U.S. Supreme Court Decisions on Immigration Scrutinized

ImpactoAZ kicks off its second season featuring a discussion with our friend and supporter David López, a law professor with an impressive body of work in employment and civil rights law and considerable knowledge on the workings of the court.

Respected civil rights and employment law professor David López recently shared his analysis of three recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions dealing with immigration issues.

Two of those decisions may be setting U.S. policy on a dangerous course that doesn't show any support - much less compassion - for immigrants.

Lopez weighed in on rulings that kept birthright citizenship in place in accordance with the country's historical precedent on granting birthright citizenship; gave the Trump administration the power to dismantle Temporary Protective Status for refugees, namely Haitains and Syrians; and gave Homeland Security's the power to turn back immigrants seeking to apply for asylum at the southern border before they reach U.S. soil.

In the Temporary Protected Status ruling, López says the court acted as if racially derogatory statements and comments by several member Trump administration members, including Trump himself, aimed at Haitain immigrants was never acknowledged. The omission was so glaring that Justice Elena Kagan felt the need to point it out in her dissenting opinion.

"To me it signaled that when they talk about colorblindness, they mean blindness to racism, right," López said.

And while the Justices rebuffed the Trump administration's move to not grant citizenship to those born in the U.S. to undocumented parents, the administration has said it will seek congressional support to reverse that decision.

To view the full podcast, visit https://youtu.be/ceqiw4e4sXs?si=j1R41i4_QXCl9gwD