3 reasons the Supreme Court's order to revive Trump's 'Remain in Mexico' policy could be toothless

A divided Supreme Court late Tuesday declined the Biden administration's request to pause a district judge's order to immediately reinstate former President Donald Trump's "Remain in Mexico" policy. President Biden had ended the program, formally called the Migrant Protection Protocols, on his first day in office. The Biden administration said it will take steps to comply with the ruling while it challenges the district judge's order, and immigrant advocates warned of another looming humanitarian crisis.
But there are at least three reasons the judicial intervention in immigration policy won't have any immediate effect.
First, Mexico is under no obligation to follow the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling, and the U.S. can't start returning non-Mexican asylum seekers across the border without Mexico's permission. None of the 71,000 asylum seekers returned to Mexico under Trump's policy were Mexican.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
The Supreme Court told "the Biden administration that they have to make a good faith effort to restart this program," NPR Mexico City correspondent James Frederick explained Wednesday. "So in theory, they could ask Mexico to restart it. Mexico could say no. And the Biden administration can turn around to the Supreme Court and say, we made efforts, but it's not possible because of Mexico. So in theory, the policy could die right there."
Some analysts argue that, given Mexico's cooperation with Trump's hard-line policies, a hard no is unlikely. But the Biden administration also has broad discretion over how it carries out a court-revived policy. "It could reimplement it on a very small scale for families who meet certain criteria from very specific nationalities, or it could do something broader," Migration Policy Institute analyst Jessica Bolter tells The Associated Press.
The third reason there should be no immediate effect is the pandemic. "The Trump administration placed roughly 6,000 migrants into the program from April 2020 to January 2021," out of 71,000 total, AP reports. Starting in April 2020, the Trump administration began blocking migrants from seeking asylum inside the U.S. through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's invocation of Title 42. The CDC renewed Title 42 in early August.
The Biden administration "has emphasized that Title 42 is not an immigration authority, but a public health authority, and its continued use is dictated by the CDC's analysis of the public health situation," AP reports. The end result is that most migrants still have to remain in Mexico.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Peter has worked as a news and culture writer and editor at The Week since the site's launch in 2008. He covers politics, world affairs, religion and cultural currents. His journalism career began as a copy editor at a financial newswire and has included editorial positions at The New York Times Magazine, Facts on File, and Oregon State University.
-
'With every technological advance, there are risks'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
5 of the best platonic TV friendships
the week recommends Maintaining boundaries has proven tricky for all but the most committed of buddies on the small screen
-
Why are global postal services cutting off package delivery to the US?
Today's Big Question 'Uncertainty' around new tariff rules halts small-dollar imports
-
DOGE put Social Security data at risk, official says
Speed Read DOGE workers made the personal information of hundreds of millions of Americans vulnerable to identity theft
-
Court rejects Trump suit against Maryland US judges
Speed Read Judge Thomas Cullen, a Trump appointee, said the executive branch had no authority to sue the judges
-
Trump expands National Guard role in policing
Speed Read The president wants the Guard to take on a larger role in domestic law enforcement
-
Trump says he's firing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook
Speed Read The move is likely part of Trump's push to get the central bank to cut interest rates
-
Abrego released from jail, faces Uganda deportation
Speed Read The wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego García is expected to be detained at an ICE check-in and deported to Uganda
-
Trump arms National Guard in DC, threatens other cities
speed read His next targets are Chicago, New York and Baltimore
-
Judge: Trump's US attorney in NJ serving unlawfully
Speed Read The appointment of Trump's former personal defense lawyer, Alina Habba, as acting US attorney in New Jersey was ruled 'unlawful'
-
Third judge rejects DOJ's Epstein records request
Speed Read Judge Richard Berman was the third and final federal judge to reject DOJ petitions to unseal Epstein-related grand jury material