After calling US immigration policy a “moral failing and a national disgrace” during the election campaign, President Joe Biden finds himself facing his progressive allies in an immigration dispute.
Earlier in the week, the Biden administration argued in the U.S. Supreme Court that immigrants held for deportation after illegally returning to the United States should not have bail hearings.
Bail hearings are held when the immigration judge determines if the immigrant is eligible for bail and can be released while their asylum or deportation case is pending.
Arguing against bond hearings, Curtis Gannon, an attorney with the Solicitor General’s office, said, “Congress can make rules for noncitizens that it can’t for citizens, and detention during removal proceedings is constitutionally permitted.
However, many of Biden’s progressive allies take issue with the federal government’s position. For example, immigrant rights attorney Matt Adams has argued that bail hearings for these immigrants are a “fundamental tenet of our legal system.”
“It is a fundamental tenet of our legal system that when the government seeks to detain a human being for an extended period of time, that person is entitled to a hearing before an independent decision maker to determine whether the detention is warranted,” Adams said in to research.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) claimed that the Biden administration had engaged in a “systemic attack on immigrant rights”.
Last week, the administration asked a court to dismiss a lawsuit against the federal government brought by separated families on the southern border. Biden’s attorneys have argued that the separated families cannot sue the federal government for monetary damages in these circumstances because it enjoys sovereign immunity from suits brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
Unsurprisingly, progressives have been antagonized by the Biden administration’s attempt to have the separated families’ lawsuit thrown out.
“Actions speak louder than words, and by sending its lawyers to try to remove separated families from the courts, the Biden administration is effectively defending Trump’s cruel and illegal policy of family separation,” said Bree Bernwanger, Senior Immigrant Justice Counsel on the Lawyers’ Committee. for Civil Rights in the San Francisco Bay Area.
At the same time, the Biden administration is embroiled in ongoing litigation over Migrant Protection Protocols (MPPs), a Trump-era immigration policy often referred to as the “Remain in Mexico” program. As part of the stay in Mexico policy, asylum seekers at the southern border receive notices to appear in immigration court and then are returned to Mexico.
Progressives were appalled by President Biden after the Supreme Court ordered the administration to reinstate the MPP in August.
“The Biden administration has had nearly two months to release a new memo that addresses the district court’s concerns and officially ends the MPP program for good,” said Jorge Loweree, director of policy at the American Immigration Council. :
The fact that she has not done so and is moving forward with plans to relaunch the program in November is a betrayal of the president’s campaign promises and a clear sign that this administration is not reviewing the management. borders and how we treat people who seek protection in the United States.
The Biden administration began returning migrants to Mexico under the reimplemented MPP in December 2021.
The cases are Johnson vs. Arteaga-Martinez, U.S. Supreme Court No. 19-896; Garland vs. González, U.S. Supreme Court No. 20-322; Biden vs. Texas, U.S. Supreme Court No. 21A21; and Wilburg PG v. United States of America, No. 4:21-cv-4457-KAW in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.