Connect with us

News

U.S. Supreme Court to hear argument on Biden immigration enforcement policy

Published

on

U.S. Supreme Court to hear argument on Biden immigration enforcement policy

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday is set to consider whether President Joe Biden’s administration can implement guidelines challenged by two conservative-leaning states of shifting immigration enforcement toward public safety threats.

This the court said in a case testing executive branch power to set enforcement priorities.

The justices will hear the administration’s bid to overturn a judge’s ruling in favor of Texas and Louisiana that vacated U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) guidelines narrowing the scope of those who can be targeted by immigration agents for arrest and deportation.

The Democratic president’s policy departed from the hard-line approach of his Republican predecessor, Donald Trump, who sought to broaden the range of immigrants subject to arrest and removal.

Biden campaigned on a more humane approach to immigration but has been faced with large numbers of migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border.

The guidelines, announced by Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in September 2021, prioritised apprehending and deporting non-U.S. citizens who pose a threat to national security, public safety or border security.

In a memo, Mayorkas called the guidelines necessary because his department lacks the resources to apprehend and seek the removal of every one of the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally.

Mayorkas cited the longstanding practice of government officials exercising discretion to decide who should be subject to deportation and said that a majority of immigrants subject to deportation “have been contributing members of our communities for years.’’

Biden’s administration, saying fewer detentions and deportations have encouraged more illegal border crossings.

The top Republican in the U.S. House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy, earlier called on Mayorkas to step down and said the House may try to impeach him when Republicans formally take control of the chamber in January.

Republican state attorneys general in Texas and Louisiana sued to block the guidelines after Republican-led legal challenges successfully thwarted other Biden administration attempts to ease enforcement.

Their lawsuit, filed in Texas, argued that the guidelines ran counter to provisions in immigration laws that makes it mandatory to detain non-U.S. citizens who have been convicted of certain crimes or have final orders of removal.

U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton, a Trump appointee, ruled in favor of the challengers, finding that while immigration agents could on a case-by-case basis act with discretion the administration’s guidelines were a generalised policy that contravened the detention mandate set out by Congress.

“Whatever the outer limits of its authority, the executive branch does not have the authority to change the law,’’ Tipton wrote.

After the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in July declined to put that ruling on hold, Biden’s administration turned to the Supreme Court.

The justices on a 5-4 vote declined to stay Tipton’s ruling, with conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson in dissent. The justices did not provide reasons for their disagreement.

Biden’s administration has told the Supreme Court that Texas and Louisiana lack the proper legal standing to challenge the guidelines because the states had not suffered any direct harm as a result of the policy.

The states countered that they would be harmed by having to spend more money on law enforcement and social services as a result of an increase in non-U.S. citizens present within their borders due to the guidelines.

The administration also told the justices that the guidelines do not violate federal immigration law and that the mandatory language of those statutes does not supersede the longstanding principle of law enforcement discretion.

A decision is expected by the end of June. 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Troops Raid Terrorist Enclaves in Katsina, Criminals Flee Before Contact

Published

on

Troops Raid Terrorist Enclaves in Katsina, Criminals Flee Before Contact

By: Zagazola Makama

Troops of 17 Brigade, in collaboration with local vigilantes, have conducted coordinated offensive operations on suspected terrorist enclaves across parts of Katsina State, forcing criminals to flee before troops’ arrival.

Security sources told Zagazola that the operation took place at about 0800 hours on May 10, 2026, targeting Kafin-Soli, Karaduwa, Maraban Musawa and Jikamshi villages in Kankia, Musawa and Matazu Local Government Areas of the state.

The sources said the clearance operation was part of ongoing efforts to dislodge criminal elements and deny them freedom of action within rural communities.

According to the sources, troops and vigilantes moved simultaneously into the identified locations but met no resistance as the suspected terrorists had fled prior to their arrival.

Military authorities said follow-up exploitation of the general area was ongoing to ensure the criminals do not regroup or return to the affected communities.

They added that troops will continue intelligence-led patrols and offensive operations across vulnerable areas in Katsina State to sustain pressure on criminal networks and restore normalcy.

Troops Raid Terrorist Enclaves in Katsina, Criminals Flee Before Contact

Continue Reading

News

Troops Ambush Terrorists in Kogi State, Neutralise One, Recover Arms and Cash

Published

on

Troops Ambush Terrorists in Kogi State, Neutralise One, Recover Arms and Cash

By: Zagazola Makama

Troops of 12 Brigade have successfully ambushed suspected terrorists along the Old Obajana–Jakura–Tajimi axis in Lokoja Local Government Area of Kogi State, neutralising one insurgent and recovering weapons, ammunition and other items.

Security sources said that the operation occurred at about 0450 hours on May 10, 2026, west of Meyanga and north of Adankolo Forest during a planned ambush operation.

The sources said troops made contact with the terrorists in the early hours of the day, leading to a brief exchange of fire.

According to the sources, one terrorist was neutralised during the engagement, while others fled the scene, abandoning their weapons and equipment.

Items recovered at the scene included two AK-47 rifles, six magazines loaded with 145 rounds of 7.62mm special ammunition, one locally fabricated pistol, one Motorola handheld radio, one motorcycle, and a sum of ₦62,900.

Other recovered items included a camouflaged bandolier, three mobile phones and additional sundry materials.

Military authorities said troops have continued exploitation of the general area to track fleeing suspects and prevent regrouping of criminal elements.

They added that operations in the axis remain ongoing as part of sustained efforts to dominate the environment and deny terrorists freedom of action.

Troops Ambush Terrorists in Kogi State, Neutralise One, Recover Arms and Cash

Continue Reading

News

Funding of Politics with State Funds: ActionAid Demands Impeachment of Governors Found Culpable

Published

on

Funding of Politics with State Funds: ActionAid Demands Impeachment of Governors Found Culpable

By: Michael Mike

Human rights and anti-poverty organisation, ActionAid Nigeria, has called for the immediate impeachment of any governor found guilty of using state resources to fund political campaigns ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The organisation made the demand in a statement issued on Tuesday in Abuja by its Country Director, Andrew Mamedu, following growing public concerns over alleged movement of huge sums of money by some political actors for campaign-related activities.

ActionAid Nigeria said the allegations have raised serious questions about the source of the funds allegedly being deployed for political mobilisation and consolidation of power ahead of the next election cycle.

Mamedu described the reports as disturbing and unacceptable, especially at a period when millions of Nigerians are grappling with economic hardship, rising inflation, insecurity, unemployment and worsening living conditions.

According to him, it would amount to a grave abuse of public trust if state resources meant for governance and development were diverted for partisan political purposes.

“It is appalling that at a time when Nigeria is drowning in debt, workers are struggling with the rising cost of living, public hospitals are underfunded, schools are collapsing, insecurity is spreading, and millions of Nigerians are battling hunger and extreme economic hardship, that any suggestion of public resources are being diverted or deployed for political campaigns,” he stated.

The organisation stressed that governors were elected to serve the people and not to convert state resources into what it described as “political war chests.”

ActionAid Nigeria challenged governors and political actors allegedly linked to the claims to publicly explain the source of the funds being used for political activities, insisting that Nigerians deserve transparency and accountability.

The group further urged anti-corruption agencies, including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, as well as State Houses of Assembly, to commence immediate investigations into the allegations.

According to the organisation, any governor found culpable should face impeachment, prosecution and recovery of diverted public funds.

“Any governor who diverts public resources for political campaigns has violated public trust and abused the mandate given to them by citizens. Such individuals should not remain in office,” Mamedu said.

He warned that unchecked misuse of public resources could weaken democratic institutions and create an unfair political environment where incumbents enjoy undue advantage over other contestants.

The organisation also noted that while political parties have the right to organise campaigns and raise lawful support, such activities must not involve public funds, government assets or state institutions.

ActionAid Nigeria cited countries such as the United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Germany and South Africa as examples where strict accountability measures exist to prevent incumbents from using state resources for partisan political activities.

The organisation called on citizens, civil society groups, journalists, whistleblowers and anti-corruption advocates to remain vigilant and expose any suspicious use of public resources for political purposes ahead of the 2027 elections.

ActionAid Nigeria maintained that safeguarding democracy and protecting public resources must remain a collective responsibility of both institutions and citizens.

Funding of Politics with State Funds: ActionAid Demands Impeachment of Governors Found Culpable

Continue Reading

Trending

Verified by MonsterInsights