Court temporarily backs protocols to keep asylum seekers in Mexico

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay of a lower-court ruling four days earlier that blocked the administration’s protocol. The appeals court will consider next week whether to extend that stay — and allow the Trump administration policy to remain in effect longer.

The administration in December announced its new policy, called the migration protection protocols, arguing that it would help stop people from using the asylum process to enter the country and remain illegally. President Donald Trump has long been angered by catch-and-release policies, under which asylum seekers are temporarily allowed in the United States while they wait for their court hearings.

On Monday, Judge Richard Seeborg of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued an injunction against Trump’s protocols, saying that the president did not have the power to enforce them and that they violated immigration laws.

Seeborg said in his ruling that the protocols did not include “sufficient safeguards” to comply with the Department of Homeland Security’s obligation not to return migrants to places where their “life or freedom would be threatened.”

On Friday, as Seeborg’s injunction was set to go into effect, a three-judge panel for the 9th Circuit issued the temporary stay.

In a tweet late Friday, Trump wrote: “Finally, great news at the Border!” He had previously criticized the 9th Circuit, which is based in San Francisco, saying that the court always ruled against him. While that is not always true, the administration’s track record in the circuit has been poor.

The Justice Department, which appealed Seeborg’s decision, argued that the injunction would “impose immediate, substantial harm on the United States, including by diminishing the executive branch’s ability to work effectively with Mexico to manage the crisis on our shared border.”

Judy Rabinovitz, deputy director of the Immigrants’ Rights Project at the American Civil Liberties Union, who argued the case, called the policy unlawful and cruel.

“The question will be, can the government continue to implement the policy while it appeals it to the 9th Circuit,” she said. “Obviously, we don’t think it should be able to.”

Lawyers for the Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The appeals court’s decision comes as the nation’s immigration system may have reached a breaking point as migrants increasingly arrive at the country’s border with Mexico.

The flow of migrant families has reached record levels, with February totals 560 percent above those for the same period last year. Many are seeking asylum, in which they have the burden to show evidence of past persecution or testimony that establishes the “well-founded” fear that they would face danger if they returned home.

The Trump administration’s migration protection protocols were an attempt to deter migrants. Mexico’s government reluctantly agreed to house the migrants in December.