Latest in immigration
Louisiana v. CDC marked a notable setback for Biden’s efforts to roll back Trump-era immigration policies and stop authorizing U.S. border expulsions on public health grounds.
Late last year, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a sweeping injunction against President Biden’s termination of the Migration Protection Protocols by grossly distorting statutory provisions enacted in 1996.
Reducing the drivers of unauthorized migration demands confronting an entrenched, rapacious elite with coercive diplomatic tools, while supporting local anti-corruption champions.
Belarus is currently using migrant issues as “lawfare” in its hybrid operations against Western European neighbors.
As immigration cases continue to surge and President Biden seeks to craft an immigration policy, the standard of proof at bond hearings will remain a consequential issue.
The courts failed to accord deference to executive decisions about foreign affairs and resource allocation in immigration enforcement. The Biden administration’s best move might be to develop a more comprehensive explanation for ending the Migrant Protection Protocols.
The ruling will not immediately affect current DACA recipients, but it will bar approval of new applications.
This guide describes the scope and context of Biden’s early immigration executive actions, outlines where their effect is limited, and emphasizes where more action is needed.
Initial litigation challenging the Biden administration’s immigration policy may have far-reaching implications for executive power, judicial power, federalism and administrative law.
COVID-19 has exposed the underlying fault lines in societies around the world. Yet by revealing long ignored flaws, it presents a rare chance to reform.