Washington DC -Some American Immigration Groups, and the US Freedom Union (ACLU) have filed a lawsuit to prohibit President Donald Trump’s asylum claims.
This is the latest attempt to oppose Trump’s hard immigration policy, targeting people in Japan and those who are looking for safety from overseas.
Similar to the Trump administration, the Monday complaint argues that the President has crossed his constitution and violated existing laws.
Currently, if an exile applicant is escaping from persecution, it is legal to go to the United States.
Lee Gallant, Deputy Director of the ACLU immigration project, states in a statement:
“The President has no authority to unilaterally disable protection that the parliament’s risk of escaping.”
The complaint quotes the duty of domestic laws and international treaties in which the US government requires individuals to allow asylum application. That includes the Immigration Law (INA).
“Through the Immigration Law, Congress has created a comprehensive legal system that allows persecution or torture,” read the lawsuit.
“Under the declaration, the government has ordered the United States to do the United States by law. It is a country that faces persecution and torture, not only in single adults but also for families. Is to return.
Declaration of the first day
The Monday complaint aims directly at Trump’s declaration signed on the first day of his second term.
Shortly after taking office on January 20, Trump announced a document titled “Guarantee state protection against invasion.”
In that, he declared that unwritten immigrants are “restricted to call on INA’s provisions that allow continuous existence in the United States.”
Republican leaders quoted the risk of national security and the possibility of “infectious disease” as a theoretical basis. He also argued that the border in the southern United States was “overwhelmed.”
“Therefore, I will tell you that such foreign entry into the United States will be interrupted until the discovery of the invasion of the tropical border,” Trump wrote.
Republican leaders have long been campaigns with a hard approach to immigrants, including the idea of sealing borders for exile.
His 2024 re -bonds were defined by the same fire brand rhetoric, including the native claim that the United States was dominated by the “invasion” of immigrants.
Trump has repeatedly accused people who have not been unwritten by the national misery, from violent crimes to unemployment.
Opposition
However, groups, such as ACLU, are using the court system to question legal benefits and oppose Trump’s policy.
Monday litigation argues that Trump’s declaration not only contradicts US laws, but also contradicts the obligations based on international treaties.
For example, the United States ratified the 1967 protocol, which is a treaty of refugees, a treaty that establishes the protection of refugees.
In a statement on Monday, Jennifer Babai, a director of the Las American immigration center in Texas, and Director of Legal Services, litigation was “Our immigration law is operated by her and others. , I will not stand out. “
“Regardless of the personal beliefs of immigrants, the government trying to violate our law blatantly is a serious problem that affects all the communities nationwide,” said Babai.
The Texas -based group is one of the four plaintiffs in the lawsuit, along with the Texas civil rights project, the Ministry of Refugee Immigration Education (RAICES), the Immigration of Florence and the refugee rights project.
Wave of legal issues
However, Trump’s immigration behavior in the first few weeks of the second phase is beyond seeking asylum.
Even in the first few hours of the presidential position, Trump has signed some execution actions designed to restrict immigrants and expel unwritten people in the United States.
Trump has increased immigration activities, pushes the army to the US border, suspended the US refugee program for 90 days, and canceled online applications used by exile applicants to schedule the appointment of US immigrants.
Some exile applicants have been waiting for a few months to make reservations for apps known as CBP One. The deletion of this app has invalidated the planned conference and became a limbo.
In the aftermath, the rights group has begun a legal task to question the dissolution of CBP.
Other legal issues are trying to oppose Trump’s expansion of the “quick removal” process.
Others have also tried to overturn the suspension order to stop funding for legal services for immigrants.
Meanwhile, defending groups and various state governments have filed at least five lawsuits on Trump’s presidential orders in seeking to end the US -lived citizenship.
In January, the Federal judge immediately blocked Trump’s order and called it “blatantly unconstitutional.”
Source link
