FEDERAL COURT VACATES TRUMP ASYLUM RULE3 min read

-Shivchandra Boosa




 U.S District Court for the District of Columbia struck down a Trump administration rule on Tuesday night that required migrants at the southern border to seek asylum from every country through which they passed before seeking asylum in the US. What is Assylum Rule, as per rule individual’s asylum claim could face greater scrutiny if the person travelled through at least one country while on the way to the US but didn’t seek refuge there? The Trump administration applied a related rule to migrants travelling through Mexico from Latin America.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly, appointed to the bench by President Donald Trump, issued the ruling nearly a year after he first rejected a temporary restraining order against the restriction. A similar challenge has played out in federal court in California, where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is set to rule on whether to uphold a preliminary injunction against the rule. The U.S. Supreme Court had previously said the administration can enforce the measure while that court fight played out.

Two separate lawsuits were primarily filed by immigrant-services organizations and individual asylum applicants against the Trump administration, both challenging the interim final rule that would prevent migrants at the southern border from seeking asylum in the US unless they sought asylum from every country through which they passed on their way to the US.

Judge Timothy Kelly of the U.S. District Court of Columbia, an appointee of President Donald Trump, delivered the judgment late Tuesday. Kelly stated the ban, which was published in July. 2019, without a typical notice-and-comment period, failed to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act governing how agencies should implement rules. 

Defendants unlawfully promulgated the rule without complying with the APA’s notice-and-comment requirements, therefore, the rule was not exempt from the APA’s notice-and-comment procedures. The court found that the rule was required to be promulgated under the notice-and-comment procedures, which had not been done, concluding that the court didn’t need to rule on other claims about the legality of the rule to vacate it. 

The ruling arguably bucks the view of the Supreme Court that the asylum ban could go into effect when the high court ruled on this topic, suggesting there are additional legal battles on the way over how the administration is implementing asylum policies.

Way Forward: 

With the rule now vacated, the administration must begin a new rulemaking process if it wants to implement a similar policy with a strict mutatis and mutandis of provision which has led to the vacating of the present order by the Judge. 

The U.S President Donald Trump should come out of the box and mull that the world as a family and should act as a saviour, wherein the south and central America majority of the peoples as affected by the military type Government. The prez must act as a Big brother and should resonance about it in the international arena. The refugee’s first option is the U.S because the refugees are in a state that the United States of America is the land of Opportunities whereas the Prez should not cease them. 

Read also: Karnataka HC extends operation of all interim orders passed by courts and tribunals in the state till August 7