Texas sues Biden administration over change in immigration asylum process
“I protested the proposed version of these rules back in October 2021, and, unsurprisingly, Biden found a way to make it worse, so I’m suing,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton says.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Thursday sued President Joe Biden and several members of his cabinet, asking the court to halt an administrative rule change that he says will dramatically transform the asylum and parole process, facilitating the release of more illegal immigrants into the country.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposed an Interim Final Rule to process asylum claims more quickly in late March. Unless halted by the courts, it’s set to go into effect May 31.
DHS’ rule change violates the Administrative Procedure Act, the Homeland Security Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Appointments Clause in Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, the lawsuit alleges.
“I protested the proposed version of these rules back in October 2021, and, unsurprisingly, Biden found a way to make it worse, so I’m suing,” Paxton said in a statement. “The last thing Texas needs is for this Administration to make it easier for illegal aliens to enter the U.S. and obtain asylum through false claims and less oversight.
“We know what’s going to happen when the rule goes into effect in May 2022: wave upon wave of illegal aliens claiming ‘asylum.’ It’s true that our immigration system is extremely backlogged. But the answer is to secure the border, not overwhelm it even more by enacting cheap, easy incentives for illegal aliens to get into the United States.”
Paxton filed the lawsuit in the United States District Court Northern District of Texas Amarillo Division.
DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Ur Jaddou; Commissioner of U.S. Customs & Border Protection Chris Magnus; Acting Director of U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement Tae Johnson; Attorney General Merrick Garland, Director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review David Neil, and their respective agencies, are named as defendants.
It's the 11th immigration-related lawsuit Paxton’s filed against the Biden Administration and the 27th overall.
“Unsatisfied with releasing over 836,225 illegal aliens into the United States within fifteen months – not counting the number of unaccompanied alien children released separately, and aliens who have evaded apprehension … the Defendants promulgated an Interim Final Rule to release even more illegal aliens into our country,” the complaint states.
DHS and the Department of Justice say the rule changes were made “to improve and expedite processing of asylum claims made by noncitizens subject to expedited removal, ensuring that those who are eligible for asylum are granted relief quickly, and those who are not are promptly removed.”
One key proposed change in the rule includes authorizing asylum officers to review and rule on asylum applications. Under the law, asylum cases are only adjudicated by immigration judges within the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review.
Due to existing court backlogs, the process for hearing and deciding asylum cases takes several years. Once the rule change is implemented, DHS and DOJ argue the process will be shortened to several months for most asylum applicants.
“The current system for handling asylum claims at our borders has long needed repair,” Mayorkas said when announcing the rule change last month. “Through this rule, we are building a more functional and sensible asylum system to ensure that individuals who are eligible will receive protection more swiftly, while those who are not eligible will be rapidly removed. We will process claims for asylum or other humanitarian protection in a timely and efficient manner while ensuring due process.”
The rule change won’t apply to unaccompanied minors who are brought into the U.S. illegally. It only applies to individuals placed into expedited removal proceedings on or after its effective date. The rule is expected to be implemented in phases, DHS says, unless halted by the court.