The Biden Collective — the group of individuals who currently run the country using the authority of the White House — is appealing directly to the Supreme Court in its third attempt to do away with the Trump-era “Remain in Mexico” policy.
President Trump created and implemented the “Remain in Mexico” policy, which is officially known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), in order to stem the flood of people attempting to storm the United States and take up residency without troubling themselves to go through the legitimate process. Would-be immigrants know that they can magically circumvent that process by claiming to be seeking asylum, and Democrat U.S. politicians uncritically accept this claim (even though the “amnesty” seekers are already many countries away from their alleged oppressors) and afford the itinerants every right and opportunity to remain here. This is the primary driver of the humanitarian crisis at our border, as our good-faith system is deliberately overwhelmed.
The last competent president we had addressed this problem by denying migrants permission to vanish into the U.S. while their dubious amnesty claims were being adjudicated. He artfully made a deal with Mexico to keep the migrants south of the border, saving Americans from the expense and damage of being overrun with a new subclass of dependents.
But Democrats’ slogan may as well be, “If it works, we’re against it.” As soon as Biden was sworn in, the Collective immediately set about trying to dismantle MPP.
On Inauguration Day, the Collective suspended MPP. By April, Texas and Missouri had filed suit against the administration, claiming their decision was “arbitrary and capricious” and had incited thousands of children to swarm the border with “meritless asylum claims.” Then, on June 1, while the case was still under consideration, Dept. of Homeland Security Sec. Alejandro Mayorkas went ahead and cancelled the “Remain in Mexico” policy. Oops — in mid-August, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued a nationwide injunction, ordering that the MPP be reinstated by Aug. 21. The Collective appealed the decision to the Supreme Court at that time, but SCOTUS declined to take up the case and the injunction remained in place. However, Justice Samuel Alito granted a temporary stay to allow the full Fifth Circuit to consider the case.
But on Dec. 13, the full Fifth Circuit, too, slapped down the Collective’s appeal. In its decision, the court wrote that the Dept. of Homeland Security “claims the power to implement a massive policy reversal — affecting billions of dollars and countless people — simply by typing out a new Word document and posting it on the internet.” The decision also pointed out that there had been “[no] input from Congress, no ordinary rulemaking procedures, and no judicial review. DHS has come nowhere close to shouldering its heavy burden to show that it can make law in a vacuum.”
Now, the Biden Collective has turned to the Supreme Court once again, looking for a win. In their petition, White House attorneys complain that the lower court’s decision forces DHS “to reinstate and continue implementing indefinitely a controversial policy that the Secretary has twice determined is not in the interests of the United States.” (LOL, they think Remain in Mexico is the controversial policy here.)
And not only is the Collective asking SCOTUS to rule that DHS has done due diligence enough to end MPP, but it also wants the black robes to step lively. “Delaying review until next Term would likely postpone resolution of those critical issues until sometime in 2023,” the petition notes. “In the meantime, the government would be forced to continue negotiating with Mexico to maintain a controversial program that it has already twice determined is no longer in the best interests of the United States.”
The administration’s attorneys conclude, “To facilitate consideration of this case this Term, the government is filing this petition just over two weeks after the decision below, which will enable the Court to consider the petition at its February 18 conference. If the Court grants this petition, it should order expedited briefing so that the case can be heard in the Court’s April sitting.”
It will be interesting to see whether the Supremes agree to take up the case or repeat their decision of last summer and let the lower court decision stand. Here’s hoping for the latter.