Latest news with #noncitizens
Wall Street Journal
10-07-2025
- Politics
- Wall Street Journal
The Birthright Order Is Halted—Again
Well, that was quick. Two weeks ago the Supreme Court reined in nationwide injunctions, in a case involving President Trump's effort to redefine birthright citizenship. On Thursday a federal judge again blocked the government from enforcing Mr. Trump's order, except this time it's a class-action challenge. The new lawsuit was filed by noncitizens who recently had a child or are expecting one. According to the complaint, the plaintiffs include a Taiwanese woman with a student visa who has lived here for 12 years and is applying for a green card. 'Petitioners have satisfied the requirements for provisional class certification,' writes Judge Joseph Laplante, a George W. Bush appointee.
Yahoo
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Supreme Court says administration can remove 8 migrants being held in Djibouti
The Supreme Court in a 7-2 decision on Thursday ruled that the Trump administration is not obligated to keep eight noncitizens in temporary confinement at a U.S. military facility in Djibouti while a legal battle over their status plays out, clearing the way for their removal to South Sudan -- a country with which the men have no ties. The immigrants in question, who were convicted of violent crimes, were given notices of removal from the U.S. to the East African country of South Sudan -- but after U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy blocked the administration's attempt to deport the group without giving them a sufficient chance to contest their removal, the group has been in legal limbo. In an unexplained decision last week, the Supreme Court lifted Judge Murphy's injunction, allowing the deportation of migrants to third countries without additional due process requirements that Murphy had imposed . MORE: ICE agents and migrants they're holding in Djibouti are at risk of rocket attacks, malaria: Official Subsequently, Judge Murphy said he believed specifically that the eight men in Djibouti -- who sued to challenge their removal -- remained protected from being sent to South Sudan under an earlier order he had issued. The Trump administration attacked Murphy as exhibiting "defiance" of the Supreme Court and asked for clarification. The Thursday ruling from the high court granted the administration's wish. The decision is another win for the Trump administration and its unprecedented effort to deport immigrants to countries with which they have no ties and where they may face mistreatment. In an unsigned opinion, the court explained that since it lifted judge-imposed due process requirements for third-country removals last month, the government can no longer be held to account for allegedly violating the requirements. "I do not see how a district court can compel compliance with an order that this Court has stayed," wrote liberal Justice Elena Kagan in a short concurrence with the conservative justices. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented. "Today's order clarifies only one thing: Other litigants must follow the rules, but the administration has the Supreme Court on speed dial," Sotomayor wrote.
Fox News
03-07-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
Noncitizens get ‘only limited' due process rights: Conservative legal expert
FIRST ON FOX: Courts have repeatedly stymied President Donald Trump's efforts to quickly remove noncitizens living illegally in the country, but a conservative think tank is warning that the judiciary branch could, at times, be overstepping. The Heritage Foundation's Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the organization and a former Department of Justice official, detailed in a new memorandum how noncitizens' due process rights are minimal when they are facing deportation. "As provided by Congress and by some court decisions interpreting the Constitution, aliens have only limited due process rights in immigration proceedings," von Spakovsky wrote in the document, reviewed by Fox News Digital in advance of its publishing. The document makes clear that noncitizens, including illegal immigrants, have the same rights as citizens when it comes to criminal proceedings. If a noncitizen has been charged with a crime, that person is entitled to a lawyer just like a citizen would be, for example. But outside of that, the legal processes for noncitizens facing deportation vary widely depending on their circumstances. These cases are often handled in immigration courts rather than federal courts. Heritage's document suggests how due process, a contentious topic at the heart of many of the Trump administration's immigration-related court cases, should apply to noncitizens in various scenarios. "Those rights differ depending on the status of the aliens and whether they are outside the United States and trying to enter this country or are already in the country, either legally or illegally, as well as their visa or other status," von Spakovsky wrote. Immigration law allows for near-immediate deportations in cases where a migrant has crossed into the country illegally but is apprehended within two years. "That alien can be removed without a hearing or any other proceeding," von Spakovsky said. But he added a caveat that has become a major source of frustration among border control advocates: "unless the alien requests asylum or asserts a credible fear of persecution if returned to his or her native country." If a migrant requests asylum, a form of protection for a person who fears they will be persecuted if sent back to their home country, an immigration officer, immigration judge, the Board of Immigration Appeals, and even the federal circuits and Supreme Court could all end up having a say in that migrants' case before their asylum claim is fully vetted. Critics of the asylum system say it has been roundly abused and that migrants making bogus asylum claims is common practice and allows migrants to be released into the country and drop off the government's radar. That concern came to a head on Wednesday, when a federal judge in Washington, D.C., issued a 124-page order blocking the administration from severely limiting asylum claims. The judge said Trump attempted a "wholesale rewriting" of immigration laws. Attorney General Pam Bondi has signaled an appeal is imminent. The Heritage Foundation has been a presence in Republican politics for decades and has significant influence over government policy. The organization spearheaded Project 2025, a controversial playbook designed for Trump to use as a blueprint for his second term. Heritage's new memorandum comes as due process has become the bane of the administration as it attempts to deliver on Trump's vows to deport all illegal immigrants. Stephen Miller, Trump's immigration adviser and White House deputy chief of staff, has been railing against the courts and immigration rights groups, who he claims have overplayed their hand and are illegally derailing Trump's agenda. "The only process illegals are due is deportation," Miller wrote online in May. The topic has cropped up in numerous heated, high-profile court cases, many of which remain pending. Kilmar Abrego Garcia alleged he was wrongly deported to El Salvador despite an immigration judge forbidding it. A group of deportees bound for Sudan, but held up in inhumane conditions in Djibouti, argued in court that they got no due process. And numerous men deported under the Alien Enemies Act to a Salvadoran megaprison have claimed in courts that they were not afforded a chance to contest their removal. Von Spakovsky indicated that the Supreme Court would ultimately continue to decide where lower courts were, or were not, overstepping. "Federal courts that assume jurisdiction over banned, prohibited, or limited claims by aliens are violating federal law, and the Supreme Court should tell them so," he wrote. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that the Constitution extends due process to anyone on U.S. soil, but illegal immigrants do not have the same rights as citizens to it. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed noncitizens are entitled to some form of due process. "It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in Reno v. Flores in 1993. In an order in April, the Supreme Court cited Scalia's words when it directed the Trump administration to give "reasonable" notice to the alleged transnational gang members at risk of being deported under the Alien Enemies Act. The high court said those who are subject to the Alien Enemies Act must be given a chance to "seek habeas relief" before they are deported. Habeas corpus petitions are a form of legal recourse for those who believe they have been wrongly detained.
Bloomberg
28-06-2025
- Politics
- Bloomberg
Court Fans Fear of State Patchwork in Birthright Citizenship
A US Supreme Court ruling is stoking fears that the babies of many noncitizen parents could be treated differently depending on the state in which they're born, as legal challenges unfold against President Donald Trump's order ending birthright citizenship. The justices didn't rule on the constitutionality of Trump's restrictions. But in a divided decision Friday, they paused nationwide injunctions in three cases that had blocked the policy from taking effect.
Yahoo
26-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Justice Department sues Orange County Registrar over voter record access
The U.S. Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against Orange County's top election official, accusing him of refusing to turn over key voter registration records related to noncitizens. On Wednesday, the DOJ announced the civil suit against Orange County Registrar of Voters Bob Page, alleging he failed to provide unredacted information about noncitizens who were removed – or attempted to register – from the county's voter rolls. The federal complaint claims this violates the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), a 2002 law designed to modernize and secure the nation's election systems. According to the DOJ, the dispute centers on access to five years' worth of data involving voter registrations that were canceled for failing to meet citizenship requirements. While Orange County did respond to the DOJ's request, the department says the registrar redacted key details and warned of potential litigation if more data was demanded. The registrar's office, in turn, cited California state law as the reason for withholding certain information and suggested a compromise to avoid legal action. That effort failed, and the DOJ moved forward with the lawsuit. The issue gained attention last year when Michael Gates, then the Huntington Beach City Attorney, posted online about a noncitizen reportedly receiving a ballot in the mail. Gates now serves as a U.S. Attorney and is one of the officials leading the lawsuit. 'Voting by non-citizens is a federal crime, and states and counties that refuse to disclose all requested voter information are in violation of well-established federal elections laws,' said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon in a statement. She emphasized that accurate voter rolls are essential to maintaining election integrity. The lawsuit also comes in the wake of former President Donald Trump's executive order earlier this year, which pushed for stricter voter registration requirements, including proof of citizenship. That order is currently facing legal challenges from several states, including California. KTLA reached out to Registrar Bob Page for comment, but his office declined to speak, citing the pending litigation. The case marks a significant clash between federal oversight and California election law—and could set a precedent for how far states must go in complying with federal requests related to voter integrity. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
