Here’s A Better Reason To Cheer For The Supreme Court’s U.S. Border Reprieve

Tuesday will see the Supreme Court ruled The Trump-era ban on entry to Mexico must continue in effect while the high court reviews an appeal filed in this case by 19 states to defend the policy. The order was in Arizona v. Mayorkas prompted cheers from Americans frustrated with the Biden Administration’s failure to defend our country’s borders. But it is not the justices’ job to make or enforce immigration policy, and conservatives applauding the stay for that reason should re-think their response.

And yet, there is a legitimate reason to celebrate the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the appeal in Arizona v. MayorkasIt provides the highest court with the means to stop the abuse of friendly settlement agreements in order to avoid the administrative or political process.

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a regulation in March 2020 to immediately suspend entry at Canadian and Mexican ports of entry for individuals without proper travel documents, or whose entry would be illegal. Informally known as the “Title 42 system,” The title of the United States Code authorized the CDC suspension of admission into the country to stop the spread of a communicable disorder.

Title 42 provides for expulsion of aliens. Huisha-Huisha v. Mayorkas in January of 2021 in a federal court in D.C., alleging the Trump Administration’s CDC expulsion rules violated various federal statutes. The Huisha-Huisha The case was pending. In April 2022, CDC, now under the Biden Administration issued an order ending its Title 42 orders. A coalition of states sued the Biden Administration in Louisiana. They claimed that the Title 42 system was being terminated by the CDC because it did not provide the required notice or comment period and because the rule was arbitrary, capricious, and violated the Administrative Procedure Act.

The states’ lawsuit argued that the CDC’s termination order was “‘plainly at war with other policies of the Biden Administration,’ such as refusing to lift the mask mandate on airline travelers, refusing to repeal vaccination mandates, and insisting on discharging members of the military who sought religious exemptions from those mandates.”

The states also supported the argument. “CDC utterly failed to consider the consequences of the Termination Order on the States, which even Biden Administration officials acknowledged would lead to an ‘influx’ of migrants, inflicting a ‘surge on top of a surge’ that would irreparably harm the States.”

A federal judge in the Louisiana case concluded the Biden Administration violated the notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements of the ADA and entered a preliminary injunction preventing the CDC’s termination order of Title 42 from going into effect. The Biden Administration filed an appeal of the Louisiana district court’s decision with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Three months later on November 15,

*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases