Last week the Supreme Court upheld the Biden Administration’s deportation policy in an eight-to-one ruling. The policy was focusing on certain types of illegal aliens to deport while generally leaving the rest alone.
DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas stated that “The fact an individual is a removable noncitizen therefore should not alone be the basis of an enforcement action against them.” He claimed that targeting selected categories of aliens, such as violent criminals, is the most effective use of enforcement resources.
Critics of this policy maintain that it is just an excuse to pursue the administration’s overall goal of gutting immigration law enforcement. As evidence they cite the sharp decline of deportations after President Biden entered office.
The case the Court decided involved a lawsuit brought by Texas and Louisiana to compel DHS to enforce the law as written by Congress. They maintained that they had legal standing in the case because lack of enforcement means higher costs imposed on states by illegal aliens who aren’t sent home.
The Court’s majority disagreed with this argument on legal standing. The sole dissenting justice, Samuel Alito, declared that “The Secretary of Homeland Security . . . has instructed his agents to disobey [legislation] and instead follow a different policy that is more to his liking. And the Court now says that no party injured by this policy is allowed to challenge it in court.” This view of executive authority, Alito affirmed, is “a deeply and dangerously” flawed.
Read more at foxnews.com