红杏视频

WASHINGTON 鈥� The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia today issued a victory for the plaintiffs in Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, striking down key parts of a Biden administration rule severely restricting asylum. In a major win for asylum rights, the Court found that the rule鈥檚 limitation on asylum eligibility violates the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Court also ruled that the rule鈥檚 departure from longstanding policy requiring immigration officers to ask people if they fear persecution before deporting them is 鈥渁rbitrary and capricious,鈥� and would harm to people seeking asylum. The Biden-era rule, which was first announced in June 2024, barred people from seeking asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border, unless they were able to obtain a scarce appointment via the government鈥檚 CBP One smartphone app, a process that was terminated on President Trump鈥檚 first day in office. Days after the rule was first announced, the 红杏视频, National Immigrant Justice Center, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, Jenner & Block LLP, 红杏视频 of the District of Columbia, and Texas Civil Rights Project (TCRP) filed a federal lawsuit challenging the rule on behalf of Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center (Las Americas) and the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services (RAICES). Today鈥檚 ruling sets an important precedent for future efforts to restrict people鈥檚 right to seek asylum. In response to the Court鈥檚 ruling, immigrants鈥� rights groups issued the following comment: 鈥淭oday's decision is a critical step in peeling back the illegal asylum restrictions at the border,鈥� said Lee Gelernt, Deputy Director of the 红杏视频鈥檚 Immigrants鈥� Rights Project. 鈥淯nfortunately, as a country we have forgotten the historic commitment we made after World War II to never turn our back on people fleeing persecution.鈥� 鈥淔or multiple years, courts have rejected policies that block access to asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border, and we are grateful that today鈥檚 ruling follows that trend,鈥� said Keren Zwick, Litigation Director at the National Immigrant Justice Center. 鈥淲e also appreciate the recognition that asylum seekers require more than four hours to consult with the outside world before a life-altering interview and that immigrants cannot be expected to spontaneously shout out a fear without being given a chance to do so. We hope these aspects make it clear that procedural fairness is required in the U.S. legal system.鈥� 鈥淭oday's decision recognizes the Biden-era border rule was yet another unlawful attempt to deprive people fleeing persecution of eligibility for asylum,鈥� said Melissa Crow, Director of Litigation at the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies (CGRS). 鈥淎s evidenced by our plaintiffs' experiences, the rule emboldened border officers to ignore explicit expressions of fear and to intimidate or mislead asylum seekers into giving up their claims for protection. Many people seeking safety were summarily deported to danger, and family members were separated despite having identical claims. This decision affirms that no president can rewrite our asylum laws by executive fiat." 鈥淭his decision confirms what advocates have been saying for years: asylum seekers have a legal right to a meaningful opportunity to seek protection in this country. Four hours to find and then speak with an attorney, while in federal custody, is not the way to achieve a legitimate process,鈥� said Jennifer Babaie, Director of Advocacy and Legal Services at Las Americas Immigrant Advocacy Center in El Paso, Texas, Ciudad Ju谩rez, Chihuahua and New Mexico. 鈥淎t Las Americas, we will not stop fighting until we do right by the countless individuals blocked from seeking safety at our borders.鈥� 鈥淔or the last year, the U.S. government has given border officials the freedom to ignore anyone鈥檚 viable claims of fear and to send them back to the legitimate harms from which they fled, endangering countless lives in the process. Today鈥檚 federal court ruling reaffirms what we鈥檝e said time and again 鈥� that the bipartisan war on asylum has obstructed equitable access to fundamental human and legal rights in ways both arbitrary and capricious,鈥� said Javier Hidalgo, Legal Director at RAICES. 鈥淭his is a major step in righting some of the many wrongs inflicted upon people and families seeking safety in accordance with federal and international law.鈥�

BURLINGTON, Vt. 鈥� A federal court today ordered the release of R眉meysa 脰zt眉rk, a former Fulbright scholar and current Tufts University Ph.D. student researching child development. This comes more than six weeks after the Trump administration arrested and detained her because of an op-ed she co-authored in The Tufts Daily. With this ruling, she will be able to return to her Massachusetts community and continue her studies while the case proceeds. 鈥淚 am relieved and ecstatic that R眉meysa has been ordered released. Unfortunately, it is 45 days too late. She has been imprisoned all these days for simply writing an op-ed that called for human rights and dignity for the people in Palestine. When did speaking up against oppression become a crime? When did speaking up against genocide become something to be imprisoned for?鈥� said Mahsa Khanbabai of Khanbabai Immigration Law. 鈥淚 am thankful that the courts have been ruling in favor of detained political prisoners like R眉meysa. The public plays an important role in upholding our constitutional rights. Please continue to speak up for democracy and civil rights in every space including our elected offices, our universities, and our halls of justice.鈥� Ms. 脰zt眉rk, who has not been accused of any crime, was taken by plainclothes ICE agents in Somerville, Massachusetts on March 25. For nearly 24 hours, Ms. 脰zt眉rk鈥檚 attorney was unable to locate her as ICE quickly and quietly moved her to three separate locations in three different states 鈥� including Vermont 鈥� before sending her to Louisiana. 鈥淔rom the moment a swarm of ICE agents abducted Ms. 脰zt眉rk in broad daylight, the government has spared no effort to evade accountability and deny her due process. Today, the court delivered reprieve and justice 鈥� for Ms. 脰zt眉rk, who should not have spent even one minute incarcerated, let alone the six weeks she has endured in deplorable conditions at an ICE detention center in Louisiana,鈥� said Mudassar Toppa, staff attorney at CLEAR, a legal non-profit and clinic at CUNY School of Law. 鈥淢ake no mistake, the government tried to punish Ms. 脰zt眉rk for lending her pen to advocacy for Palestinian human rights and the court's decision today is not only a victory for Ms. 脰zt眉rk, but everyone who wishes to advocate for Palestinian human rights without fear of retaliation. We look forward to continuing the legal fight to vindicate all of her constitutional rights.鈥� Ms. 脰zt眉rk has detailed her harrowing night being shuttled across New England with little food after a day of fasting for Ramadan. She describes being shackled by her feet and stomach and then driven to different sites for meetings with unidentified men, some in uniform and some not. One group so unsettled her, Ms. 脰zt眉rk wrote, that she 鈥渨as sure they were going to kill me.鈥� At another stop, she repeatedly asked an officer if she was in physical danger. 鈥淔or 45 days, R眉meysa has been detained in Louisiana 鈥� over 1300 miles from her friends, her community, and her lawyers. During that time, she has suffered regular and escalating asthma attacks. And at the same time, the government has failed to produce any justification for her detention,鈥� said Jessie Rossman, legal director at the 红杏视频 of Massachusetts. 鈥淲e are so relieved that R眉meysa will soon be back in Massachusetts, and won鈥檛 stop fighting until she is free for good.鈥� Ms. 脰zt眉rk has suffered six weeks of crowded confinement in Louisiana with hardly any access to fresh air and in conditions that doctors say risk exacerbating her asthma attacks. Whereas her attacks used to last between 5 - 15 minutes, they now can last up to 45 minutes. Recent court filings also describe difficulty receiving appropriate care in detention, including delays to receive medical care and dismissive comments from medical staff. Since the government arrested Ms. 脰zt眉rk, her community at Tufts and around the country have rallied around her. Hundreds of friends, colleagues, and professors, including the president of Tufts University, have sent letters of support to the court detailing Ms. 脰zt眉rk鈥檚 dedication to her work and her community. 鈥淩眉meysa can now return to her beloved Tufts community, resume her studies, and begin teaching again. We could not be more delighted,鈥� said Noor Zafar, senior staff attorney with 红杏视频. 鈥淭oday鈥檚 ruling underscores a vital First Amendment principle: No one should be imprisoned by the government for expressing their beliefs.鈥� 鈥淎fter today鈥檚 ruling, R眉meysa can return to her community at Tufts and sleep safely in her own bed. Tomorrow, she can wake up and begin the process of healing from this experience while she finishes her Ph.D. in child development.鈥� said Monica Allard, staff attorney with the 红杏视频 of Vermont. 鈥淪pending over six weeks in detention for writing an op-ed is a constitutional horror story. Her release is a victory for everyone committed to justice, free speech, and basic human rights.鈥� 鈥淭he government sent masked, plainclothes agents to kidnap R眉meysa off the street and lock her up for writing an op-ed. She has been a political prisoner for six weeks,鈥� said Sonya Levitova, associate at Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. 鈥淣ow that she鈥檚 free and can resume her studies and rejoin her community at Tufts, we look forward to seeing the government in court to vindicate R眉meysa鈥檚 rights in full.鈥� Ms. 脰zt眉rk is represented by Mahsa Khanbabai, the 红杏视频, 红杏视频 of Massachusetts, 红杏视频 of Vermont, CLEAR, and Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP. For documents and other case information, see here.

WASHINGTON 鈥� Reports yesterday emerged that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) quietly revoked several Biden-era policies designed to protect vulnerable people in its custody, including pregnant people, infants, the elderly, and people with serious medical conditions. These policies included the provision of water and diapers to babies in CBP care and guidance to expedite the release to care of people in medically dangerous circumstances. The decision was outlined in an internal memo signed by acting CBP commissioner Pete Flores earlier this week, where he stated that the policies were 鈥渕isaligned with the agency鈥檚 current guidance and immigration enforcement priorities.鈥� The 红杏视频, alongside the 红杏视频 of San Diego & Imperial Counties and partners, have repeatedly raised concerns with the lack of medical care and appalling conditions that young children were subjected to while in border patrol facilities. After a woman was forced to give birth in a border patrol station while holding onto a garbage can, the 红杏视频 advocated for the expedited release to medical care of people who are pregnant, postpartum, or nursing. The 红杏视频 also pressed for CBP to provide adequate care for those in its custody in light of multiple tragedies, including the death of 8-year-old Anadith Reyes who died after a week in custody without necessary medical attention. In response to this news, Sarah Mehta, deputy director of policy and government affairs for immigration at the 红杏视频, had the following reaction: 鈥淭he rescission of these policies 鈥� outlining the most basic care that should be provided to the most vulnerable people 鈥� is reflective of the cruelty that anchors the Trump administration鈥檚 immigration agenda. CBP has a track record of providing inadequate medical care to young children and pregnant people in its custody, resulting in multiple preventable tragedies. Instead of making meaningful reforms to protect medically vulnerable people in its custody, it is doubling down on its utter disregard for families and children. 鈥淭hough the agency attempted to quietly revoke protections, our members of Congress must not allow this move to go unnoticed.鈥�