaC4czq
— Gregory Royal Pratt (@royalpratt) October 31, 2025
Another video of ICE grabbing at least two people after a crash on Oakton/Asbury in Evanston
Witnesses say at least three were arrested by Feds pic.twitter.com/DStgCrKWTA
— Matthew Eadie (@mattheweadie22) October 31, 2025
The operation in Evanston came on the same day that Bellingcat published a report documenting what has been described as "a pattern of extreme brutality" being carried out by immigration enforcement officials in Illinois.
Specifically, the publication examined social media videos of immigration enforcement actions taken between October 9 to October 27, and found "multiple examples of force and riot control weapons being used" in apparent violation of a judge's temporary restraining order that banned such weapons except in cases where federal officers are in immediate danger.
"In total, we found seven [instances] that appeared to show the use of riot control weapons when there was seemingly no apparent immediate threat by protesters and no audible warnings given," Bellingcat reported. "Nineteen showed use of force, such as tackling people to the ground when they were not visibly resisting. Another seven showed agents ordering or threatening people to leave public places. Some of the events identified showed incidents that appeared to fall into more than one of these categories."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


