Alito says Biden's refusal to enforce 'Remain in Mexico' policy 'violates the clear terms of the la

[rebewranger]

SUPREME COURT Published June 30, 2022 12:50pm EDT

Alito says Biden's refusal to enforce 'Remain in Mexico' policy 'violates the clear terms of the law'
Alito said in dissenting opinion that Biden violating the law by letting in 'untold number' of migrants
Tyler OlsonBy Tyler Olson | Fox News
 
Justice Samuel Alito Thursday said that by refusing to enforce the "Remain in Mexico" policy, the Biden administration was clearly flouting a federal law that requires migrants to be detained or deported – not released.

Alito made the comments in a dissenting opinion in the Supreme Court case Biden v. Texas, in which the court ruled 5-4 in favor of the Biden administration. Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the court's three liberal members, cleared the way for President Biden to finally end "Remain in Mexico" after more than a year of trying.

"In fiscal year 2021, the Border Patrol reported more than 1.7 million encounters with aliens along the Mexican border," Alito wrote in an opinion joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/alito-biden-refusal-enforce-remain-mexico-policy-violates-clear-terms-law

[Bigun]

Biden v. Texas: Remain in Mexico May End,
But Main Issue Is Unresolved

Washington, D.C. (June 30, 2022) - The Supreme Court's decision in the Remain in Mexico case leaves the main question unresolved.

The Court finds that the Biden administration may end the program (formerly known as the Migrant Protection Protocols, or MPP) and the lower court's injunction against it is invalid. The case now goes back to the circuit court to decide whether the program was terminated properly.

More important: The lower court also has to decide whether federal law's detention mandate for illegal border-crossers is really a mandate and whether DHS is violating the law by releasing most illegal aliens instead of detaining them...

Excerpt: Rest at headline link.

[libertybele]

SUPREME COURT Published June 30, 2022 12:50pm EDT

Alito says Biden's refusal to enforce 'Remain in Mexico' policy 'violates the clear terms of the law'
Alito said in dissenting opinion that Biden violating the law by letting in 'untold number' of migrants
Tyler OlsonBy Tyler Olson | Fox News
 
Justice Samuel Alito Thursday said that by refusing to enforce the "Remain in Mexico" policy, the Biden administration was clearly flouting a federal law that requires migrants to be detained or deported – not released.

Alito made the comments in a dissenting opinion in the Supreme Court case Biden v. Texas, in which the court ruled 5-4 in favor of the Biden administration. Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the court's three liberal members, cleared the way for President Biden to finally end "Remain in Mexico" after more than a year of trying.

"In fiscal year 2021, the Border Patrol reported more than 1.7 million encounters with aliens along the Mexican border," Alito wrote in an opinion joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/alito-biden-refusal-enforce-remain-mexico-policy-violates-clear-terms-law

I was hoping for a different outcome.    I am not surprised by Roberts by Kavanaugh is very disappointing.

[Bigun]

To reiterate: we need not and do not resolve the parties’ arguments regarding whether section 1225(b)(2)(A) must be read in light of traditional principles of law enforcement 
discretion, and whether the Government is lawfully exercising its parole authorities pursuant to sections 1182(d)(5)
and 1226(a).

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-954_7l48.pdf

Page 23.

For the reasons explained, the Government’s rescission of
MPP did not violate section 1225 of the INA, and the October 29 Memoranda did constitute final agency action. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and
remand the case for further proceedings consistent with
this opinion. On remand, the District Court should consider
in the first instance whether the October 29 Memoranda
comply with section 706 of the APA. See State Farm, 463
U. S., at 46–57.
It is so ord

Pg. 30