A federal judge appointed by Barack Obama shot down a policy from President Trump that would have cut legal immigration by two-thirds.
The Oregon-based judge struck down a rule requiring visa applicants to have health insurance or the means to otherwise pay for their own healthcare, the Oregonian reported. U.S. District Judge Michael Simon disputed the legal basis for Trump’s rule, which would have drastically reduced legal immigration to the United States.
“The president offers no national security or foreign relations justification for this sweeping change in immigration law,” Simon said.
Activist judge overrules Trump on visa policy
It’s an all too familiar scenario in the Trump era: the president tries to enforce a policy in furtherance of his immigration agenda, only to be unilaterally blocked by an overzealous federal judge. President Trump was obstructed once again Tuesday when Simon blocked the October rule, which asks that visa applicants buy unsubsidized healthcare within 30 days of entering the U.S. or else prove the means to cover medical costs, Politico reported.
When Trump introduced the policy in October, the White House justified the change by citing the burden that immigrants who lack healthcare or the means to pay for it impose on American taxpayers, Daily Wire reported. The administration pointed to heavy uncompensated care costs for immigrants that are transferred to American taxpayers, as well as overcrowding in hospitals from immigrants seeking non-emergency care in emergency rooms.
But Simon issued a nationwide injunction against Trump’s proclamation, saying that Congress, not Trump, has authority to set immigration policy, that Trump contradicted the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1965, and that Trump’s health care argument was not convincing. Simon interpreted the proclamation as a “categorical exclusion for any affected immigrant who cannot afford health insurance or reasonably anticipated medical costs.”
Simon pointed to provisions of immigration law which require U.S. officials to consider multiple factors when deciding whether an immigrant will be a “public charge.” The judge agreed with the plaintiffs that Trump overstepped his authority by trying to make health care costs into the sole determining factor, Simon said.
“Such an indefinite bar to entry is not within the president’s authority,” Simon wrote.
Trump expected to challenge
Presumably, the president has some interest in looking out for American citizens, but Simon rejected Trump’s proclamation for its focus on healthcare burdens, which he said were not demonstrated, over foreign policy or national security concerns. The judge sided with the plaintiffs in fretting that the policy could restrict up to 60 percent of visa applicants from coming to the U.S.
Siding with the plaintiffs, which include seven U.S. citizens and nonprofit Latino Network, Simon had temporarily blocked the policy earlier this month. The policy would have gone into effect on December 1, but the Trump administration is now expected to appeal Simon’s injunction.
Justice Department lawyers had asked the judge to issue a stay on his ruling if he issued a preliminary injunction to give them time to prepare for an appeal, but he refused.
While Simon’s argument challenges Trump on the basis of separation of powers, the president and his allies argue that Trump has had his legitimate authority to set policy usurped by overzealous “activist” judges. Indeed, this is just the latest example of federal judges issuing nationwide injunctions to block Trump and effectively make immigration policy themselves.
No comments: