Score another victory for fast-track deportations of those attempting to game the system. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
On the heels of an appellate court ruling\nclearing the way for more expedited removals of illegal aliens, the U.S.\nSupreme Court did the same in a case of a Sri Lankan asylum seeker.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In a 7-2 decision<\/a>, the high court said asylum seekers do not have a right to federal court hearings before being deported from the U.S. Affirming the government\u2019s authority to speedily remove\u00a0asylum applicants, Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion: <\/p>\n\n\n\n “While\naliens who have established connections in this country have due process rights\nin deportation proceedings, the court long ago held that Congress is entitled\nto set the conditions for an alien\u2019s lawful entry into this country and that,\nas a result, an alien at the threshold of initial entry cannot claim any\ngreater rights under the Due Process Clause.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In other words, constitutional rights of due process do\nnot automatically apply to migrants simply because they illegally set foot on\nU.S. soil.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The case at issue involved\nVijayakumar Thuraissigiam, a native of Sri Lanka. After he was arrested in 2017 just 25 yards north of\nthe U.S.-Mexico border, immigration officials determined he did not\nqualify for asylum status because he lacked \u201ccredible fear of persecution\u201d if\nreturned to his home country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Supreme Court decision,\noverturning a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal ruling, could mean fast-track\ndeportation for thousands of asylum seekers. An estimated 9,500 asylum\napplicants have claims similar to Thuraissigiam\u2019s, and justices expressed\nconcern that granting him a hearing could trigger a flood of new court\ncontests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Trump administration asserts that the U.S. asylum system is abused and, indeed, data show<\/a> that a growing majority of claims fail on the merits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Obama-appointed Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan argued that the\nhigh court \u201chandcuff[ed]the judiciary\u2019s ability to perform its constitutional\nduty to safeguard individual liberty and dismantles a critical component of the\nseparation of powers.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n But Trump administration lawyers pointed\nto legal precedents that distinguish between people who lawfully enter the\ncountry, and those who arrive illegally. Immigration laws enacted by Congress\nprovide expedited removal as a tool to expel those attempting to game the\nsystem with meritless claims.<\/p>\n\n\n\n