No. of Recommendations: 2
The plaintiff argued that since he was physically present in the United States, he was entitled to a hearing on whether he qualified for asylum. That the "we" couldn't just be ICE or Border Patrol or an LEO, but it had to be a judge (whether administrative or Article III) who would afford him an opportunity, governed by due process, to submit evidence on whether his situation warranted asylum.
Yah, I'd like them to have that chance, but I'd rather they remain in Mexico. It looks like the Mexican border became too dangerous for remain in Mexico though, and we were taking to long, which would have been helped by the unpassed bill that Mike disparages, even though a similar bill was passed a year later.
