奥巴马任命的法官下令特朗普政府重启难民庇护申请处理程序
Obama-Appointed Judge Orders Trump Admin To Restart Processing Asylum Claims

原始链接: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/obama-appointed-judge-orders-trump-admin-restart-processing-asylum-claims

美国联邦地区法官约翰·麦康奈尔(John McConnell Jr.)裁定,特朗普政府必须恢复处理来自39个受限国家国民的庇护申请及移民福利请求。该裁决撤销了美国公民及移民服务局(USCIS)实施的多项政策;此前,该机构曾因白宫附近发生安全事件而暂停处理相关申请,以优先进行强化背景调查。 由奥巴马任命的麦康奈尔法官宣布这些政策“武断且反复无常”,认为该机构超越了其法定职权,并以国家安全为幌子掩盖反移民情绪。包括多个倡导组织在内的原告方对该裁决表示赞赏,称其结束了移民因原籍国而被迫陷入的“法律困境”。 美国国土安全部(DHS)强烈反对这一裁决。国土安全部总法律顾问詹姆斯·珀西瓦尔(James Percival)批评了该决定,称此次法律挑战是“披着法律外衣的蓄意破坏”,并指出这属于利用“敌意”指控来废除特朗普时代政策的惯用伎俩。政府方面坚称,这些措施在其法律授权范围内,旨在确保充分的背景调查与国家安全。

相关文章

原文

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

The Trump administration must restart processing claims of asylum, a federal judge ruled on June 5.

Officials must also resume adjudicating requests for immigration benefits such as work permits from nationals of 39 countries from which President Donald Trump has restricted travel, Obama-appointed U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr., based in Rhode Island, said.

This is the same judge AFL exposed for failing to recuse from the Trump spending freeze case - despite previously leading a nonprofit that received $128M in federal funding.

The Department of Homeland Security and its U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) division, which implemented the challenged policies, said they did not agree with the ruling.

“The Left has been running the same gambit with so-called ‘animus’ claims since 2017. It is sabotage dressed in legal clothing,” James Percival, the Department of Homeland Security’s general counsel, told The Epoch Times via email.

“It goes like this: (1) the admin is racist, (2) therefore a policy I don’t like is motivated by race, (3) therefore it is invalid. They have used it on virtually every Trump era Department of Homeland Security policy.”

“These policies were wrong, plain and simple, and caused … profound fear and uncertainty for so many of our friends, neighbors, and coworkers,” Milagro Sique, CEO of Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island, one of the plaintiffs, said in a statement.

“Having the judicial process work as intended—by upholding the rule of law—gives us some reassurance that all is not lost and allows those who have been impacted to move forward with their lives in a meaningful way.”

The administration in late 2025 announced the policies in the wake of the shooting, allegedly by an Afghan national, of National Guard members near the White House. USCIS Director Joseph Edlow said at the time that asylum claims would not be processed “until we can ensure that every alien is vetted and screened to the maximum degree possible.”

A coalition of groups, including the Service Employees International Union and the Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts, filed a lawsuit over the policies in March. They said that the policies violated federal law because they went beyond the authority of USCIS, were arbitrary and capricious, and went against U.S. Constitutional protections.

Government lawyers said the policies fell within the authority Congress outlined in the Immigration and Naturalization Act.

McConnell said Friday in a 135-page decision that the policies “threw the lives of countless immigrants living in the United States into indeterminate legal limbo” solely because of where the immigrants were born.

He wrote that USCIS violated federal laws, in part because officials made decisions without adequate explanation.

“The agency has violated the very immigration laws that Congress has charged it with administering, as well as the administrative laws that govern the agency’s actions,” he said. “In enacting its latest immigration policies, USCIS: claims statutory and regulatory authority that it does not possess; makes decisions without the reasoned explanations that it must provide; acts without regard for the reliance interests of applicants that it must consider; and justifies its actions with pretextual concerns of ‘national security’ that mask anti-immigrant sentiments that it is forbidden from letting influence its decision-making. In legal terms that means USCIS’s actions are contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious.

The ruling vacated the policies as illegal and set them aside, as well as two other USCIS policies.

One involved reviewing and reconsidering past decisions granting immigration benefits to any people from countries subject to Trump’s travel ban. The other featured amendments to the USCIS policy manual, requiring agency workers to take a person’s home country as a negative factor when deciding whether to grant requests for benefits.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com