Supreme Court Permits Fast-Track Removal of Asylum-Seekers
Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post)
We ran the numbers: There are 1489 news articles covering this topic. 53% (782) are left leaning, 36% (535) center, 12% (172) right leaning.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled that asylum-seekers have no right to a federal court hearing before being removed from the United States. While left-leaning articles highlight that the decision would affect tens of thousands of people, right-leaning articles highlight that the Trump administration has proposed legislation that would make it harder for people to be granted asylum.
The Washington Post published a left-leaning article highlighting that Justice Samuel A. Alito wrote the majority, focusing on the historical meaning of the constitutional right to challenge detention. Lee Gelernt of the American Civil Liberties Union said the decision would affect tens of thousands of people “facing flawed deportation orders who can be forcibly removed with no judicial oversight.”
The Hill published a centrist article reporting that a majority of justices ruled that Congress should have the power to authorize executive agencies to remove asylum seekers without a hearing in federal court. Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented, writing that the decision “increases the risk of erroneous immigration decisions that contravene governing statutes and treaties.”
A right-leaning article by New York Post highlights that the Trump administration has proposed legislation that would make it harder for people to be given asylum, among other immigration restrictions, to preserve jobs in the U.S. during the pandemic. The case involved Sri Lankan farmer, Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam, who fled persecution as a member of the country’s Tamil minority but could not persuade immigration officials that he would be in danger if he returned home.
From the left
Supreme court agrees with Trump administration on limits on asylum seekers
Washington Post