The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals late Tuesday granted the Trump administration’s request to send asylum seekers back to Mexico to wait out court proceedings temporarily.
The court order reversed a decision by a San Francisco judge that would have blocked the policy — giving President Trump a temporary victory on immigration.
The case must still be considered on its merits at a lower court in San Francisco and could end up at the Supreme Court.
U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg ruled April 8 that the policy should be halted while a lawsuit, filed on behalf of 11 asylum applicants and several other organizations, proceeds…
Asylum law, conservatives point out, is intended to shield individuals from near-certain death or persecution on account of limited factors like religious or political affiliation — not poor living conditions and economic despair.
Most asylum applicants are ultimately rejected for having an insufficient or unfounded personalized fear of persecution, following a full hearing of their case before an asylum officer or an immigration judge.
My opinion? International guidelines state that refugees should apply for refuge in the first safe country they reach after leaving their home countries. For those from Central American countries such as Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, that country is Mexico, not the United States. Mexico is where these refugees belong if they are truly in need of asylum. If the asylum claims are insufficient or false, they should be sent home.
Keeping those who are seeking asylum in Mexico will prevent illegal aliens from disappearing into the USA before they can be sent back to their home countries.
There is still a case pending before the courts, which will probably end up at the Supreme Court. In the meantime, asylum seekers appearing at our southern border can be detained in Mexico.
Stella's Place 
It is good news.
LikeLiked by 3 people