The repeal of Title 42 would not, contrary to popular belief, make it easier for migrants to enter the United States without difficulty; instead, they will have to demonstrate that they had no choice but to flee their nations.
However, the nightmare created by President Donald Trump in the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak will continue for the time being, since federal judge Robert Summerhays has blocked the current Democratic administration’s effort to lift the prohibition.
Immigrants apprehended under this legislation are not housed in separate processing camps, but are instead evacuated immediately: Mexicans and Central Americans by land, and others by plane.
Summerhays, a magistrate for the Western District Court of Louisiana, argued that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) did not follow the correct procedures to end the controversial mandate.
Bureaucratic failure?
Although the health authorities consider Title 42 unnecessary, the jurist pointed out that all provisions still require a notification and comment process, something that could potentially take months.
According to Summerhays, there was a violation of the Administrative Procedure Law, and hearing that vetoed the end of Title 42 and, therefore, border officials can still expressly reject migrants at the US southern border.
The outrage was immediate: hundreds of people protested in front of the US consulate in Tijuana against the extension of the regulation, which ruins President Joe Biden’s idea of eliminating it.
The anger is greater among migrants with their complete vaccination schedule, who feel discriminated against by being banned from entering the northern nation, despite the fact that they no longer represent a threat to the spread of COVID-19.
For now, the White House announced that it will appeal the Summerhays ruling.
Old measure
Title 42 is not remotely new: its approval dates back to 1893, with the idea of protecting the Union from recurrent epidemics of cholera and yellow fever, although it was rarely invoked.
Former President Trump (2016-2022) activated it on March 20, 2020, in order to promptly deport undocumented migrants detained at land borders, which affected asylum seekers above all.
According to the US Customs and Border Protection Office, 1.7 million people have been deported since its implementation.
Lee Gelernt, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), described Summerhays’ ruling as “incorrect” and questioned the governments of Arizona, Louisiana and Missouri, promoters of the lawsuit to stop his dismissal.
“The lawsuit is the height of hypocrisy; the States that brought it seem only to want COVID restrictions when it comes to asylum seekers,” said in a statement.
The activist recalled that there is a parallel court order in Washington that prohibits the use of Title 42 to expel families who would face persecution or torture, as is the case with many of the asylum seekers who arrive at the southern border.
The lawsuit filed by the aforementioned states was later joined by others, mostly led by the Republican Party, who argued that the lifting of the regulations would trigger the entry of migrants.
The CDC assures that the COVID-19 situation is under control in the United States, which is why several activists agree that the obstacles to the lifting of Title 42 are mere pretexts with a dose of xenophobia and populism.
Image Credit: Getty
You were reading: Migrants still clash against Title 42 in the US