Illegal immigrants cross the Rio Grande in Del Rio, Texas, on September 18, 2021. (Photo by PAUL RATJE/AFP via Getty Images)
(CNSNews.com) – “We have a dangerous national security crisis at our southern border, and it’s about to get a lot worse,” Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) told a news conference on Tuesday, as he explained what Republicans would do to improve the situation.
“We know what we need to do to secure the borders,” the senator said:
“Apply the laws as written. Finish building the wall. Keep the Remain in Mexico policy. And maintain Title 42.
“Title 42 is about public health and safety for the American public. And on this topic, the President is speaking out of both sides of his mouth.
“On one side, he says that COVID is so bad we need — he asked for $25 billion of additional money for COVID. At the same time, he says, oh no, COVID is behind us in terms of the border — so we can open the border to more illegal immigrants.
“For people who think that — like I do about this policy, that we’re in a dangerous situation at the border, under Joe Biden it’s going to get a lot worse very soon.”
On April 1 (no fooling) the CDC announced it was lifting Title 42, effective on May 23, which means authorities would no longer be able to expel some illegal aliens for public health (COVID) reasons.
Even the Department of Homeland Security says lifting Title 42 will accelerate the ongoing rush to the border by people from all over the world.
Late Monday, a federal judge in Louisiana issued a temporary restraining order preventing the Biden administration from lifting Title 42 pending a May 13 hearing.
The senator blamed President Joe Biden: “When he came into office he rolled out one executive order after another, which was rolling out the red carpet for illegal immigrants to come to the United States.
“We’re at a point now where over two million illegal immigrants have come to the United States, and that’s more illegal immigrants in 14 months under Joe Biden than under four years with President Trump.”
Sen. Barrasso said President Biden “has turned over his immigration and his border policies to people, who many of whom don’t believe we ought to have borders in this country.
“People in his Administration, including the Vice President of the United States, who ran for president, at a point calling to eliminate Immigration and Customs Enforcement in America.”
Supreme Court hears argument on ‘Remain in Mexico’
On Tuesday, the same day Barrasso spoke, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the Remain in Mexico policy instituted by President Donald Trump. The Biden administration tried to scrap it, but a federal judge in Texas ordered the Biden administration to reinstate it.
Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, arguing for the Biden administration, told the Justices that the Secretary of Homeland Security, in abolishing MPP, “exercised his statutory discretion to make a policy judgment. He found that the benefits of MPP were outweighed by its domestic, humanitarian, and foreign policy costs.
“Yet, the lower courts ordered DHS to reinstate MPP in perpetuity, requiring ongoing negotiations with Mexico to send thousands of non-citizens into its territory. That was error.”
Prelogar argued that MPP “confers a discretionary return authority that the Secretary may use, not a mandate. Nothing in the statutory text or history compels DHS to use MPP whenever Congress fails to provide sufficient funds for universal detention.”
But Texas Solicitor General Judd Stone argued that if the U.S. can’t detain every immigrant attempting to enter the country, as it is required to do, the federal government must return them to Mexico.
He said MPP allowed the federal government to comply with that part of the law.
“MPP, as implemented, reduced the number of violations. It did not fully satisfy the executive’s mandate,” Stone told the justices. “But so far as it went, it complied with the executive’s obligations to return rather than detain the aliens enrolled in MPP.”
Stone said the law requires that illegal aliens be placed in detention pending an administrative hearing on their asylum claims, but as Chief Justice Roberts noted: « Well, Congress may want detention but it hasn’t come up with the money to make — to provide more beds, right?
The Chief Justice continued:
« I mean, it gets back to General Prelogar’s point, which is, it’s not going to make a difference. You can have MPP and send a limited number of people back to Mexico, although I gather that requires the consent of the Mexican government. And I don’t know if that’s going to be forthcoming or not.
“And then there’s a limited number of beds. I mean, it may mean that it’s difficult for them to comply with the law, but what good do you think will come from a requirement that the…government keep MPP in place?”
« Put candidly, Your Honor, » Stone responded, « fewer statutory violations…is better than more. The United States is required to attempt to comply, even in the face of limited resources, as best it can with the resources it’s been appropriated. »
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt speak to reporters in front of the US Supreme Court on April 26, 2022. – The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Tuesday in the Biden v. Texas case, which will determine if the Biden administration must continue to enforce a Trump-era program known as the Remain in Mexico policy. (Photo by STEFANI REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images)
Vous aimer cet article ? Partagez-le avec un ami !
Vous pouvez lire l’article original ici
Votre soutien est essentiel pour nous permettre de vous partager une information libre & indépendante.
À l’ère de la censure de masse, pour que nous restions en contact, j’ai besoin que vous vous inscriviez à ma newsletter gratuite ➡️ ICI
Nous avons besoin de financements pour garder notre site en vie et ils proviennent presque exclusivement de la publicité. N’hésitez pas à regarder les offres de nos annonceurs pour lesquels vous seriez intéressé ou nous envoyé votre contribution via Paypal.