US Supreme Court rejects Trump request to enforce asylum ban

US Supreme Court rejects Trump request to enforce asylum ban

US Supreme Court rejects Trump request to enforce asylum ban

"It's a major blow to the Trump administration and sends a strong signal that there are at least five justices who agree with the district court that the asylum ban exceeds the President's statutory authority", said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals then refused the administration's request to lift Tigar's order.

The White House said in response that Wednesday's ruling "will further overwhelm our immigration courts with meritless cases, making the existing massive backlog even worse".

"The Supreme Court's decision to leave the asylum ban blocked will save lives and keep vulnerable families and children from persecution", Gelernt said in a statement.

Chief Justice John Roberts was the deciding vote in the nine-person US Supreme Court, siding with some of the more left-leaning justices.

Trump's order was immediately challenged by rights groups who said it violated global standards and U.S. law on asylum.

But early last month, as both the midterm elections and a caravan of Central Americans approached, Trump issued a proclamation to sharply limit asylum claims, except for those who presented themselves at a designated port of entry. A majority of those Defense Department staff providing additional support to border patrol agents have since been withdrawn.

For the first time on a contested issue, new Justice Brett Kavanaugh, nominated by President Donald Trump and confirmed in October after a brutal partisan battle, noted his agreement with the court's other conservatives.

"The Court has not yet fully considered the merits of this case", Justice Department spokesman Steven Stafford said. "They have escaped the law, undermined the system, and made it harder for us to actually help real asylum-seekers by flooding the system with false claims". The administration may eventually, as Trump predicted, win in the Supreme Court, but this round went to the challengers, and the eventual fate of the case nearly certainly lies in Roberts' hands.

"We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges", Roberts said.

The immigration groups challenging the new rule urged the court to leave Tigar's order in place, telling the justices that even if there were a crisis - which, they said, there is not - it would be up to Congress, not the president and the executive branch, to make any changes to the USA asylum scheme.

U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar first blocked Trump on November 19 and then extended his order on December 19.

In a 5-4 ruling, the court denied the Trump administration's request to put on hold a California-based federal judge's order, at least temporarily preventing it from carrying out the policy meant to make anyone crossing the U.S.

Many of them request asylum due to pervasive violence and poverty in their home countries.

Related news

[an error occurred while processing the directive]