Supreme Court maintains immigration restrictions in place indefinitely

The Supreme Court has decided to keep the pandemic-era immigration limits in place indefinitely. This is a blow to immigration advocates who had been expecting their demise this week.

In Tuesday’s ruling, the Supreme Court extended the temporary stay that Chief Justice John Roberts had issued last week.

At the start of the pandemic, the limits were imposed by the then-President Donald Trump. Officials have expelled 2.5 million asylum-seekers from the United States and refused to grant asylum to most who sought asylum at the border under the restrictions. This was done in order to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Title 42 is often used to refer to the 1944 public health law.

Title 42 was abolished by advocates for immigration. They claimed the policy is against international and American obligations to those fleeing persecution to the U.S. They’ve also argued that the policy is outdated as coronavirus treatments improve.

In November, a federal judge sided in their favor and gave them a Dec. 21 deadline for ending the policy. Conservative-leaning states appealed to the Supreme Court, warning that an increase in migration would take a toll on public services and cause an “unprecedented calamity” that they said the federal government had no plan to deal with.

Roberts, who handles emergency matters that come from federal courts in the nation’s capital, issued a stay to give the court time to more fully consider both sides’ arguments.

The federal government asked the Supreme Court to reject the states’ effort while also acknowledging that ending the restrictions abruptly would likely lead to “disruption and a temporary increase in unlawful border crossings.”

The Supreme Court’s decision comes as thousands of migrants have gathered on the Mexican side of the border, filling shelters and worrying advocates who are scrambling to figure out how to care for them.

The court will be deciding whether states are allowed to intervene in the lawsuit. This was a complex issue that largely relates to procedural issues. A similar group of states also won an order in a lower court of another court district, preventing the lifting of restrictions following the announcement by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in April that it would no longer use the policy.

Until the judge’s November order in the advocates’ lawsuit, the states had not sought to take part in that case. They claim that the administration has effectively abandoned its defenses of Title 42 and should be allowed to intervene. While the administration appealed, the administration has not tried to preserve Title 42 during the legal proceedings.