The 2-1 ruling got the right result, but not entirely for the right reason.
It's a new low in US refugee/asylum policy; simultaneouly unjust and counterproductive.
"We have no criticism of the U.S. government—on the contrary, we are truly thankful. However, we are deeply afraid of the possibility of being returned to Afghanistan."
Class actions and Administrative Procedure Act claims can achieve much the same result as the nationwide orders that the Supreme Court rejected.
But, notably, the court chose not to rule on the issue of what qualifies as an "invasion."
Afghan prosecutors, interpreters, and other U.S. partners are being evicted, abandoned, or forced back into Taliban hands.
They face severe persecution if deported to Iran.
Dismissing asylum applications for migrants who entered the U.S. unlawfully would boost immigration-related arrests, but have little impact on public safety.
Sayed Naser worked with U.S. forces in Afghanistan, fled after the Taliban killed his brother, and was awaiting asylum. ICE agents still took him in handcuffs—and the government won’t explain why.
The State Department is eliminating the CARE office and ending the Enduring Welcome program, stranding U.S. allies who risked their lives and were told America would protect them.
Afghans who fled Taliban rule with hopes of U.S. resettlement now face detention, extortion, and forced return.
But volunteers are stepping up even as Congress fails to act.
To justify the immediate deportation of suspected Venezuelan gang members, the president is invoking a rarely used statute that does not seem to apply in this context.
Afghan legal professionals face deadly threats, but a federal injunction and a last-minute boarding letter helped one family escape. Thousands more remain in limbo.
We can't be sure, and that's why due process matters.
Plus: Texas midwife arrested for violating abortion ban, JFK files, Gaza bombings, astronauts finally rescued, and more...
A former Afghan intelligence officer who worked alongside U.S. forces sought safety in America. Now, under the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, his parole has been revoked, and he’s been detained without explanation.
David Bier has an excellent analysis on this point.
The president-elect can't tell political asylum from an insane asylum. But a little linguistic history reveals a more compelling American tradition.
Authoritarian states increasingly resort to this tactic. Immigration restrictions enacted by liberal democracies exacerbate the problem.
The president's plan to address security at the Mexican border drew backlash both from immigration advocates and border hawks.
It is also questionable whether it will achieve its political goals.
They're fleeing tyranny and seeking opportunity, not coming to "build a little army."
One is an interview for the new Argue with Me podcast series, and the other is part of Michael Liebowitz's Rational Egoist series.
The difficulties some cities are experiencing arise because many migrants aren't allowed to work, and because of restrictions on construction of new housing.
It mixes much-needed reform with changes that could upend the asylum system in damaging ways.
“The victims may not have been persecuted or tortured due to the data breach yet, but the likelihood of those outcomes has increased due to ICE’s conduct.”
Plus: A listener asks the editors to name America's unsung or undersung heroes.
It's the predictable result of the combination of federal regulations barring asylum seekers from working legally and local policies offering free housing, while severely restricting new housing construction.
The 2-1 ruling (divided along surprising ideological lines) is a win for the administration. But they may well still end up losing in the end.
Plus: Digital rights groups protest "bad internet bills," the FTC might be readying another lawsuit against Amazon, and more...
The decision is an unsurprising, straightforward application of the text of the relevant statute. It could have a major impact.
Taking this step would benefit both the migrants themselves and the American economy. It would also eliminate burdens on local governments.
Plus: A listener asks if the Roundtable has given the arguments of those opposed to low-skilled immigration a fair hearing.
Plus: A listener question concerning the key to a libertarian future—should we reshape current systems or rely upon technological exits like bitcoin and encryption?
Plus: Schools suing social media companies, a bitcoin mining tax is a bad idea, and more...
Title 42 expulsions caused great harm for very little benefit. Biden plans to replace them with a combination of policies, some good and some very bad.
What we did for Ukrainians, we could do for other migrants too.
It's less bad than Trump-era efforts along the same lines. But saying that is damning with faint praise.
These days, he may run for president. His politics have changed.
Analysts differ on whether their net impact is more pro-immigration or more restrictionist. On balance, I think the former is closer to the truth. But there is some uncertainty here.
Such mistreatment is both unjust in itself and harmful to US economic and foreign policy interests.
The judge granted the Biden administration a stay, which will keep the policy in place through late December.
Several countries are rejecting Russians fleeing forced military service. But offering them refuge would help protect dissidents and deprive Putin of critical manpower.
They were ultimately allowed to stay. But it’s an example of ICE targeting nonviolent migrants after a federal judge blocked the Biden administration’s enforcement priorities.
But thousands of Afghans who helped U.S. forces are still stuck in Afghanistan under Taliban rule.
Scrapping the policy is an important step in restoring a fair asylum-seeking process.
