SAN DIEGO – A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration's move to significantly expand the powers of immigration officers to deport people without allowing them to appear before judges, the third legal obstacle to a day's immigration program.
The policy, which was announced in July but has not yet been enforced, will allow rapid deportation to be applied to anyone in the country who has been illegally engaged for less than two years. They are now largely confined to people arrested almost immediately after crossing the Mexican border.
USA. District Judge Ketanjie Brown Jackson, late Friday in Washington, said expanding the administration's "expedited removal" power violates procedural requirements to seek first public comment and ignore shortcomings in the way it is used on a smaller scale on the border.
The shortcomings, which were not disputed by the government lawyers, include allegations that some people eligible to be in the country were targeted for deportation, translators were not provided, and Authorities have made "grave mistakes" by recording statements from migrants who said they were afraid of persecution or torture if sent back to their home country.  "With regard to the policy discussed here, the potential devastation is so obvious that (the Department of Homeland Security) could be justly blamed for its inexplicable unforeseen and attempt to mitigate fully foreseeable future floods," Jackson wrote.
Jackson, appointed to President Barack Obama, has not ruled on the merits of the case, but her decision prevents the administration from expanding.
Earlier Friday, a federal judge in Los Angeles blocked new rules that would allow the government yours to detain immigrant children with their parents indefinitely, saying that the move is at odds with the 1997 settlement agreement, which calls for the release of children caught at the border as soon as possible to relatives in the United States, and says that they can only be held in facilities licensed by the state.The Flores agreement – specifically a teenage plaintiff – will remain in force and govern the conditions of the children in custody, including those with their parents.
Also Friday, another federal judge in Los Angeles blocked U.S. immigration and customs from relying solely on insufficient databases aimed at people to be in the country illegally. The decision affects detained individuals issued by an IAF officer in the Central District of California to a federal court.
Deportation powers established 1996, but did not become a major part of border enforcement until 2004, when Homeland Security said it would apply to people arrested within two weeks of entering the US by land and caught under 100 miles from the border. Advocates say it eases the burden on immigration judges – their number of cases has recently exceeded 1 million – while critics say it gives too much authority to border patrol agents and other immigration enforcement officials and threatens fairness rights.
Keven McAleenan, Acting The Secretary of Homeland Security said in July that US authorities have no place to detain the "vast majority" of people arrested at the border, leading to the release of hundreds of thousands of notices appearing in court. He said expanded powers are likely to reduce illegal entries and, as a result, expel people faster from the country than in immigration courts, where cases can take years to resolve.
The Department of Justice said Saturday that a judge has exceeded her powers and undermined laws passed by Congress by carefully considering the administration's how to implement them. The White House reiterated this view in a statement, adding that the administration has been trying to enforce immigration laws since its inception, and that "the wrong decisions of the lower courts have prevented those laws from ever being enforced – at huge cost to the whole country"  Migrants illegally transferred to El Paso, Texas, surrendered to seek asylum on July 31, 2019. Jose Luis Gonzalez / Reuters file
The potential impact of the expansion of high-speed forces is difficult to predict, In July, McAleenan stated that 20,570 people, Ap interned in the nation from October 2017 to September 2018, have been in the US for less than two years, which would make them obey the new rule. Critics say the impact may be larger because many in the United States for more than two years may not be able to prove that they have been in the country for so long.
"The court rejects the Trump administration's unlawful attempt to remove hundreds of thousands of people from the US without any legal law," said American Civil Liberties Union lawyer Anand Balakrishnan, who makes the case on behalf of Make the Road New York and other advocates groups. "This decision acknowledges the irreparable harm of this policy."
The administration's failures followed two recent victories for its immigration policies in the Supreme Court, one allowing the Department of Defense money to divert money to build a border wall and another refuse everyone's asylum. , who enters the country at the Mexican border after crossing another country and not applying there.