A federal judge has blocked on Wednesday the order of Donald Trump to suspend asylum requests on the border with Mexico by migrants in search of refuge. On Wednesday, Judge Randolph Moss determines that with said policy of the United States. “The president cannot adopt an alternative immigration system that supplies the statutes promulgated by Congress,” says Moss.
The Magistrate of the Columbia district adds that neither the current immigration laws nor the Constitution grant the President to unilaterally reject asylum access to people who are already on American soil, regardless of how they entered. Moss blocking would go into force in 14 days, during which Trump administration is expected to appeal the decision, which probably
The government’s arguments are that, since the immigration situation is extraordinary – a invasion, they say – and is a national security emergency, the president is empowered to promote policies that pass over the congress.
Moss’s decision comes less than a week after promoted at a federal level. That tallest court order in the country enters into force the last week of July, so the Moss blocking also generates new legal questions to be resolved. Within his judgment on Wednesday, Judge Moss also agreed to certify asylum seekers in the case as a class or a collective. The collective demands, which involve many people in a similar situation, were outside the Supreme decision.
The resolution published on Wednesday responds to the lawsuit filed months ago by several organizations defending civil rights, immigrants and refugees, against the closure of the asylum system on the American border with Mexico and in the name of several directly affected individuals. The main argument of the plaintiffs is that the order, puts at risk the lives of thousands of people around the world seeking refuge in the United States for various reasons.
“Within the framework of the proclamation, the government is doing just what Congress decreed by law that the United States should not do,” wrote the immigrant rights defense groups in their complaint. “He is returning to asylum applicants – not only to single adults, but also to families – to countries where they face persecution or torture, without allowing them to invoke the protections that Congress has provided them.”
Likewise, the lawsuit tests the presidential power to eliminate protections promulgated by Congress for people fleeing persecution in other countries and that involves one of the most restrictive measures in Trump’s crusade against immigration.
Lee Gelert, the lawyer of the American Union of Civil Libertads (ACLU) who has defended the case, quickly spoke after the ruling. “This sentence means that asylum will be available for those who flee from horrible dangers and, in doing so, it reaffirms that the President must respect the laws promulgated by Congress. The decision will literally mean the difference between life and death for many families that escape religious persecution and other ways.”
