Trump Can Enforce Asylum Policies Says… The Ninth Circuit?

Did somebody spike the water in San Diego this week? A very unusual ruling was handed down from the Ninth Circuit yesterday. President Trump’s recent policy of having asylum seekers wait in Mexico while their cases are heard had been put on hold last month when a federal judge in San Francisco agreed with immigration advocacy groups who challenged it. But the government appealed the decision and yesterday the Ninth Circuit reversed the decision, saying the policy could remain in effect while the challenge plays out in the courts. Since when does the Ninth Circuit agree with Donald Trump? (Associated Press)

A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that the Trump administration can make asylum seekers wait in Mexico for immigration court hearings while the policy is challenged in court, handing the president a major victory, even if it proves only temporary.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — a frequent target of the president’s complaints — reversed a decision by a San Francisco judge that would have prevented asylum seekers from being returned to Mexico during the legal challenge.
The case must still be considered on its merits and could end up at the Supreme Court. But allowing the policy to remain in effect in the meantime lets the administration carry out an unprecedented change to U.S. asylum practices.

Well, that’s certainly helpful. Our immigration courts and detention centers down on the southern border are so overwhelmed that there’s no more room to hold people while their cases are processed. That’s led to a huge spike in people simply being released into the interior of the country in the hope that they will show up for their court date. (Many do not.)

The new policy allows those seeking asylum to show up at an authorized border crossing and have transportation provided for them to go to court. When their hearing is finished they are returned to the border and allowed to go back into Mexico. The Mexican government has been okay with this plan (at least for now) and it takes some of the pressure off of our detention centers and courts. The problem is that the backlog is already so great that some of the asylum seekers will wait months, if not years, before their case is concluded.

Since the policy is being challenged in a couple of places, the Supreme Court likely won’t get involved until most of them have chimed in. Thus far the Supremes have beenn giving the President a fairly wide lattitude when it comes to questions of immigration policy and they may do so again here. But the only real way to address this issue is to vastly expand the volume of traffic our immigration courts can handle and start clearing the backlog, along with setting up more detention centers. The flow of migrants, particularly from Guatemala and Honduras, is always going to be greater than the current system can handle.

Either that or we’ll have to figure out some way to significantly slow the flow of migrants, both legal and illegal, crossing the Mexican border. If only someone had a plan for some type of barrier or something…

In the hundreds of postings here in Free Republic rarely is this brought up. It’s Known As Reciprocity. We should be treating anybody illegally crossing the Mexican border into the US the way the Mexican’s do treat any American illegally doing the same.crossing into Mexico. Entry denied fined and possible imprisonment.

It’s time we consider illegal entry by any person who is a non Mexican citizen illegally entering the United States through the US Mexican border a defacto Mexican citizen with limited Mexican constitutional rights subject to their laws while transiting. As well as any Mexican citizen entering illegally exempting those who do so legally and meet US citizenship requirements.

Democrats with their open border jingo bingo should not be allowed to allow to pervert the concept of sovereignty get twisted into being propagandized as “White Nationalism”. Use of that term is usually directed when the immigration issue is brought up to devalue of the protections an American citizen have by being one. When allowing the hordes illegally entering the US through the Mexican border avoid recognizing and dealing with the 2nd class treatment that American citizens get while legally residing in Mexico which not just includes denial of voting privileges but employment, and land ownership in their name. All of which when given to illegals and property ownership by them is used in states which Mexico has previously claimed.that could be used to support any reclaiming effort should regime changes in Mexico arise , Our border with Mexico has always been contentious, those barriers are a must .

Today’s so called democrats insist Americans must allow illegals storm in here by the hundreds of thousands despite their cost to us citizens. Claiming benefits are cheap labor which winds up removing PT job opportuities for citizens including teenagers and full time work for blacks. That open door sanctuary policy is suddenly requireing billion$ in tax dollars,which is never enough. Tax money that should be going to our citizens for their sustenance,health,education,and housing even infrastructure are being diverted to illegal’s needs. But Americans must do the tax flagellating punishment because we’re the very rich United States and must divert those billion$ to fill the needs of those poor illegals plus give them the right to vote. Sustained by our tax money which our children’s children if not aborted will be paying for.

What never gets mentioned in all of this is the lacking reciprocal treatment. If we applied that policy . Would this continue ?
Because of that a US citizen besides not being able to vote,and cannot have title in their name to any land property in Mexico. And until that is changed the US and the affected state should consider making that reciprocal. Prohibiting any illegal entrant employment, voting, and land ownership privileges fully enforced .In other words Sneak into this country before expulsion no job no voting no landowning.

And I believe that there are a few more vacancies to fill in the Ninth. I hate the pace of this, but Turtle is getting them through quicker than most Presidents have enjoyed.

I love it because Mitch warned Dirty Harry on the floor of the Senate not to invoke the nuclear option. Harry laughed at him. Mitch said, maybe not today, but soon the democrats would regret it.

They regret it now.

Thank the Lord John Insane isn’t alive to gum up the works because that is just what he would be doing right now.

Any idea of which judges made the actual ruling ...

It's in the article linked (reversed the decision) in the story:

"Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain, who was appointed by President Ronald Regan, offered the strongest backing for the administration’s position. Judges William Fletcher, an appointee of Bill Clinton, and Paul Watford, who was named by Barack Obama, were more critical."

The Trump administration's argument must have been strong for two Democrat-appointed judges to support it, albeit reluctantly. And it doesn't look like anyone is asking for an en banc ruling so the argument must be very clear cut.

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.