Oral arguments heard in immigration and asylum-seekers
On Monday the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the cases of Nasrallah v. Barr, Attorney General. and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) v. Thuraissigiam.
The case of Nasrallah v. Barr seeks to determine if federal courts have the jurisdiction to review a challenge of an immigration court decision to deny relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Congress has passed several laws preventing judicial review of immigration courts, so this case will determine if the CAT takes precedent over those laws.
The Court will be seeking to determine if asylum-seekers are able to challenge the mistakes that were made during an expedited removal process in the case of DHS v. Thuraissigiam. The expedited removal process applies to any presumed non-citizens within 100 miles of the U.S. border.
As the Lord Leads, Pray with Us…
- That God would lead the Justices of the Court to have wisdom on how to decide these cases.
- For wisdom for the Court on which cases to hear in the future.
- That the result of these rulings would bring about a more just society in the future.
Sources: SCOTUSblog, Supreme Court
