Mark Brnovich Opposes Stay in Judgement Involving a Dangerous Department of Homeland Security Policy

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich led a coalition of 19 states on Wednesday in filing an amicus brief at the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in opposition to the federal government’s application for a stay regarding the U.S. Department of Homeland Securities’ (DHS) dangerous Permanent Guidance policy.

“The federal government’s plan would intentionally and substantially increase illegal immigration when border crossings are already at unprecedented levels,” Brnovich said in a press release. “Instead of seeking solutions, the Biden administration is attempting to further inflame the crisis.”

Brnovich and the other states sent the brief in support of Texas and Louisiana in Texas v. United States, which centers around the Permanent Guidance policy. Brnovich says Permanent Guidance “halts nearly all arrests and deportations, even for those convicted of crimes, and drastically ties the hands of immigration officers.”

Brnovich’s brief outlined multiple points in opposition to the DHS’s application for a stay.

The first is the current situation at the southern border. The brief points to statistics from the DHS, which demonstrate a “historic surge” of border encounters in 2022; reportedly, the DHS admitted that July 2021 had the highest number of monthly encounters in decades. Since then, March, April, and May of 2022 have all seen higher encounter numbers. Brnovich further states that the DHS’s record of encounters at the southern border is “unfortunately only tell a small part of the story.” The DHS allegedly fails to encounter most illegal border crossers, upwards of three-fourths of all border crossers.

Furthermore, the brief outlines that the DHS is unlawfully permitting migrants entry into the U.S. even though they are supposed to be subject to mandatory detention if they are not immediately removed.

“For the vast majority of migrants unlawfully entering the United States, actual enforcement of U.S. immigration laws by DHS is thus the rare exception, rather than the rule,” according to the brief.

Moreover, Brnovich argues that the DHS has systematically violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) for 17 months and that the violations “underscore why DHS’s requested stay is particularly unwarranted here.”

Point three states that the Permanent Guidance policy harms states by increasing law enforcement costs. The policy has allegedly resulted in the U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) lifting detainers on criminals who have completed their sentences. However, these individuals are released onto the streets rather than being removed from the country. Brnovich argues that because the Permanent Guidance policy releases criminals into states, they will incur additional law enforcement and incarceration costs and crime-based losses.

“The border is in crisis. This DHS Administration is lawless. And the states continue to suffer escalating irreparable harm as the border crisis continually intensifies to successive, ever-more-unprecedented levels of illegal crossings,” the brief says. “To prevent the Final Memo [Permanent Guidance] from becoming a final countdown to complete loss of operational control at the southwestern border, this Court should deny DHS’s application for a stay.”

The Arizona Sun Times reported this is not the first brief Brnovich has led in opposition to the Permanent Guidance policy.

– – –

Neil Jones is a reporter for The Arizona Sun Times and The Star News Network. Follow Neil on Twitter. Email tips to [email protected].



Related posts