Biden v. Texas

2022 United States Supreme Court case
Biden v. Texas
Supreme Court of the United States
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. 785 (more)
142 S.Ct. 2528
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

Biden v. Texas, 597 U.S. 785 (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to administrative law and immigration in which the Court held that that the federal government has the authority to revoke the Migrant Protection Protocols, known unofficially as the "Remain in Mexico" policy.

Background

Admissibility

Under federal immigration law, undocumented immigrants are "inadmissible" to the United States and are subject to expedited removal.[1] In other situations arriving immigrants who may be inadmissible are placed in formal removal proceedings to appear before an immigration judge for a hearing. Immigrants in formal removal proceedings may be returned to a "contiguous territory" where they are entitled to apply for asylum.[2]

In December 2018, the Trump administration announced the Migrant Protection Protocols (the "Remain in Mexico" policy) requiring some undocumented asylum seekers to "remain in Mexico" while officials reviewed their case. After a policy guidance was issued on January 25,[3] a lawsuit was filed in California to argue that the contiguous territory provision did not apply for undocumented immigrants subject to expedited removal.[4]

Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf

In April 2019, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California enjoined the implementation of the MPP expansion.[5][6]

In May 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stayed the preliminary injunction pending disposition of the appeal.[7][8] The Mexican government reported in June 2019 that 15,079 people were awaiting immigration proceedings in Mexico under the MPP program.[9]

In February 2020, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the preliminary injunction, over the dissent of Judge Ferdinand Fernandez,[10] 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.[11]

The Supreme Court granted that request, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissenting. In October 2020, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal.[12] 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.[13]

Fifth Circuit

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.[14] The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied a stay pending appeal,[15] as did the Supreme Court in a 6-3 order citing the Supreme Court's 2020 decision Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California.[16]

In December, the Fifth Circuit again ruled against the federal government, this time on the merits of the appeal.[17][18]

Kacsmaryk supposed that federal law required immigrants claiming asylum to remain in Mexico when they could not be detained in the United States. However, the immigration statute allows other alternatives that Kacsmaryk did not consider in his opinion. The federal government filed a petition for a writ of certiorari.[19] Certiorari was granted on February 18, 2022 for the statutory question.[20][21]

Supreme Court

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.[22][23][24]

Aftermath

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.[25] However, Kacsmaryk did not order the policy reinstated.[26] In February 2023, Mexico's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced it rejects any efforts to reinstate the policy for asylum-seekers.[27]

References

  1. ^ 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1)
  2. ^ 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(c)
  3. ^ Wasem, Ruth Ellen (2020). "More than a Wall: The Rise and Fall of US Asylum and Refugee Policy". Journal on Migration and Human Security. 8 (3). doi:10.1177/2331502420948847.
  4. ^ "Mexico rejects any effort to reinstate 'remain in Mexico' policy for asylum-seekers". February 7, 2023.
  5. ^ Innovation Law Lab v. Nielsen, 366 F. Supp. 3d 1110 (N.D. Cal. 2019).
  6. ^ Gonzales, Richard (April 8, 2019). "Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration Policy of Sending Asylum-Seekers to Mexico". NPR.
  7. ^ Innovation Law Lab v. McAleenan, 924 F.3d 503 (9th Cir. 2019).
  8. ^ Gonzales, Richard (May 8, 2019). "Appeals Court Rules Trump Administration Can Keep Sending Asylum-Seekers to Mexico". NPR.
  9. ^ ""We Can't Help You Here": US Returns of Asylum Seekers to Mexico". Human Rights Watch. July 2, 2019.
  10. ^ Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf, 951 F.3d 1073 (9th Cir. 2020).
  11. ^ Innovation Law Lab v. Wolf, 951 F.3d 986 (9th Cir. 2020).
  12. ^ Wolf v. Innovation Law Lab, 141 S. Ct. 617 (2020).
  13. ^ Mayorkas v. Innovation Law Lab, 141 S. Ct. 2842 (2021).
  14. ^ Texas v. Biden, 554 F. Supp. 3d 818 (N.D. Tex. 2021).
  15. ^ Texas v. Biden, 10 F.4th 538 (5th Cir. 2021).
  16. ^ Biden v. Texas, 142 S. Ct. 926 (2021).
  17. ^ Texas v. Biden, 20 F.4th 928 (5th Cir. 2021).
  18. ^ Montoya-Galvez, Camilo (December 15, 2022). "Judge suspends Biden administration's termination of "Remain in Mexico" border policy". CBS News.
  19. ^ Howe, Amy (February 18, 2022). "Justices agree to review Biden's attempt to unwind Trump-era asylum policy". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved February 18, 2022.
  20. ^ "Biden v. Texas". Oyez.
  21. ^ "21-954 Biden v. Texas" (PDF). supremecourt.gov.
  22. ^ Blitzer, Ronn (June 30, 2022). "Supreme Court hands Biden victory, allows end to 'Remain in Mexico' policy". Fox News. Retrieved June 30, 2022.
  23. ^ 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.
  24. ^ Zampa, Peter (June 30, 2022). "Supreme Court backs Biden administration in immigration policy rollback". KCBD. Retrieved June 30, 2022.
  25. ^ Gans, Jared (December 15, 2022). "Federal judge prevents Biden from ending Trump-era 'Remain in Mexico' policy". The Hill. Retrieved December 17, 2022.
  26. ^ "Judge blocks Biden bid to end 'Remain in Mexico' policy". Associated Press. December 16, 2022. Retrieved December 16, 2022.
  27. ^ 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.
  • Text 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&oldid=1329802258"