- Thread starter
- Staff
- #1
Dadparvar
Staff member
- Nov 11, 2016
- 10,715
- 0
- 6
The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on Monday granted the government’s motion to stay a lower court order, pending appeal, which prohibited the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from removing migrants to third countries.
The court did not explain its order, stating only that “Defendants’ emergency motion for stay pending appeal is granted.” The grant pauses the lower court’s order until the appellate court can rule on the case. Judge Lara Montealvo would have denied the motion, dissenting against majority judges Jeffrey Howard and Seth Aframe.
The case arose from a lawsuit that four noncitizens brought against President Donald Trump’s administration, alleging that it violated due process and various statutes when the government removes migrants to countries other than their country of origin “where they face persecution, torture, and/or death.” Plaintiffs argued that noncitizens are not given proper notice or an opportunity to object to their removal to third countries. The US District Court for the District of Massachusetts agreed and found that the government cannot reliably determine where a noncitizen will face persecution without consulting the noncitizen.
The government appealed the district court decision to the First Circuit, asking for a stay on the lower court order until the appeals court ruled on the case. The government asserted that it was likely to win on appeal because the lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case and that DHS provides sufficient due process to noncitizens prior to removal because they have the opportunity to object to removal to various countries during removal proceedings. Plaintiffs countered that they cannot object without knowing where the government planned to send them.
The case comes against the backdrop of the Trump administration’s various controversial immigration policies. Among them include an enacted a visa ban on certain countries and the removal of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to El Salador, despite a court order against it. Third country removal is another policy among this list of contested practices.
The case will continue in the First Circuit, where the court has ordered the government to file its brief in 14 days, and plaintiffs must then file a reply 14 days after that.
The post US court allows third country removal of migrants while case on appeal appeared first on JURIST - News.
Continue reading...
Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.
The court did not explain its order, stating only that “Defendants’ emergency motion for stay pending appeal is granted.” The grant pauses the lower court’s order until the appellate court can rule on the case. Judge Lara Montealvo would have denied the motion, dissenting against majority judges Jeffrey Howard and Seth Aframe.
The case arose from a lawsuit that four noncitizens brought against President Donald Trump’s administration, alleging that it violated due process and various statutes when the government removes migrants to countries other than their country of origin “where they face persecution, torture, and/or death.” Plaintiffs argued that noncitizens are not given proper notice or an opportunity to object to their removal to third countries. The US District Court for the District of Massachusetts agreed and found that the government cannot reliably determine where a noncitizen will face persecution without consulting the noncitizen.
The government appealed the district court decision to the First Circuit, asking for a stay on the lower court order until the appeals court ruled on the case. The government asserted that it was likely to win on appeal because the lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case and that DHS provides sufficient due process to noncitizens prior to removal because they have the opportunity to object to removal to various countries during removal proceedings. Plaintiffs countered that they cannot object without knowing where the government planned to send them.
The case comes against the backdrop of the Trump administration’s various controversial immigration policies. Among them include an enacted a visa ban on certain countries and the removal of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to El Salador, despite a court order against it. Third country removal is another policy among this list of contested practices.
The case will continue in the First Circuit, where the court has ordered the government to file its brief in 14 days, and plaintiffs must then file a reply 14 days after that.
The post US court allows third country removal of migrants while case on appeal appeared first on JURIST - News.
Continue reading...
Note: We don't have any responsibilities about this news. Its been posted here by Feed Reader and we had no controls and checking on it. And because News posted here will be deleted automatically after 21 days, threads are closed so that no one spend time to post and discuss here. You can always check the source and discuss in their site.