Posted on 12/27/2022 1:30:49 PM PST by devane617
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Title 42 — a Trump-era immigration policy implemented when the pandemic broke out to quickly expel asylum-seekers at the border — to remain in effect for now, putting a judge’s ruling that would have ended it last week on hold.
The court voted 5-4 to grant an emergency request by 19 Republican state attorneys general who sought to intervene in defense of the policy. The decision puts on hold a ruling by Washington-based U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, who said the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s implementation of the policy was “arbitrary and capricious.” Sullivan’s ruling was due to go into effect Dec. 21.
Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch joined the three liberals on the court in voting against the stay request. The brief court order said that while the administration cannot set aside the Title 42 policy, the decision "does not prevent the federal government from taking any action with respect to that policy."
The Supreme Court also agreed to hear oral arguments in February and rule on whether the states can intervene, with a decision due by the end of June.
The court's intervention averts what many had predicted would be an additional surge of people seeking to enter the United States at a time when border crossings are already high. Without the policy in place, people seeking asylum would be able to enter the U.S., where they could be waiting for years for a court date if they pass their initial interview with authorities.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
Even without Title 42, the President can control the border: I wrote about Section 212(f) a few years ago in a slightly different context. See https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/02/the_law_that_never_was.html
See this discussion:
https://cis.org/Arthur/If-You-Title-42-Youll-Love-Section-212f
Not really. Gorsuch saw intervening in this as a form of results oriented judicial legislation. A very conservative concept.
Mayorkas will skirt it as much as possible. He is very good at what he does.
JKP's words "quickly removed" does not seem to be the exact language in the federal code, but even if it was, it would be useless. "Quickly" might mean 10 years, but even it there was a limit. there would be no penalty or remedy for not meeting that limit.
In fact, the Biden gang is determined to import more invaders than "our system" can possibly support. Don't hold your breath waiting for SCOTUS to do anything useful (like requiring federal agencies to stop allowing entry based on a non-citizen's declaration).
Yes, he had valid reasons.
I still say the “emergency” is not really over, as they’re still lecturing us on TV and such about getting boosters and how dangerous it is (bunk). AND if gov says it’s over, then go after the damn coward medical industry - they’re still forcing us into masks and vaccine requirements for XYZ. They will not let go.
But Gorsuch has a good reason to resist this.
As it is, I say, if we let aliens run in all during this scamdemic, then it is NOT that serious.
But the other poster is right that aliens should be turned back based on ILLEGAL-ALIEN LAW!
Gorsuch is afraid this will allow the pandemic to be abused to implement even more rules which is a fair fear to have to be honest.
I think it’s more a knowledge that the panicdemic HAS been used to pursue unrelated policy goals than a fear that it WILL.
BTTT!
The Executive branch will not point a gun at itself and threaten to throw itself in jail if it does not comply ...
_______________________________________________________
That’s why the legislative branch must threaten to impeach (like they did to Trump). If they do not, then Supreme Court decisions really don’t matter if the Executive branch doesn’t enforce them.
FMI (for my information) who will enforce or is enforcing the court’s ruling?
Must the illegals delivered to Denver and New York and Washington be rounded up and sent packing back to Mexico?
There is no law, no order
FMI (for my information) who will enforce or is enforcing the court’s ruling?
************
Enforcement will likely be similar to actions of the past.
Move over, make room and share the biscuits please.
Not sure but as of Jan 1st they can be cops in California as I read it.
So in the current political landscape, there is no Constitutional mechanism available to force the Executive branch to fulfill its Constitutionally mandated duty of protecting the border.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.