https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GlfsQAFO2_-dqDEVpkvKQ-zQWF8Mj5-r/view?usp=sharing
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AMARILLO DIVISION
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AMARILLO DIVISION
THE STATE OF TEXAS
THE STATE OF TEXAS and THE STATE OF MISSOURI, Plaintiffs,
v.
JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., in his official capacity as President of the United States of America; The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, in his official capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of Homeland Security; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; TROY MILLER, in his official capacity as Acting Commissioner of the United States Customs and Border Protection; UNITED STATES CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION; TAE JOHNSON, in his official capacity as Acting Director of the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement; UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT; TRACY RENAUD, in her official capacity as Acting Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services; and UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, Defendants.
COMPLAINT
No. 2:21-cv-00067-Z
Filed 04/13/21
In the first several hours following President Biden’s inauguration, the incoming Administration suspended the successful Migrant Protection Protocols (“MPP”). These regulations required individuals who both lacked a legal basis to be present in the United States and who had passed through Mexico en route to the United States to remain in Mexico pending adjudication of their immigration claims. Prior to the MPP, individuals passing through Mexico could enter the United States, raise asylum claims, expect to be released into the United States in violation of statutory requirements mandating their detention, and stay in the U.S. for years pending the resolution of their claims—even though most were ultimately rejected in court. MPP changed the incentives for economic migrants with weak asylum claims, and therefore reduced the flow of aliens—including aliens who are victims of human trafficking—to the southern border.
CLAIMS
COUNT I
(Arbitrary and Capricious Agency Action—Lack of Reasoned Decision-Making)
COUNT II
(Arbitrary and Capricious Agency Action—Failure to Consider State Reliance Interests)
COUNT III
(Arbitrary and Capricious Agency Action—Failure to Consider Alternative Approaches)
COUNT IV
(Arbitrary and Capricious Agency Action—No Stated Basis for Agency Action)
COUNT V
(Failure to Provide Notice to, and Consult with, Texas)
COUNT VI
(Violation of Section 1225)
COUNT VII
(Failure to Take Care that the Laws be Faithfully Executed)
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court:
a. Hold unlawful and set aside the January 20 Memorandum suspending new enrollments into the MPP;
b. Declare that the January 20 Memorandum is unlawful;
c. Issue preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining Defendants nationwide from enforcing or implementing the January 20 Memorandum suspending new enrollments into the MPP;
d. Award Texas and Missouri the costs of this action and reasonable attorney’s fees; and
e. Award such other and further relief as the Court deems equitable and just.
REFERENCES:
KEN PAXTON
ATTORNEY GENERAL of TEXAS
April 13, 2021 | Press Release | Immigration AG Pax¬ton Sues Biden Administration to Reinstate Migrant Protection ProtocolsState of Texas v. Joseph R Biden (2:21-cv-00067)
District Court, N.D. Texas
No comments:
Post a Comment