fbpx
Wikipedia

Biden v. Texas

Biden v. Texas, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to administrative law and immigration.

Biden v. Texas
Argued April 26, 2022
Decided June 30, 2022
Full case nameJoseph R. Biden, Jr., President of the United States, et al. v. Texas, et al.
Docket no.21-954
Citations597 U.S. ___ (more)
ArgumentOral argument
DecisionOpinion
Case history
Prior
  • Texas v. Biden, 554 F. Supp. 3d 818 (N.D. Tex. 2021)
  • Stay denied, 10 F.4th 538 (5th Cir. 2021)
  • Stay denied, 142 S. Ct. 926 (2021)
  • Affirmed, 20 F.4th 928 (5th Cir. 2021)
  • Cert. granted, 142 S. Ct. 1098 (2022)
Holding
The Government's rescission of the Migrant Protection Protocols did not violate section 1225 of the INA, and the October 29 Memoranda constituted final agency action.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito · Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan · Neil Gorsuch
Brett Kavanaugh · Amy Coney Barrett
Case opinions
MajorityRoberts, joined by Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh
ConcurrenceKavanaugh
DissentAlito, joined by Thomas, Gorsuch
DissentBarrett, joined by Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch (all but first sentence)
Laws applied
Administrative Procedure Act
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996

Background edit

In December 2018 under the Trump administration, the United States Department of Homeland Security announced its promulgation of the Remain in Mexico policy, formally titled the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), which required asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while officials reviewed their case. In April 2019, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California enjoined its enforcement.[1] In May 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stayed the preliminary injunction pending disposition of the appeal.[2] In February 2020, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the preliminary injunction, over the dissent of Judge Ferdinand Fernandez,[3] and in March, the same panel denied a request by the federal government to stay the injunction pending disposition of a petition for writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court of the United States.[4] The Supreme Court granted that request, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissenting. In October 2020, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal.[5] After President Joe Biden took office in January 2021, the Court held the case in abeyance. It vacated the Ninth Circuit's judgment as moot in June after the government rescinded MPP.[6]

In April 2021, Texas and Missouri challenged the rescission of MPP in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. In August, Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk held the rescission of MPP was arbitrary and capricious, agreeing with the states that allowing asylum seekers to stay within the United States imposed undue costs on these states, and issued a permanent injunction.[7] The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied a stay pending appeal,[8] as did the Supreme Court, the latter in a 6–3 vote.[9] In December, the Fifth Circuit again ruled against the federal government, this time on the merits of the appeal.[10]

The federal government filed a petition for a writ of certiorari.[11]

Supreme Court edit

Certiorari was granted in the case on February 18, 2022. Oral arguments were held on April 26, 2022. On June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court reversed the Fifth Circuit by a 5–4 vote and held that the federal government has the authority to revoke the Migrant Protection Protocols. It was ruled that the 1996 law which amended the Immigration and Nationality Act, and which was used to justify the authority Congress had over the Remain in Mexico policy, did not deny the President the authority to end the protocols.[12][13][14]

Aftermath edit

The case was then returned to the lower courts for additional proceedings determining whether the Biden administration's action was "arbitrary and capricious" in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how federal agencies develop and issue regulations. On December 15, 2022, U.S. district judge Matthew Kacsmaryk prevented the Biden administration from officially ending the program by ruling that the policy should stay in place while legal challenges play out.[15] However, Kacsmaryk did not order the policy reinstated.[16] In February 2023, Mexico's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced it rejects any efforts to reinstate the policy for asylum-seekers.[17]

References edit

  1. ^ Innovation Law Lab v. Nielsen, 366 F. Supp. 3d 1110 (N.D. Cal. 2019).
  2. ^ Innovation Law Lab v. McAleenan, 924 F.3d 503 (9th Cir. 2019).
  3. ^ Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf, 951 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2020).
  4. ^ Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf, 951 F.3d 986 (9th Cir. 2020).
  5. ^ Wolf v. Innovation Law Lab, 141 S. Ct. 617 (2020).
  6. ^ Mayorkas v. Innovation Law Lab, 141 S. Ct. 2842 (2021).
  7. ^ Texas v. Biden, 554 F. Supp. 3d 818 (N.D. Tex. 2021).
  8. ^ Texas v. Biden, 10 F.4th 538 (5th Cir. 2021).
  9. ^ Biden v. Texas, 142 S. Ct. 926 (2021).
  10. ^ Texas v. Biden, 20 F.4th 928 (5th Cir. 2021).
  11. ^ Howe, Amy (February 18, 2022). "Justices agree to review Biden's attempt to unwind Trump-era asylum policy". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved February 18, 2022.
  12. ^ Blitzer, Ronn (June 30, 2022). "Supreme Court hands Biden victory, allows end to 'Remain in Mexico' policy". Fox News. Retrieved June 30, 2022.
  13. ^ Montoya-Galvez, Camilo (June 30, 2022). "Supreme Court says Biden can end "Remain in Mexico" rule for asylum-seekers". CBS News. Retrieved June 30, 2022.
  14. ^ Zampa, Peter (June 30, 2022). "Supreme Court backs Biden administration in immigration policy rollback". KCBD. Retrieved June 30, 2022.
  15. ^ Gans, Jared (December 15, 2022). "Federal judge prevents Biden from ending Trump-era 'Remain in Mexico' policy". The Hill. Retrieved December 17, 2022.
  16. ^ "Judge blocks Biden bid to end 'Remain in Mexico' policy". Associated Press. December 16, 2022. Retrieved December 16, 2022.
  17. ^ Garcia, Amando; Owen, Quinn (February 7, 2023). "Mexico rejects any effort to reinstate 'remain in Mexico' policy for asylum-seekers". ABC News. Retrieved February 8, 2023.

External links edit

  • Text of Biden v. Texas, 597 U.S. ___ (2022) is available from: Google Scholar  Justia  Oyez (oral argument audio)  Supreme Court (slip opinion) 

biden, texas, 2022, united, states, supreme, court, case, related, administrative, immigration, supreme, court, united, statesargued, april, 2022decided, june, 2022full, case, namejoseph, biden, president, united, states, texas, docket, 954citations597, more, . Biden v Texas 597 U S 2022 was a United States Supreme Court case related to administrative law and immigration Biden v TexasSupreme Court of the United StatesArgued April 26 2022Decided June 30 2022Full case nameJoseph R Biden Jr President of the United States et al v Texas et al Docket no 21 954Citations597 U S more ArgumentOral argumentDecisionOpinionCase historyPriorTexas v Biden 554 F Supp 3d 818 N D Tex 2021 Stay denied 10 F 4th 538 5th Cir 2021 Stay denied 142 S Ct 926 2021 Affirmed 20 F 4th 928 5th Cir 2021 Cert granted 142 S Ct 1098 2022 HoldingThe Government s rescission of the Migrant Protection Protocols did not violate section 1225 of the INA and the October 29 Memoranda constituted final agency action Court membershipChief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Clarence Thomas Stephen Breyer Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor Elena Kagan Neil Gorsuch Brett Kavanaugh Amy Coney BarrettCase opinionsMajorityRoberts joined by Breyer Sotomayor Kagan KavanaughConcurrenceKavanaughDissentAlito joined by Thomas GorsuchDissentBarrett joined by Thomas Alito Gorsuch all but first sentence Laws appliedAdministrative Procedure ActIllegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 Contents 1 Background 2 Supreme Court 3 Aftermath 4 References 5 External linksBackground editIn December 2018 under the Trump administration the United States Department of Homeland Security announced its promulgation of the Remain in Mexico policy formally titled the Migrant Protection Protocols MPP which required asylum seekers to remain in Mexico while officials reviewed their case In April 2019 the United States District Court for the Northern District of California enjoined its enforcement 1 In May 2019 the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stayed the preliminary injunction pending disposition of the appeal 2 In February 2020 the Ninth Circuit affirmed the preliminary injunction over the dissent of Judge Ferdinand Fernandez 3 and in March the same panel denied a request by the federal government to stay the injunction pending disposition of a petition for writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court of the United States 4 The Supreme Court granted that request with Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissenting In October 2020 the Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal 5 After President Joe Biden took office in January 2021 the Court held the case in abeyance It vacated the Ninth Circuit s judgment as moot in June after the government rescinded MPP 6 In April 2021 Texas and Missouri challenged the rescission of MPP in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas In August Judge Matthew J Kacsmaryk held the rescission of MPP was arbitrary and capricious agreeing with the states that allowing asylum seekers to stay within the United States imposed undue costs on these states and issued a permanent injunction 7 The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied a stay pending appeal 8 as did the Supreme Court the latter in a 6 3 vote 9 In December the Fifth Circuit again ruled against the federal government this time on the merits of the appeal 10 The federal government filed a petition for a writ of certiorari 11 Supreme Court editCertiorari was granted in the case on February 18 2022 Oral arguments were held on April 26 2022 On June 30 2022 the Supreme Court reversed the Fifth Circuit by a 5 4 vote and held that the federal government has the authority to revoke the Migrant Protection Protocols It was ruled that the 1996 law which amended the Immigration and Nationality Act and which was used to justify the authority Congress had over the Remain in Mexico policy did not deny the President the authority to end the protocols 12 13 14 Aftermath editThe case was then returned to the lower courts for additional proceedings determining whether the Biden administration s action was arbitrary and capricious in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act which governs how federal agencies develop and issue regulations On December 15 2022 U S district judge Matthew Kacsmaryk prevented the Biden administration from officially ending the program by ruling that the policy should stay in place while legal challenges play out 15 However Kacsmaryk did not order the policy reinstated 16 In February 2023 Mexico s Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced it rejects any efforts to reinstate the policy for asylum seekers 17 References edit Innovation Law Lab v Nielsen 366 F Supp 3d 1110 N D Cal 2019 Innovation Law Lab v McAleenan 924 F 3d 503 9th Cir 2019 Innovation Law Lab v Wolf 951 F 3d 1073 9th Cir 2020 Innovation Law Lab v Wolf 951 F 3d 986 9th Cir 2020 Wolf v Innovation Law Lab 141 S Ct 617 2020 Mayorkas v Innovation Law Lab 141 S Ct 2842 2021 Texas v Biden 554 F Supp 3d 818 N D Tex 2021 Texas v Biden 10 F 4th 538 5th Cir 2021 Biden v Texas 142 S Ct 926 2021 Texas v Biden 20 F 4th 928 5th Cir 2021 Howe Amy February 18 2022 Justices agree to review Biden s attempt to unwind Trump era asylum policy SCOTUSblog Retrieved February 18 2022 Blitzer Ronn June 30 2022 Supreme Court hands Biden victory allows end to Remain in Mexico policy Fox News Retrieved June 30 2022 Montoya Galvez Camilo June 30 2022 Supreme Court says Biden can end Remain in Mexico rule for asylum seekers CBS News Retrieved June 30 2022 Zampa Peter June 30 2022 Supreme Court backs Biden administration in immigration policy rollback KCBD Retrieved June 30 2022 Gans Jared December 15 2022 Federal judge prevents Biden from ending Trump era Remain in Mexico policy The Hill Retrieved December 17 2022 Judge blocks Biden bid to end Remain in Mexico policy Associated Press December 16 2022 Retrieved December 16 2022 Garcia Amando Owen Quinn February 7 2023 Mexico rejects any effort to reinstate remain in Mexico policy for asylum seekers ABC News Retrieved February 8 2023 External links editText of Biden v Texas 597 U S 2022 is available from Google Scholar Justia Oyez oral argument audio Supreme Court slip opinion Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Biden v Texas amp oldid 1199618448, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.