A Major Setback for Biden’s Immigration Policy
A recent ruling by U.S. District Judge John Campbell Barker has dealt a serious blow to the Biden administration’s “parole in place” program. This policy aimed to allow hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants married to American citizens, along with their stepchildren, to pursue legal status.
Judge Barker’s Ruling
On Thursday, Judge Barker, who was appointed by Trump, ruled that the program violated federal immigration law. His decision came after a lawsuit from a coalition of 16 Republican-led states that sought to block this initiative before it could take effect.
The Administration’s Intentions vs. Legal Boundaries
The Biden administration rolled out this “parole in place” policy back in June, claiming it would help families facing complicated immigration situations. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) estimated that around 550,000 undocumented immigrants could benefit from this program. However, critics argue that the actual number might be much higher.
States like Texas, Florida, and Missouri have been vocal opponents of this plan. They argue that the administration overstepped its authority by implementing such a significant policy without Congressional approval—essentially creating what they see as unauthorized amnesty.
Legal Authority and Congressional Oversight
In his ruling, Judge Barker made it clear: DHS does not have the statutory authority to grant broad-based parole to undocumented immigrants. His reasoning emphasizes an important point: while streamlining immigrant family statuses is a worthy goal, bypassing established immigration laws is not acceptable.
This decision reinforces the argument among conservatives that any major changes in immigration policy need oversight and approval from Congress—not just unilateral action from the executive branch.
State Concerns Over Border Security
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey expressed his frustration with how things are unfolding at the border under Biden’s watch. He believes these actions have only exacerbated what many conservatives view as a growing “border crisis.” Bailey argues state-level intervention is necessary because he feels the federal government has failed to secure our southern border effectively.
The Conservative Response
Gene Hamilton, executive director of America First Legal, echoed these concerns when he described Biden’s parole program as an attempt at “the largest administrative amnesty in American history.” This claim has rallied conservative opposition against the initiative and sparked heated debates across political lines.
Biden’s Plan Under Fire During Elections
This issue became particularly contentious during recent election cycles. President-elect Donald Trump frequently criticized it on campaign stops across America. In Wisconsin specifically, he argued that Biden’s plan lacked both legal grounding and popular support among Americans.
Trump promised voters he would dismantle this policy on “day one” if elected president again and pledged stricter enforcement measures—including what he calls “the largest deportation initiative” ever seen in U.S. history.
Leave a Comment