WASHINGTON – Immigrant rights groups told a federal judge Wednesday the Biden administration’s push to limit the number of migrants seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border is illegal, the latest step in a brewing court battle that has pit those groups against the Democratic president amid a steep decline in border crossings.
At issue is a policy Biden unveiled in February that, in part, requires migrants heading to the U.S. border to first seek protection in Mexico before attempting to do so in the United States – an idea that is strikingly similar to one proposed by President Donald Trump and repeatedly shot down by federal courts in the past. The administration also rolled out an app that allows migrants to request an appointment to have their case reviewed.
But an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union told a U.S. District court in California the policy flies in the face of federal immigration law. The administration’s other policies, such as the new app, have been difficult for asylum seekers to navigate and don’t go far enough to address what it sees as the legal problems, the ACLU said.
“Agencies cannot force asylum seekers to choose between options that are all unlawful,” said Katrina Eiland, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, who predicted that thousands of people with legitimate asylum claims had been returned. “This rule has consequences.”
Border encounters are down significantly
The lawsuit is winding its way through federal courts during a period of relative calm on the border. Border agents encountered about 144,000 people attempting to cross the border in June, a 30% decrease from May, according to newly released data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The number, which includes people who presented at ports of entry with or without an CBP appointment, is the lowest since February 2021.
U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar, nominated to the bench by former President Barack Obama, heard the case. Tigar repeatedly blocked similar restrictions during the Trump administration. Most of his most pressing questions were directed at attorneys for the Justice Department defending the policies.
“I read somewhere that 2023 was going to be a big year for sequels,” Tigar joked.
“I wouldn’t call this a sequel,” said Erez Reuveni, a Justice Department attorney. “I would call this more of a remake.”
A ruling expected in coming days
Though the two were joking, the exchange underscored a broader point: the Biden administration argues that its policies are different from those imposed under Trump in part because officials have also opened new pathways for migrants to seek legal entry in the country. The new policy also includes exemptions for some circumstances.
“We are not suggesting that the rule alone is the sole cause of this dramatic, frankly unprecedented…drop in encounters,” Reuveni said. But, he said, “it’s a strong contributing factor.”
Tigar said he hoped to rule within a matter of days.
Contributing: Arizona Republic; Rick Jervis
