News
U.S. Supreme Court to hear argument on Biden immigration enforcement policy
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.
NBMA Debunks Allegations of Negligence, Compromise Against It
By: Michael Mike
The Director General and Chief Executive Officer (DG/CEO) of the National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA), Dr. Yemisi Asagbra debunked some allegations level against the agency by some non governmental organisations (NGOs) concerning negligence and compromise.
Speaking during a press briefing in Abuja on Friday, Asagbra said: “The negative statements circulating are misleading and lack credible scientific backing. The agency asks these organisations to present verifiable scientific evidence for their claims and we relies on sound scientific research and internationally recognized protocols to make informed decisions. It is part of the Cartagena Protocol with over 180 parties, our mandate is to protect the health of Nigerians and the environment. It will not compromise on this as it is an agency of integrity.
She added that: “The agency is transparent and accountable in its operations. It invites review of its processes and rigorous evaluations of GMO products. We are confident in our procedures that it’s meet global standards and it is a leader in effective regulation in Africa”.
On the source of the allegations, she said “over the years they have been advocating to have their presence in the board where all these products coming will be thoroughly Investigated, but it hasn’t been given. Most times we rely on the information given by Nigeria Custom Service to furnish them with needed information, which most time is not always easy if they have other things doing.
The Head planning, research and statistics National Biosafety Management Agency Mrs. Bello Scholastica said the agency is concerned with safety to our health and safety to our environment.
She further reiterated that what NBMA stands for is to establish first regulation from identification of the gene of interest, “of what you are interested in, from then till commercialization, and even after commercialization, they still follow suit to make sure that the approvals they gave hasn’t caused any harm, or those that were given approval to that they stay put to what they were asked to do”.
She further explained that the agency has put in effort to promote environmental conservation and biosafety in Nigeria.
NBMA Debunks Allegations of Negligence, Compromise Against It
House of Reps Assures on Passage of Human Rights Defenders Bill
By: Michael Mike
The House of Representatives has revealed that it is interested in the passage of the Human Rights Defenders Bill into law, saying that the bill has already passed the first reading and will soon be subjected to second reading.
The House also promised to take the necessary steps to ensure an improvement in the 2025 budget of the NHRC, pointing out that the N5 billion approved for it in the 2024 budget is inadequate considering the myriad of human rights violations in the country.
The Chairman House Committee on Human Rights, Hon. Abiola Makinde made this disclosure during the oversight visit of Committee to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).
The Chairman, who was represented at the occasion by his Deputy, Hon. Mudashiru Lukeman assured the NHRC that the Committee would continue to advance the course of human rights in Nigeria by ensuring that the House of Representatives passes critical bills on human rights issues as well as makes adequate budgetary provisions to ease the work of the Commission.
Makinde also stated that in a bid to improve some aspects of Civil and Political Rights, the House of Representatives had ensured the establishment of human rights desks in all police formations and Headquarters across the 36 States of the Federation.
Earlier, the Executive Secretary of the NHRC, Dr. Tony Ojukwu who received the lawmakers with his management staff told the Human Rights Committee that the Commission relies heavily on them for the enactment of human rights friendly laws and enhanced budgetary provisions to discharge it broad mandate of promotion, protection and enforcement of human rights in the country.
He used the opportunity to commend the legislators for their role in the amendment of the NHRC Act 2010 as well as the support of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon. Femi Gbajabiamila in the payment of compensation to victims of human rights violations by the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) unit of the Nigeria Police Force.
He equally informed the legislators who were on oversight visit about the recent report released by the Commission following the findings of the Special Independent Investigative Panel on Human Rights Violations in Counter-Insurgency Operations in the North East Nigeria , which he noted has saved the country from possible invitation by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
He noted that the aforementioned wide spread allegations of human rights infractions against some government institutions could result in the ICC extending invitations to some of the leaders to respond to the allegations, but the Commission has done the needful in compliance with the international principles of omplementarity.
He thanked the Committee for promising to improve the budgetary allocation of the Commission in the 2025 fiscal year.
House of Reps Assures on Passage of Human Rights Defenders Bill
FG Confirms Arrest of Simon Ekpa
By: Michael Mike
The arrest of Biafra agitator, Simon Ekpa in Finland has been confirmed by the federal government.
A statement on Friday by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that the Nigerian-Finnish citizen and prominent leader of the proscribed Indigenous People
of Biafra (IPOB), was arrested by Finnish authorities on Thursday.
According to the statement, Ekpa was
charged with inciting terrorism and promoting violence.
The Finnish District Court of
Päijät-Häme ruled to detain him on probable cause for publicly inciting crimes with terrorist intent.
The Finnish authorities alleged that Mr. Ekpa used social media platforms to spread
separatist propaganda, incite violence and encourage illegal actions, which had caused
significant disruptions in the South-East of Nigeria. Finnish investigators had also linked
him to incidents of violence in Nigeria, which were believed to had been fueled by his
online activities.
The statement said “the arrest of Mr. Simon Njoku Ekpa follows sustained diplomatic
pressure by the Nigerian government on Finland, to take action against his activities,
which were linked to violence and instability in the South-East of Nigeria. The request
for action featured during high level engagements between countries.”
The Ministry stated that the arrest of Ekpa, is a significant development in addressing the activities of IPOB, and also neutralizing the influence of transnational actors and “their impact on our national security.”
The Ministry promised to continue to monitor the legal proceedings and provide further updates as the case progresses.
FG Confirms Arrest of Simon Ekpa
NBMA Debunks Allegations of Negligence, Compromise Against It
Nigerian lawyers Ask to Collaborate with Chinese Colleagues in Law Relating to Investment and Dispute Resolution
House of Reps Assures on Passage of Human Rights Defenders Bill
Roger Federer’s Shock as DNA Results Reveal Myla and Charlene Are Not His Biological Children
THE PLIGHT OF FARIDA
EYN: Rev. Billi, Distortion of History, and The Living Tamarind Tree
-
News8 months agoRoger Federer’s Shock as DNA Results Reveal Myla and Charlene Are Not His Biological Children
-
Opinions3 years ago
THE PLIGHT OF FARIDA
-
News8 months agoEYN: Rev. Billi, Distortion of History, and The Living Tamarind Tree
-
ACADEMICS9 months agoA History of Biu” (2015) and The Lingering Bura-Pabir Question (1)
-
Columns9 months agoArmy University Biu: There is certain interest, but certainly not from Borno.
-
Opinions9 months agoTinubu,Shettima: The epidemic of economic, insecurity in Nigeria
-
Opinions3 years agoPOLICE CHARGE ROOMS, A MINTING PRESS
-
National News9 months agoFraud and Mismanagement Rock INGO’s IDP Cash Assistance Effort in Bama
