Results 1 to 3 of 3
Like Tree3Likes
  • 3 Post By Captainron

Thread: Supreme Court to consider rights of asylum seekers to challenge expedited removal

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member JohnDoe2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    PARADISE (San Diego)

    Supreme Court to consider rights of asylum seekers to challenge expedited removal

    Supreme Court to consider rights of asylum seekers to challenge expedited removal orders

    By Ariane de Vogue and Priscilla Alvarez, CNN
    Updated 3:39 PM ET, Fri October 18, 2019

    Washington (CNN)The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to take up a major immigration case concerning the rights of undocumented immigrants seeking asylum to challenge their expedited removal proceedings.

    The Trump administration had asked the court to review an opinion of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals that would allow those who have been denied asylum the opportunity to make their claims in federal courts.

    If the opinion is ultimately upheld, it could open the doors to more asylum seekers at a time when the administration has attempted to dramatically limit who's eligible for asylum in the US.

    The case centers on Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam, a native citizen of Sri Lanka who's a member of an ethnic minority group. He was arrested 25 yards north of the US-Mexico border and placed in expedited removal proceedings. That fast-track deportation procedure allows immigration authorities to remove an individual without a hearing before an immigration judge.

    Deportations of migrant families continue to jump under the Trump administration

    Thuraissigiam applied for asylum, citing fear of persecution in Sri Lanka, and an asylum officer determined he had not established a credible fear of persecution. A supervising officer and an immigration judge affirmed the decision. Under the law, after the denial, Thuraissigiam was ineligible to challenge the finding.

    Thuraissigiam went to federal district court, arguing that the expedited removal violated his constitutional rights. A district court said the law did not authorize the court to hear his claims. The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, but said the law violates the Suspension Clause, which, the court held, requires Thuraissigiam, even as a noncitizen, to have a "meaningful opportunity" to demonstrate that he is being held against the law.

    The Trump administration argued in briefs that the law -- which sharply limits judicial review to final orders of removal -- was passed so that the asylum system would not be abused. The law offers some exceptions, but they were not met by Thuraissigiam.

    "The Ninth Circuit held that the Suspension Clause provides respondent with a constitutional right to additional review of his application for admission, beyond the review Congress has established," Solicitor General Noel Francisco argued in court briefs. He said Thuraissigiam "failed to satisfy even the threshold screening standard."

    A Congressional Research Service report notes that the Supreme Court "has repeatedly held" that the government may exclude immigrants "without affording them the due process protections that traditionally apply to persons physically present in the United States."

    Expedited removal has been a point of contention in recent months, as the Trump administration has moved to expand the procedure and cast a wider net over undocumented immigrants subject to it. A federal judge blocked the move in a separate case last month.


    Don't reward the criminal actions of millions of illegal aliens by giving them citizenship.

    Sign in and post comments here.

    Please support our fight against illegal immigration by joining ALIPAC's email alerts here

  2. #2
    Senior Member Captainron's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    How are these "his" constitutional rights? Lawyers always talk about a "bright line" or "high bar." How is that a foreign citizen enjoys the rights of any country's constitution? What about the prerogatives of the US Executive?
    MW, Beezer and Scott-in-FL like this.
    "Men of low degree are vanity, Men of high degree are a lie. " David
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  3. #3
    Moderator Beezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    They have no rights here! They have rights in their own countries.

    Shut it all down until 1,000,000 backlog cases are denied and they are all deported!

    Send them back...hear the cases via SKYPE at an Embassy in their countries.

    We cannot allow 2 billion people on the planet to breach our border!


Similar Threads

  1. Supreme Court allows court challenge on census citizenship question to go forward
    By Jean in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-02-2018, 10:10 PM
  2. Human Rights Group Says Mexico Not Safe for Asylum Seekers
    By lorrie in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-25-2017, 07:50 PM
  3. Supreme Court won't hear case challenging government's expedited removal of illegals
    By JohnDoe2 in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-17-2017, 02:24 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-17-2014, 07:03 PM
  5. NE Supreme Court Fremont Ordinance and Removal of Sen Ben Ne
    By SusanSmithNAG in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-06-2010, 01:00 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts