McALLEN, Texas (Border Report) — Migrant advocacy groups are celebrating a federal appeals court ruling this week that struck down a past policy of limiting the number of migrants crossing at border ports of entry, a process known as “metering.”
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California, in a 2 to 1 decision on Wednesday upheld a lower court’s ruling finding that the policy of U.S. border agents turning away migrants at the Southwest border when daily numbers exceeded a certain amount was a violation of federal immigration law.
In a 104-page ruling, the appeals court found that the Asylum Transit Rule — also known as “metering” — violated the Administrative Procedure Act, even if the asylum-seekers had not yet crossed into the United States.
“Officials turned away noncitizens without taking any steps to keep track of them or otherwise allow them to open asylum applications, the panel concluded that the metering policy constituted withholding of action,” the court found.
The court also ordered the government to unwind past asylum denials to individuals who were turned away.
People wait to apply for asylum between two border walls on Thursday, May 11, 2023, in San Diego.
The metering policy began under President Barack Obama in 2016 in San Diego, where large numbers of Haitians appeared at main crossings from Tijuana, Mexico. In 2018, the Trump administration expanded the process throughout the entire Southwest border.
But the policy became obsolete in 2019 when the COVID-19 pandemic struck and Title 42 was implemented in March 2020. Title 42 largely prevented asylum-seekers from crossing at U.S. border ports to stop the spread of the deadly virus.
The appeal’s court ruling comes after a federal district judge in San Diego ruled in September 2021 that U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s use of metering on asylum-seekers was unconstitutional.
The lawsuit was brought by the California-based nonprofit Al Otro Lado, which helps asylum-seekers on the border, and a group of migrants subjected to metering.
“After 7 long years of litigation, we did it! We won our case challenging @CBP’s illegal practice of turning away asylum seekers at POEs before they could reach US soil, forcing them to wait on metering lists in dangerous border cities,” Al Otro Lado posted on X.
“Respect for the rule of law and international human rights norms still matters,” Nicole Ramos, Al Otro Lado border rights project director, posted on X. “You cannot have a legal process to decide asylum claims while also creating policies to deny access to that process. Too many good people have died as a result of the metering policy, too many were raped, sold, tortured, or disappeared because CBP turned them away.”
Sandra Sanchez can be reached at SSanchez@BorderReport.com.
Read: Read More