Federal government attorney Katherine Shinners countered, claiming that the plaintiffs sought to enforce the policy that would ultimately involve the inspection and processing of migrants, a matter squarely within the scope of the Aleman decision.
Migrants Use Online App : Judge’s Ruling and Call for Clarity
In the end, Judge Schopler concluded that embracing the asylum-seekers’ argument would undermine the Aleman Gonzalez decision. He emphasized the critical question of what asylum-seekers were being turned back from, making it clear that they sought access to inspections and asylum interviews, all encompassed within the statutory framework.
The Digital Frontier of Border Management
The CBP One app, launched by Customs and Border Protection in October 2020, has recently become a linchpin in the Biden administration’s border management strategy. In May, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security introduced a policy that presumes migrants ineligible for asylum unless they schedule an appointment through the app or provide proof of asylum denial in a third country.
Legal Warriors Representing Migrants
The plaintiffs were represented by a team of dedicated legal experts, including Matthew H. Marmolejo, Ori Lev, Michelle N. Webster, Matthew E. Fenn of Mayer Brown LLP, Stephen M. Medlock, Evan Miller, Nataly Farag, Alex Rant, and Rami Abdallah E. Rashmawi of Vinson & Elkins LLP, Melissa Crow, Neela Chakravartula, and Robert Pauw of the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies, Baher Azmy, Angelo Guisado of the Center for Constitutional Rights, and Katherine Melloy Goettel, Gianna Borroto, and Suchi Mathur of the American Immigration Council.
Migrants Use Online App : The Faceoff in Legal Attire
On the opposing side, the federal government was represented by Katherine J. Shinners of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Division.
