US appeals court temporarily blocks Biden administration's new immigration restrictions

A federal appeals court temporarily blocked the Biden administration's new restrictions on asylum claims Friday evening, putting the rule on hold over the objections of the administration.<br><br>The rule was scheduled to go into effect Saturday and would have barred migrants crossing the country's southern border from applying for asylum if they had first passed through another country en route to the US. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit did not indicate how long the rule would be blocked. Oral arguments on the case are scheduled for March.<br><br>"Because it is unlikely that [the Biden administration] will prevail on the merits, the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction," Circuit Judge Marsha Berzon wrote in the court's order.<br><br>The new rule was announced earlier this month and marked the most significant change to asylum policy in decades. The Biden administration said it was modeled after a similar rule by former President Donald Trump's administration that was also blocked by a federal appeals court.<br><br>The changes under the new rule would have required migrants to first apply for asylum in the countries they pass through before applying for asylum in the U.S. The rule also would have allowed migrants to be deported back to their home countries or the countries they passed through.<br><br>The Biden administration said it needed to implement the rule in order to quickly expel migrants at the border. The rule was modeled after a similar rule from the Trump administration that was blocked by a federal appeals court.<br><br>The Biden administration said the rule was needed to stem a surge of migrants at the southern border. Without it, the administration said, it would be unable to quickly expel migrants.<br><br>"Absent theDenial of Safe Haven Rule, the Executive Branch will face an acute need to use extreme measures to avoid releasing large numbers of migrants into the interior, thereby avoiding a surge in COVID-19 cases and further strain on our healthcare system," the Biden administration wrote in a court filing.<br><br>Critics, however, argued that the rule would violate the rights of migrants who are fleeing persecution or violence in their home countries. They argued that the rule would block migrants from being able to apply for asylum in the U.S. even if they are eligible for protection.<br><br>Critics also argued that the rule would lead to the deportation of migrants back to their home countries, where they could face persecution or violence.<br><br>"Today's decision affirms that the Biden Administration cannot unilaterally rewrite our immigration and asylum laws," said Omar Jadwat, senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union in a statement. "We will continue to fiercely defend the right to seek asylum and the bedrock principle that our country has a long history of protecting the persecuted."<br><br>The Biden administration said it planned to appeal the ruling and to try to implement the rule despite the appeals court's decision blocking it.<br><br>"The Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice are disappointed by the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, which blocks the government’s commonsense effort to enhance border security and make the asylum process more efficient and fair," a DHS spokesperson said in a statement. "The government respectfully disagrees with the court’s ruling and will seek further review of this important issue."<br><br>"Blocking the Biden administration's anti-asylum rule will literally save lives," said Lee Gelernt, deputy director of the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project in a statement. "This rule was a massive step backward for the Biden administration and would have effectively ended asylum at the Southern border."<br><br>"The administration’s decision to adopt the Trump asylum ban is shameful and will lead to immense human suffering. We are confident that the rule will be permanently enjoined on the merits and applaud today’s temporary reprieve," said Cody Wofsy, staff attorney with the ACLU's Immigrants' Rights Project.<br><br>"We have said all along that this ban is illegal because it places an impermissible burden on asylum seekers and is contrary to congressional intent. The Ninth Circuit has upheld the rule of law and protected the rights of migrants seeking safety," said Melissa Crow, senior supervising attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center.<br><br>"The Biden administration should work to build an asylum system that is fair, accessible, and welcoming, rather than one that is hostile and<br>punitive," Crow added.<br><br>---<br><br>This is a developing story and will be updated.