According to Hot Air, President Joe Biden's executive action, which was widely publicized as a measure to curb the illegal immigration crisis at the southern border, has proven to be largely ineffective.
The numbers of migrant encounters have remained consistent, even showing an increase in certain sectors. However, even the slightest suggestion of addressing the crisis he instigated was too much for some. A lawsuit was filed yesterday by a group of immigrant advocacy organizations, spearheaded by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
The group ludicrously equated Biden's actions to those of Trump and demanded a complete reopening of the border. They are insisting on unrestricted asylum claims for all who reach the border, adding to the mounting challenges Biden faces as he attempts to boost his approval ratings amidst widespread frustration over the border crisis.
The lawsuit was filed by the ACLU and other groups on behalf of Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center and RAICES. It challenges President Biden's recent directive that effectively suspends asylum claims at the southern border. The groups argue that this move is not significantly different from a similar action taken during the Trump administration, which was subsequently blocked by the courts. The lawsuit represents the first legal challenge to Biden's extensive border crackdown, which followed months of internal White House deliberations and was partly intended to deflect political criticism of the president's handling of immigration.
"By enacting an asylum ban that is legally indistinguishable from the Trump ban we successfully blocked, we were left with no choice but to file this lawsuit," stated Lee Gelernt, an attorney for the ACLU.
The ACLU's demands are likely to be met with significant public disapproval. However, the entire issue may be moot. If Biden's order were being enforced (which is unclear), it should have been implemented immediately. The number of border encounters far exceeded the limit as soon as he signed it. In theory, asylum would not be offered again until the number of encounters dropped to less than 1,500 per day for a period of seven days. But such low numbers have not been seen since July of 2020, during the peak of the pandemic.
Biden also asserted that he anticipated "record numbers of deportation" when he signed the executive order. This prediction also failed to materialize. It was recently revealed that nearly all of the illegal migrants encountered in the San Diego sector were released into the country, regardless of their asylum claim status. The purported "crackdown" was a fabrication, yet the ACLU is suing the Biden administration nonetheless.
The Supreme Court urgently needs to reevaluate this entire issue. Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that the President of the United States may restrict the entry of certain migrants into the country if their entry is deemed "detrimental to the national interest." This vague definition should provide the President with considerable discretion. It is difficult to understand how the entry of 10 million foreigners of uncertain origin, including at least 1.6 million "gotaways" roaming the country, could not be viewed as detrimental to the national interest. This has clearly been "detrimental" to the many individuals, including children, who have been assaulted, raped, and even killed by some of these migrants. Would the current Supreme Court dare to dispute this?
While it is unlikely that Joe Biden will take any action on this matter, it remains crucial to obtain a ruling on this issue sooner rather than later. If Donald Trump returns to office, he will undoubtedly fully implement this policy from day one. It would be comforting to know that the court will support him on this issue. In the meantime, the rest of us must endure until November, hoping for a change in circumstances.
Login