U.S. Supreme Court refuses to block Trump immigration policy during pandemic

[Polybius]

Source: Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday rejected a long-shot bid by New York and two other states to suspend during the coronavirus pandemic a Trump administration immigration policy that denies legal permanent residency to certain immigrants deemed likely to require government assistance in the future.

The court turned away New York’s request, which was joined by the states of Connecticut and Vermont as well as New York City, with none of the nine justices publicly dissenting.

The states argued that the regulation is hindering efforts to combat the spread of the coronavirus “by deterring immigrants from accessing healthcare and public benefits that are essential tools for protecting the public.”

The immigration rule has been criticized by immigrant rights advocates as a “wealth test” that would disproportionately keep out non-white immigrants. It is part of President Donald Trump’s hardline immigration policies.

Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-immigration/u-s-supreme-court-refuses-to-block-trump-immigration-policy-during-pandemic-idUSKCN2263FQ

[at140]

1. Not surprised with Kavanaugh on the court.

[cstanleytech]

2. This is stupid as surely they could have simply instituted a temporary stay themselves?

[roamer65]

3. The USSC is a useless joke.

[Steelrolled]

4. Party line vote.

[former9thward]

5. There were no dissents.

[Steelrolled]

6. That would be a positive. The article is ambiguous on this...

It initially said..

The court turned away New York’s request, which was joined by the states of Connecticut and Vermont as well as New York City, with none of the nine justices publicly dissenting.

But the last paragraph said:

The court’s five conservative justices were in the majority and its four liberal justices dissented.

Perhaps this last paragraph was in regard to a discussion about a previous ruling - not so clear.

[former9thward]

7. This is the order.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/042420zr1_c18e.pdf

Two sentences long. Basically the states wanted the SC to revisit their January decision which was 5-4. The court declined.