Supreme Court Hands Trump an Immigration Victory
Every delay has consequences.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that federal appeals courts must follow a deferential standard of review to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ determination that asylum seekers did not experience the level of persecution necessary to qualify for asylum protections. Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said that appeals courts can only diverge from the judgment of the Board of Immigration Appeals when the evidence presented was “so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” In doing so, she upheld a decision by the First Circuit Court of Appeals and handed the Trump administration a decisive victory that will have an impact well beyond this particular case.
Every delay has consequences.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that federal appeals courts must follow a deferential standard of review to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ determination that asylum seekers did not experience the level of persecution necessary to qualify for asylum protections. Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said that appeals courts can only diverge from the judgment of the Board of Immigration Appeals when the evidence presented was “so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” In doing so, she upheld a decision by the First Circuit Court of Appeals and handed the Trump administration a decisive victory that will have an impact well beyond this particular case.
Supreme Court Hands Trump an Immigration Victory
Every delay has consequences.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that federal appeals courts must follow a deferential standard of review to the Board of Immigration Appeals’ determination that asylum seekers did not experience the level of persecution necessary to qualify for asylum protections. Writing for a unanimous court, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said that appeals courts can only diverge from the judgment of the Board of Immigration Appeals when the evidence presented was “so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” In doing so, she upheld a decision by the First Circuit Court of Appeals and handed the Trump administration a decisive victory that will have an impact well beyond this particular case.
0 Comments
0 Shares
30 Views
0 Reviews
