Texas’ challenge to a rule on how immigrants seek asylum at the border will proceed after the Biden administration lost its bid to stop it.
The state plausibly showed that it would be injured by the policy, as it alleged the potential harm is amplified by “the ongoing crisis at the border,” the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas said.
The Department of Homeland Security’s “own expert report recognized” that changes to asylum processsing or procedure can help cause “substantial changes in migration behavior,” Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk said.
Texas alleges that the rule would significantly transfer authority from immigration judges to asylum officers. It would also give those officers “significant additional authority,” limit “immigration-judge review to denials of applications,” and upend “the entire adjudicatory system to the benefit of aliens,” according to the state.
The state plausibly alleged that the rule violates the US Constitution’s appointments clause, said the judge, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump.
The case is Texas v. Mayorkas, N.D. Tex., No. 2:22-CV-094-Z, 2/6/24.
To contact the reporter on this story:
To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.