Voz media US Voz.us
Apple store Voz-media Play store Voz Media

Federal judge declines Biden's request to end 'Stay in Mexico' plan

This measure, implemented by Trump, requires asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their application is under review.

Inmigrantes frontera sur

(Cordon-Press)

Published by
Alejandro Baños

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk declined the Biden Administration's request to end the 'Stay in Mexico' policy, also known as the Migrant Protection Protocol, MPP. The policy was enacted by Donald Trump and requires asylum seekers to wait in Mexico while their application is being reviewed, therefore avoiding illegal immigration in the country.

The U.S. government's request went through different judicial bodies. Kacsmaryk, who presides over the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Northern District of Texas, emphasized in his decision that "this action has a complex procedural history, having gone from this Court to the Fifth Circuit, to the Supreme Court, and back to this Court on remand."

Texas Governor Greg Abbott posted Judge Kacsmaryk's ruling to his Twitter account and celebrated that justice is siding with those who are against illegal immigrantion:

The judge alludes to the dangers that immigrants undergo during their journey to the border

Judge Kacsmaryk noted that the Biden Administration makes mention of the conditions immigrants are exposed to at the border, but says nothing about the hardships they go through during "their perilous journey to the southern border."

In addition, Kacsmaryk stressed that the federal government does not take into account the benefits of the Migration Protection Protocols, such as reducing illegal immigration or controlling "unmeritorious" asylum claims.

Blow to Biden and Majorkas' immigration policy

U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Majorkas terminated the Migration Protection Protocols in a memorandum issued on October 2021:

This Administration is dedicated to solving the long-standing problems that have plagued our immigration system for decades, in order to bring about much-needed systemic change. The MPPs do not contribute to achieving this objective and are endemically flawed, have generated an unjustifiable human cost, consumed resources and personnel that should have been diverted to other priority efforts, and failed to address the root causes of irregular migration. Not only do PPMs undermine the Administration's ability to implement necessary and fundamental changes to the immigration system, but they also fail to provide the due process and humanitarian protections to which individuals are entitled under the law.

Texas said Majorkas' report violated the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which allows immigrants to be deported who have crossed the border illegally by land after their hearing. He took the DHS decision to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals which ruled in favor of the Texas government.

The case reached the Supreme Court, which reversed the Court of Appeals' decision and ruled that Majorkas' memorandum was valid and did not violate immigration law.

Ultimately, the case was sent to the Northern District Court of Texas, which ruled against the federal government. The Biden Administration still has time to appeal the court's ruling.

tracking