The number of migrants seeking asylum at the southern border of the US has been steadily rising. Trump’s administration has tried to make claiming asylum harder by narrowing grounds for winning asylum, imposing daily entry quotas, and forcing people to stay in Mexico while awaiting a decision.
Earlier this week, a federal appeals court ruled that applicants who are initially denied asylum have a right to appeal their case. The Trump administration will likely try to appeal this historic ruling before the Supreme Court. Read the New York Times’ reporting on this historical case at: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/07/us/asylum-seekers-ninth-circuit.html
In 2010, James Dimaya’s no contest plea for residential burglargies led an Obama administration immigration judge to bring removal proceedings against the lawful permanent resident. Arguing the law used against him was unconstitutionally vague, Dimaya’s lawyers challenged the order.
Dimaya’s case made it to the Supreme Court, where he worried that Trump-appointed Justice Neil Gorsuch would surely rule against him. Much to Dimaya’s relief, Gorsuch sided with the liberal side of the court.
Some are wondering if this indicates a trend where Gorsuch will lean more liberal than Trump expected, but it’s more likely a signal of his position on vague laws. He probably won’t be pro-immigrant on every case, but I think Congress will need to be more careful when drafting immigration laws if they’re hoping for favorable rulings from Gorsuch.
Read the story on CNN at: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/05/politics/james-dimaya-justice-neil-gorsuch/