Rightguide
Prof Triggernometry
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2017
- Posts
- 68,376
Read the decision. The argument against Biden’s action is that he categorically granted parole to hundreds of thousands of migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, rather than applying 8 U.S.C. § 1182(d)(5)(A) on a case-by-case basis as the statute requires. The court agreed. By extending parole en masse, the Biden Administration arguably ignored the individualized review requirement, creating a legal vulnerability, essentially applying what the statute limits to individual decisions to an entire group. The court also found in reversing the District Court's decision: “But absent a strong showing of likelihood of success on the merits, the risk of such irreparable harms cannot, by itself, support a stay.”The ruling wasn't about the legalities of Biden's policies, it was about the legalities of Trump's.
I don't care either way - 47 removing protections harms our country on the world stage.