Court Slams Brakes on Trump Deportation Push
The court determined that Trump's immigration policy was implemented without an adequate public notice and comment period.
JOIN TODAY and get 10% off your Daily Chela Insider subscription for an entire year.
A federal appeals court has delivered a significant setback to the administration’s efforts to broaden its immigration enforcement powers, ruling against a policy that would have expanded fast-track deportations across the country.
The decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit halts a rule that sought to empower immigration officers to deport certain undocumented immigrants without a hearing before an immigration judge, regardless of where they were apprehended in the United States.
The ruling, issued on Friday, found that the administration failed to follow proper legal procedures when it attempted to expand the “expedited removal” process. The court determined that the policy was implemented without an adequate public notice and comment period, a requirement under federal law for such significant regulatory changes.
This procedural failure formed the basis of the court’s decision to block the rule’s enforcement.
Previously, fast-track deportations were primarily used for individuals detained within 100 miles of the border who had been in the country for less than two weeks. The contested policy, introduced in 2019, aimed to apply this process nationwide to any undocumented immigrant who could not prove they had lived in the U.S. continuously for at least two years.
Immigration advocates and civil rights groups have lauded the court’s decision, arguing that the expansion of expedited removal strips individuals of fundamental due process rights.
Critics of the policy have long warned that it places immense power in the hands of individual immigration officers and increases the risk of wrongfully deporting people with legitimate claims to asylum or other legal protections. The ruling is seen as a victory for immigrant communities, providing temporary relief from the threat of immediate removal without judicial review.
The administration has argued that the expansion is a necessary tool for managing immigration court backlogs and efficiently enforcing immigration laws. Supporters of the policy view it as a critical component of a broader strategy to deter illegal immigration and maintain national security.
The court’s decision does not permanently strike down the policy but sends it back to the Department of Homeland Security, which would need to re-introduce it through the proper rulemaking process to move forward. This legal battle underscores the ongoing tension between immigration enforcement and the protection of due process rights.
JOIN TODAY & Get 10% Off A Daily Chela Insider Subscription For A Year!
Subscribers Get Exclusive News, Videos & Stories:
Our mission is to provide a platform for Mexican Americans, and cover news with the depth and context it deserves.
Here’s how you can help:
Make a Small Monthly Contribution: Your financial support will help us cover operational costs, pay our dedicated team, and expand our reach to more readers.
How To Support:
To subscribe, click on the button below. Thank you for your support and for believing in the power of independent media. Together, we can make sure that every voice is heard and every story is told.