The New York Times Might Regret Publishing That Column on Sexual Abuse in...
The Four Horsemen of the New Antisemitism
Former Staffer Says Congressman Made Her 'Uncomfortable' in Text Message Exchange
Senate Votes Down Iran War Powers Resolution, but Another Republican Has Defected
Mike Johnson Warns That 'Little Mamdanis' Want to Build a Socialist Utopia in...
'Unprecedented Threat:' Routine Maintenance Found an IED at an Alabama Dam
The Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty Just Sued the State Over Its...
Karen Bass Has Another Welfare Scheme That's a Kick in the Teeth for...
Gavin Newsom's About to Announce His Final California Budget Proposal, and It's Going...
Graham Platner Called a Maine Police Chief 'Trash' Over BLM Stance
The New York Times Doubles Down, Defends Op-Ed That Made Horrific Accusations Against...
President Trump Celebrates Successful Meetings, Future Cooperation With China in State Din...
How Did Memorial Drive Shooter Got Gun in Heavily Regulated Massachusetts?
Gavin Newsom Spent $189 Million for CA Prisoners to Watch Adult Content and...
Karen Bass Can’t Handle Spencer Pratt’s Brutal AI Campaign Ads
Tipsheet

Supreme Court to Hear 'Remain in Mexico' Case

Supreme Court to Hear 'Remain in Mexico' Case
AP Photo/Mariam Zuhaib

On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it was taking up the "Remain in Mexico" case, after the Biden administration has appealed. The policy from the Trump administration requires those seeking asylum who come to the United States via the southern border to wait in Mexico for a hearing in the U.S. immigration court.

Advertisement

Upon taking office in January 2021, President Joe Biden quickly got to work getting rid of the policy, but a ruling last August from U.S. District Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk in Texas upheld the policy. 

The Biden administration's version of the policy was implemented last December, as Julio highlighted from on the ground in Yuma, Arizona. 

The U.S. Supreme Court had also previously upheld "Remain in Mexico," last August after Judge Kacsmaryk's decision, but such an emergency docket decision was unsigned. This use of the shadow docket tactic has been particularly reviled by liberals. 

While SCOTUSblog and liberal news outlets such as CNN bemoan the policy as "controversial," Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, both Republicans, were quick to celebrate. 

Advertisement

Related:

MISSOURI TEXAS

The Court will hear the case in April. Curt Levey, a constitutional law attorney and the president of the Committee for Justice took particular notice of the timing. "The Court clearly thought an expedited decision was warranted here because they squeezed a hearing into this term. The other way to expedite it would have been skipping oral argument and deciding the case on the shadow docket. Many on the left are disturbed by the Court's recent use of the shadow docket, but in most cases, it doesn't affect the substance of the ultimate outcome," Levey said.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement