Circuit Court Rules Against Devastating Trump Policy


The U.S. government turned back 60,000 asylum seekers to Mexico. Once there, they must wait for their cases to face a clogged court. The Trump administration introduced its wrong-headed and highly racist policy in January 2019.

The advocacy group Human Rights First has opposed the policy since its inception. The organization said that it had discovered, according to The Associated Press (AG):

‘[It found over] 1,000 public reports of kidnappings, torture, rape and assaults of asylum-seekers returned to Mexico.’

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Franciso said it will halt the U.S. government’s policy beginning next week. The Supreme Court has the opportunity of stepping in prior to the implementation of reversing Donald Trump’s policy. The federal court will block the president’s Remain in Mexico, also known as the Migrant Protection Protocols, policy in Arizona and California. At that time, the court indicated it does not have authority over any of the other border


Screen-Shot-2020-03-05-at-8.44.00-AM Circuit Court Rules Against Devastating Trump Policy Featured National Security Politics Racism Top Stories

The 9th Circuit Court stopped the policy on Friday. It decided to halt its own order on Saturday after Trump warned that Remain in Mexico policy alleviated the overwhelming crush of asylum seekers and its unintended consequences.

Screen-Shot-2020-03-05-at-8.44.33-AM Circuit Court Rules Against Devastating Trump Policy Featured National Security Politics Racism Top Stories

Then on Wednesday, the 9th Circuit announced Trump’s policy would be halted unless the Supreme Court stepped in before March 12. It also extended the new ruling to include two additional southern border states: Texas and New Mexico.

President Bill Clinton appointed both Judges William Fletch and Richard Paez. They acknowledged that the order included locations outside of the court’s reach, but they were:

‘[M]atter of intense and active controversy.’

They reaffirmed their view that the policy was illegal under U.S. law:

‘[It]  is illegal under U.S. law to prevent sending people to countries where their lives or freedom would be threatened because of their race, religion, nationality, political beliefs or membership in a particular social group.’

Screen-Shot-2020-03-05-at-8.44.55-AM Circuit Court Rules Against Devastating Trump Policy Featured National Security Politics Racism Top Stories

The judges wrote in their response:

‘[There was] extreme danger to asylum seekers who are returned to Mexico.’

President George H.W. Bush appointed Judge Ferdinand Fernandez who disagreed with the ruling.

Attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union(ALCU)  Judy Rabinovitz said that her organization has sued to end this policy. The majority’s opinion stated it was it is illegal:

‘If the administration had any respect for the law or any sense of decency, it would end this program immediately. We will continue working to permanently end this illegal and inhumane policy.’

Rabinovitz continued, according to NPR:

‘The court forcefully rejected the Trump administration’s assertion that it could strand asylum seekers in Mexico and subject them to grave danger. It’s time for the administration to follow the law and stop putting asylum seekers in harm’s way.’

According to the Associated Press, the Justice Department declined to comment. In a court filing Tuesday, it warned of:

‘[Massive disruption to the government’s immigration operations and sudden confusion for thousands of migrants about their ability to enter the United States. ‘

The Mueller Report Adventures: In Bite-Sizes on this Facebook page. These quick, two-minute reads interpret the report in normal English for busy people. Mueller Bite-Sizes uncovers what is essentially a compelling spy mystery. Interestingly enough, Mueller Bite-Sizes can be read in any order.