About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (February 8, 2023)

handle is hein.crs/govekmt0001 and id is 1 raw text is: Congressional ______ R aesearch S rvice Rescission of the Migrant Protection Protocols: Litigation Developments February 8, 2023 Federal immigration laws set forth procedures applicable to aliens (as defined under federal law) seeking admission into the United States who have no legal basis to enter the country. Generally, under this legal framework, applicants for admission who are inadmissible shall be detained during the pendency of their removal proceedings. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), however, has lacked the funding and capacity to detain most inadmissible aliens encountered at the border. Given the limited detention resources, DHS has had a longstanding practice of releasing many arriving aliens on parole pending the outcome of their proceedings, particularly those who pose no risk of flight or danger to the community. During the Trump Administration, DHS took a different approach. In 2019, the agency established a new policy to discourage unauthorized migration and prevent arriving aliens encountered at the southern border who were believed to be inadmissible from being released into the United States. Known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), this program required some arriving asylum seekers at the U.S. southern border to return to Mexico pending the outcome of their removal proceedings. In 2021, Secretary of Homeland Security Alej andro Mayorkas issued two separate memoranda announcing the rescission of the MPP. In June 2021, Secretary Mayorkas issued the first rescission memo, and Texas and Missouri sued. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled that the MPP rescission was unlawful and issued a nationwide injunction requiring DHS to resume the MPP. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed that decision. On June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court in Biden v. Texas reversed, holding that DHS had the discretionary authority to rescind the MPP. The Court also held that Secretary Mayorkas's second rescission memo issued in October 2021 was the final agency action and directed the district court to review that memo in the first instance (more information about the Supreme Court's decision can be found here). In December 2022, following more litigation, the district court stayed implementation of the October 2021 memo pending the final outcome of the case on the merits. This Legal Sidebar discusses the recent litigation following the Supreme Court's Biden v. Texas decision. Background Generally, under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1), certain inadmissible aliens, as defined under federal law, arriving at designated ports of entry or who recently entered the United States unlawfully are subject to expedited Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov LSB10915 CRS Legal Sidebar Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most