A California federal judge invalidated a Biden administration rule limiting asylum. The judge specifically addresses the policy aspects that stop noncitizens who enter the U.S. between ports of entry or failed to seek protection in a third country as ineligible for asylum.
The judge ruled that both provisions of the “circumvention of the lawful pathways” rule violate congressional intent. Congress explicitly stated that the manner of entry should not impact access to asylum. Further, restrictions requiring noncitizens to first seek asylum in a transit country only applied if those countries were genuinely safe.
In essence, the judge emphasized that the statute allows any noncitizen physically present in the United States, regardless of their entry method – whether through a work visa, parole-related travel authorization, or at a land border or port of entry – to apply for asylum, subject to certain exceptions. The judge clarified that limiting eligibility based on factors such as the expansion of other means of entry or protection goes against Congress’s intended criteria for asylum eligibility.
To allow the Biden administration an opportunity to appeal, the order is stayed for 14 days. This gives the administration a brief window to challenge the ruling.
ILBSG actively monitors ongoing updates on U.S. immigration law to ensure our clients get the right advice for their specific situations. If you have questions about any immigration-related issue, contact us.
