Federal judge blocks Biden's immigrant citizenship order
Texas judge ordered an administrative stay of the order
Near the end of June, President Joe Biden issued an executive order granting a “path to legal permanent residency” and “citizenship” for roughly half a million undocumented migrants who are married to American citizens.
It also covered around 50,000 kids, most of which may be part of the nearly 300,000 migrant kids the Biden-Harris administration has lost track of.
To qualify, immigrants must have lived in the U.S. for at least 10 years, be married to a U.S. citizen as of June 17th, and meet other requirements. Those deemed threats to security will not qualify.
Other requirements included:
The program allows eligible immigrants to apply for temporary work permits and deportation protections through the immigration "parole" authority.
It also provides a streamlined path for these immigrants to obtain a green card and eventually citizenship without having to leave the U.S., which is normally required for those who entered illegally.
After 5 years with a green card, they can apply for U.S. citizenship.
An estimated 50,000 undocumented children of these mixed-status families may also qualify for the program if under age 21.
The program is expected to face legal challenges, likely from Republican-led states.
16 states sued over the order, claiming it illegally bypassed Congress for “blatant political purposes,” and that the program “incentivizes illegal immigration and will irreparably harm” the states.
On Aug. 26, U.S. District Judge J. Campbell Barker of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas agreed and put an administrative hold on that order.
"The claims are substantial and warrant closer consideration than the court has been able to afford to date," Barker wrote in his 9-page order.
Per Barker’s order, both sides will have until Oct. 10 to file briefs in the case.
More To The Story
Here is a more of the nitty-gritty of Barker’s order.
It’s a 14-day administrative stay, preventing DHS from granting parole under the new rule. This stay can be extended for good cause or with consent from all parties.
The stay does not prevent DHS from accepting applications or creating a process for seeking parole under the rule.
The court sets an expedited schedule for the case, including deadlines for motions related to venue or forum, or to intervene or proceed pseudonymously. Defendants have until Sept. 26 to file a brief and motion on the plaintiff’s challenge. Plaintiffs have until Oct. 3 to respond to Defendant filings.
Barker’s order came just days before news of apartment complexes had been taken over by Venezuelan gangs in the town of Aurora, Colorado, and that illegal aliens had been attempting to board school buses in a southern California school district that had children on board.
Related Reading:
