The court ruled that Trump’s presidential forces did not allow him to establish an “alternative immigration system.”
A federal court found that President Donald Trump has stepped over his authority by banning asylum claims at the US tropical border as part of his wider immigration crackdown.
On Wednesday, US District Judge Randolph Moss warned that Trump’s actions threatened to create a “alternative system of executive orders” separate from the law established by Congress.
This country previously had the right to asylum in law. However, on January 20th, when he took office for his second term, President Trump issued a declaration calling for the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
“This authority,” Trump wrote, “inevitably includes the right to deny foreigners physical entry into the United States and to impose restrictions on access to parts of the immigration system.”
But Judge Moss, former President Barack Obama’s appointee, pushed back that claim in his 128-page decision (PDF).
“It gives nothing of the INA or the constitution, nothing to the cleaning agency that was claimed in the declaration to the President or his Delegy,” Moss wrote.
He emphasized that the president’s authority to “replace comprehensive rules and procedures” in U.S. immigration law does not have a “uniform, extra-local organizational system.”
Asylum is the process in which an individual demands protection of foreign soils when they are afraid of persecution or harm. Asylum applications face high standards for acceptance, but successful applicants are permitted to remain in the country.
But Trump framed immigrants across the US southern border and Mexico as a “aggression” led by foreign forces.
He used that rationale to justify the use of emergency situations to suspend rights like asylum.
However, Judge Moss determined that halting asylum could cause great harm to those facing persecution.
“There is a possibility that the declaration will continue to be implemented while pending the appeal, effectively depriving tens of thousands of individuals of the legal process that is qualifying,” Moss wrote.
Nevertheless, he sued the Trump administration by giving it a 14-day window. The administration is expected to do so.
“The district court judges have no authority to stop President Trump and the United States from securing borders from floods of foreigners attempting to enter illegally,” White House spokesman Abigail Jackson said in response to Wednesday’s ruling. “We expect it to be proven on appeal.”
The court’s application argued that the administration had the right to determine whether the US was facing an invasion.
“The determination that the United States is facing an invasion is an unrecordable political issue,” a government lawyer wrote.
Judge Moss expressed sympathy for another administration’s argument that the asylum handling system was simply overwhelmed by applications.
“The courts recognize that the administrative sector faces major challenges in preventing and detering illegal entry into the United States and adjuring an overwhelming backlog of asylum claims for those who have entered the country,” he wrote.
However, he concluded that US law did not award President Trump. They did not grant “unilateral authority to restrict the right to apply for asylum for foreigners that exist in the United States.”
The ruling comes as a result of class action complaints filed by immigration rights groups, including the Florence Project, the Center for Las American Immigration Advocacy and RAICES.
The American Civil Liberties Union praised Wednesday’s decision as an important step in passing the law and protecting Congress’s authority to protect immigration rights.
“The president cannot wipe out laws passed in Congress just by claiming that asylum seekers are invaders,” ACLU lawyer Lee Gelernt told US media.
