| | | Federal judge allows Trump administration rule restricting asylum access to continue
Spencer Hsu
1 hr ago
Disney settles long-running 'Home Improvement' lawsuit
How much is a view worth in Manhattan?
Click to expand
Replay Video
UP NEXT
1
Cancel
00:07
02:20
United States (English)
SETTINGS
OFF
HQ
HD
HQ
SD
LO
Ad 00:00 - up next: "Why Trump is targeting asylum seekers"
Why Trump is targeting asylum seekers
Why Trump is targeting asylum seekers
The Washington Post
See more videos
SHARE
SHARE
TWEET
SHARE
EMAIL
What to watch next
Why Trump is targeting asylum seekers
The Washington Post2:20Mueller testifies, protests in Puerto Rico, warm weather in Europe: World in Photos, July 24
ABC News1:38Mueller hearing both a tragedy and disaster, former Independent Counsel Ken Starr says
FOX News0:36Mueller clarifies answer he gave about OLC
CNN0:51Mueller refutes Trump claim that probe was a "witch hunt"
CBS News1:03Mueller clarifies testimony on indicting a president
NBC News1:34Mueller: My investigation "is not a witch hunt"
MSNBC4:45Mueller on his investigation of Trump and Russian interference: ‘It is not a witch hunt’
The Washington Post1:11
Video captures bear dumpster heist
Associated Press1:02Mueller corrects testimony on Trump indictment decision
Reuters0:43Can criminal charges be filed against a sitting U.S. president?
USA TODAY1:02Who is Boris Johnson?
ABC News1:06Mueller calls Russian efforts to interfere with 2016 presidential election a serious challenge to democracy
FOX News4:54Ruth Bader Ginsburg: 'I am very much alive'
CNN0:54Iowa man used his fortune to send 33 strangers to college
CBS News3:19Mueller: Russia was 'absolutely' trying to impact our election
NBC News3:17
The Newsstand
USA TODAYFree
UP NEXT
President Trump’s move to sharply cut asylum requests by Central Americans and others fleeing persecution cleared its first legal hurdle Wednesday, as a federal judge said migrant advocacy groups failed to quantify how their legal services would be harmed by the change.
U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly of Washington, D.C., denied a request by the groups to block the 10-day-old rule while their lawsuit proceeds. A second federal judge in San Francisco will weigh a similar challenge brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and civil rights groups at a hearing later Wednesday.
The cases present the first court tests of the new rule, announced July 15, which bars migrants from applying for asylum if they passed through any other country en route to the U.S.-Mexico border and failed to seek protection first in that country. The change imposes the heaviest burden on people from Central American countries, who constitute the vast majority of asylum seekers.
Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Today’s most popular stories on The Washington Post
In a bench ruling Wednesday, Kelly said he did not discount the impact on asylum seekers who are turned away or deported under the change, but said two nonprofit plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit — the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition of Washington and the Texas-based Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services — had failed to establish that their organizations would suffer “certain, immediate and great harm” to warrant halting the new measure.
Kelly said that while the groups argued they are being “irreparably harmed” by the rule because it forces them to serve fewer individuals, families and children, they had failed to show how many of their clients are subject to the change or who could face deportation in the two to four weeks a restraining order would last.
“There is just nothing in the record to suggest how many individuals, if any, fall into that category,” Kelly said. “Plaintiffs have not shown the likelihood of irreparable harm by the standard required and the temporary restraining order |
|
