A federal appeals court said Friday that President Donald Trump can begin blocking some Central American migrants from applying for asylum in the United States, but only along parts of the border with Mexico.
The ruling from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allows Trump to enforce the policy in New Mexico and Texas, rejecting asylum seekers who cross from Mexico into either state.
The policy would deny asylum to anyone who passes through another country on the way to the U.S. without seeking protection there. Most crossing the southern border are Central Americans fleeing violence and poverty, who would largely be ineligible. The policy would also apply to people from Africa, Asia and South America who go to the southern border to request asylum.
But the ruling by the three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco is only a partial victory for Trump, whose immigration agenda has repeatedly been delayed by judges.
[Video not showing up above? Click here to watch » https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zr7B4lipjaE]
In July, a lower court had blocked the president's new asylum rules after finding that the administration had probably violated the procedures required to put those regulations in place. The judge suspended the asylum rules nationwide while the court challenge continued.
The appeals court agreed with the lower court but said that the judge had not provided enough evidence that the rules should be blocked across the country. The appeals panel narrowed the judge's ruling, deciding that the tough asylum rules could not go into effect in the 9th Circuit, which covers California and Arizona.
The ruling means that the administration can begin blocking the Central American migrants in two border states: New Mexico, which is covered by the 10th Circuit, and Texas, which is covered by the 5th Circuit. Migrants from Honduras, for example, who enter the United States through those states will be eligible for asylum protections only if they had been denied asylum in Guatemala or Mexico first.
Lee Gelernt, the lead lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union in the legal challenge to the asylum rules, said his organization plans to provide the judge in the case with more information about why the president's rules should be blocked nationwide.
"We will put in additional evidence about the need for a nationwide injunction," Gelernt said. "We are hopeful and optimistic that the nationwide injunction will be reinstated."
But Gelernt also expressed optimism that the court would eventually conclude that the president's policy violates federal law and should be permanently blocked from going into effect. He said the court rejected the Trump administration's argument that the policy should be allowed to go into effect nationwide.
"The overriding takeaway was that the court did not feel this was clearly legal," Gelernt said.
It was not clear whether the Trump administration would immediately begin implementing the new rules in Texas and New Mexico. A spokesman for the Department of Justice did not respond to requests for comment about the ruling by the appeals court.
Under American law, people can request asylum when they arrive in the U.S. regardless of how they enter. The law makes an exception for those who have come through a country considered to be "safe" pursuant to an agreement between the U.S. and that country.
Canada and the U.S. have a "safe third country" agreement. But the U.S. doesn't have one with Mexico or countries in Central America. The Trump administration has tried to sign one with Guatemala, but the country's incoming president said this week that Guatemala would not be able to uphold a tentative deal reached by his predecessor.
The U.S. government is already turning away many asylum seekers at the southern border.
About 30,000 people have been returned to Mexico to await asylum hearings under the government's Migrant Protection Protocols program. Tens of thousands of others are waiting in shelters and camps to present themselves to U.S. border agents at official ports of entry that have strict daily limits on asylum seekers.
GREEN CARDS
Separately, California and three other states on Friday filed the latest court challenge to new Trump administration rules blocking green cards for many immigrants who use public assistance, including Medicaid, food stamps and housing vouchers.
Nearly half of Americans would be considered a burden if the same standards were applied to U.S. citizens, said California Attorney General Xavier Becerra.
"This Trump rule weaponizes nutrition, health care and housing," Becerra said, by potentially blocking legal immigrants from becoming citizens "if your child participates in something as basic as your neighborhood school lunch or nutrition program."
The lawsuit he filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco follows others this week, including those by Washington and 12 other states and by two California counties. Joining California are Maine, Oregon and Pennsylvania, as well as the District of Columbia.
Thirteen immigrant advocacy and legal groups led by La Clinica de la Raza filed a separate lawsuit Friday in the same court, arguing that the regulation was motivated by racial bias.
A spokesman for the White House declined comment, and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services did not respond to a request for comment.
The new rules set to take effect in October would broaden a range of programs that can disqualify immigrants from legal status if they are deemed to be a burden to the United States -- what's known as a "public charge."
Becerra, a Democrat, said working families across the country rely on similar safety net programs. The impact is particularly great in California, which has more than 10 million immigrants. Half of the state's children have an immigrant parent, he said.
His lawsuit argues that the rule creates unnecessary new obstacles for migrants who want to legally live in the United States. It also discourages them from using health, nutrition, housing and other programs for fear it will erode their chances of being granted lawful status.
"The whole point is to create anxiety and create that chilling effect," California's Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, said at a news conference with Becerra, immigration advocates and services providers. "You already are seeing a decline in people that are getting supports that they're legally entitled to."
Newsom said Trump "has a particular problem with brown people -- not even immigrants."
He later said he was "not going there" by following other Democrats who have called Trump a white supremacist, "but he says a lot of things that make a lot of people that do identify with that term very happy. The continued assault on the Hispanic community, it's not even any question; it's just self-evident."
Newsom pointed to the rule change as well as recent immigration raids in Mississippi and a mass shooting by a man who authorities believe targeted Mexicans at a Walmart store in the Texas border city of El Paso.
"Connect some dots," Newsom said. "Why is it even an open question, what's going on this country and what's going on with this administration, and what they're trying to do and who they're trying to blame."
Becerra's mother was born in Mexico, coming to the U.S. after marrying his father, and he said she likely would have been affected by the policy. The rules don't apply to U.S. citizens, but he said they can discourage citizens from participating if they have an immigrant in their family.
Information for this article was contributed by Michael D. Shear of The New York Times; and by Nomaan Merchant and Don Thompson of The Associated Press.
A Section on 08/17/2019