Supreme Court Dismisses Effort to Defend Trump Immigration Rule


On Wednesday the Supreme Court dismissed an effort by Republican attorneys general to mount a legal defense of a Trump-era immigration rule that the Biden administration rescinded. The move by SCOTUS leaves intact a lower appeals court ruling that rebuffed Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich’s effort to step into the shoes of the Trump administration in hopes of reviving the public charge rule through a legal victory.

The Hill reports:

The court’s dismissal was somewhat unusual, since the justices heard argument in the case earlier this term. Chief Justice John Roberts, in an opinion concurring with the court’s move, said the case ultimately raised too many legal questions that were beyond the scope of the issue the court had agreed to hear.

“It has become clear that this mare’s nest could stand in the way of our reaching the question presented on which we granted certiorari, or at the very least, complicate our resolution of that question,” wrote Roberts, who was joined by conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch.

The Trump-era rule prompted federal immigration authorities to deny U.S. entry and green card requests to immigrants who were likely to become reliant on government assistance. The rule It also expanded the criteria for determining the likelihood that an immigrant would become dependent on taxpayer-funded aid, otherwise known as a “public charge.”

Under the policy, an immigrant would be considered a public charge if they receive at least one public benefit for more than 12 months within any three-year period. These benefits include Medicaid, food stamps, welfare or public housing vouchers. The Trump administration rule also examined the likelihood of an immigrant using such benefits in the future.

Supporters of Trump’s rule, which updated an existing Clinton-era regulation, characterized it as a commonsense way to ensure that U.S.-bound immigrants are self-sufficient, and to prevent welfare programs from being overburdened. Led by Arizona, the Republican attorneys general contended that the rule stands to save states $1 billion a year.

President Biden’s Department of Homeland Security rapidly rescinded the rule in March 2021.



Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Larry E. Dull
Larry E. Dull
1 month ago

Regardless of how SCOTUS ruled the illegal population will become the Albatross around both the Courts and law makers. It will ultimately be the burden borne by the taxpayer as it always is! And they have no say. The deck is stacked against them!😒


Nancy Portia Barberis
Nancy Portia Barberis
1 month ago

confused trump supporter

James Nice
James Nice
1 month ago

Just think. These things wouldn’t even be an issue if we didn’t have Joe signing executive orders. Maybe there should be some limits on how many executive orders one president can write. These executive orders are a double edged sword, just like the filibuster.

Don
Don
1 month ago

SCOTUS needs “adjusted” too.

bo navajo
bo navajo
1 month ago

States need to codify this rule into state law and deny public assistance to any non-citizen. Public assistance s/b for citizens only. If non-profits want to step-in and provide assistance so be it.

By submitting this form, I hereby consent to TrumpTrainNews.com's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, which permits TrumpTrainNews.com and its affiliates to contact me.