The Trump administration has won its appeal in the Ninth Circuit court to keep its remain in Mexico program intact. It used to be that one of my great aunt of the US and then claimed asylum they would be released in the United States as their claim was being processed under this new rule, I'll have to remain in Mexico. The Trump administration is also going to be imposing new restrictions and regulations. For those King Asylum, entering the southern border. Now the ruling in circuit is actually kind of unusual because the ports considered to be pretty liberal. In fact, Donald Trump has publicly criticized the court more than one occasion over their past rulings, at least in this instance. It seems that Trump has his victory, but the problem of the price is actually getting pretty serious to the point where even the New York Times Editorial Board has called on Congress to give the White House money they're asking for the amount of migrant, great apprehension the border is higher today, then, in a very, very long time, a record setting numbers, so it seems

like the migrant crisis is a real issue and it needs to be dealt with today. Let's take a look at this appeals court ruling and will take a look at some of the new restriction regulations being imposed on asylum seekers at the southern border. Before It started make sure you follow me on mine at mines, dot, com, Slash TIM cast, I've done, girl, videos about censorship, and I'm sure most of you are aware that they've kind of been banned happy for a little while mines is a good backup channel and it's a pretty good platform. So follow me there, I'm hoping to break one hundred thousand subscribers with your help, I'm very close. Now, if you want support. This video just shared on social media at work that, like button from the New York Times, the trumpet Miss Russian can keep sending asylum seekers to Mexico Court rules. A federal appeals court, Tuesday rolled at the Trump administration, can continue to enforce APOLLO that returns asylum seekers to Mexico, while they wait for an immigration courts to decide their case. The ruling by the United States Court of appeals in the ninth circuit allows the government to continue enforcing the policy formally called

the migration protection protocols, while the legal issues of the case are being decided, it wasn't unusual victory for the Trump administration in the liberal, leaning court, though the judges did not rule on the merits of the case. The story says the remain in Mexico program is intended to back down on asylum claims which have soared as central american migrants have crossed United States southwestern border in ever larger numbers over the past, but forcing asylum applicants to remain and possibly dangerous conditions in Mexico represents a major break from long standing practice that permitted most migrants requested asylum to live in the US while they awaited come of their case. The former homeland security Secretary, who introduced the policy here's the Nielsen, has said that many asylum applicants have skipped their court dates and disappeared into the country. Legal advocates for migrants have denounced the policy saying a spike in violence and overwhelm shelters in Mexico

border towns put the migrants at rest. The ninth Circuit Court's decision is devastating subjecting vulnerable families to this program is inexcusable, said: Taylor Levy an immigration lawyer in El Paso. Who has escorted several migrants to court in recent weeks. However, it seems that a three judge panel concluded that allowing the policy to remain in place was not unreasonable, saying The plaintiffs fear substantial injury upon returning to Mexico, but the likelihood of harm is somewhat by the mexican government's commitment to honor its international obligations and to grant humanitarian status and work permits to individuals returned the appeals court judge said the story does point out, however, that a federal district judge in San Francisco Richard Seaboard first ruled on April eighth, two blocks the policy from taking effect send the law did not authorize the Department of Homeland Security to act. It he also found the program lacked.

Eight cards to insure migrants were not returned to a place where they faced risk. However, according to CBS News on April, thirteenth appeals court rules, trumps remain in Mexico. Policy can proceed for now, so it seems like we have a pretty strange back and forth with so far trump winning on more than one front and as for the claim by the judges that returning these migrants to Mexico may be safe, we see this story from the Wall Street Journal. Just today, Mexico proposes redirecting US security aide to address my gray crisis. The Wall Street Journal says mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez. Obrador wants to take the security aide. His country received from the US and use the money study for development plan for Central American and Southern Mexico to help stop migration. What we are seeing an effort by the mexican government to try and aid the migrant crisis they say,

the story that is unlikely. The US will redirect funds, as Mister Lopez Obrador would like in March President Trump blaming central american countries for not doing enough to stop migration said he would cut some four hundred and fifty million dollars of development. An security aid to those countries, Lopez Obrador, is in a tough bind when you want to engage the Us and it's not where President Trump is whether or not Mexico was able to redirect funds is not so much the point as they are still trying to help many migrants with shelters and work permits, and because of that, the court has ruled it won't be on the safe for them to return to Mexico. But there is another point brought up, often by trump supporters and those who support the president's plan in this regard, and it's if the people are fleeing countries in Central America, then they're not facing those same dangers in Mexico. If there are particular groups in Honduras or Guatemala, targeting them they're going to be safe in Mexico, where they are well, they

right and Mexico is offering many of these people jobs and a chance for a life in Mexico. But the Trump Administration is doing a lot more than just sending people back to Mexico. According your times, asylum seekers facing new restraints under latest trump orders. This story from just over a week ago, says President Trump on Monday, ordered new restrictions on asylum seekers. The mexican border, including application fees and work, permit restraints and directed that cases. In the already clogged immigration courts be settled within a hundred eighty days. In a memo sent to Kevin Mikell in the acting secretary of Homeland Security and attorney general, William P Bar the president took another step to reshape asylum law, which is a term and by Congress from the White House, the New York Times quotes Trump as saying the purpose of this memorandum is to strengthen asylum procedures to say,

guard our system against rampant abuse of our asylum process. It goes on to say the memo did not make clear how the plans would be carried out in immigration courts. More than eight hundred thousand cases are pending, with average, wait time of almost two years: the Trump Administration added to that backlog. When directed immigration, authorities to re open thousands of non violent removal cases and that specifically called for the authorities to set a fee for asylum seekers filing their claims and for their work permit applications. Many people on the right argue that most of these asylum cases are fraudulent and that people just want to be released into the US and then they disappear and they don't attend court, though you have many people on the left, arguing that, if someone needs asylum, we can't restrict that it's a very challenging system. But what is true is that the amount of migrants trying to enter the USA has been escalating rather dramatically so much so that the New York Times issued an editorial statement siding with the White House telling Congress to give them the money.

I need to help solve this problem in a store that I personally found kind of shocking. The New York Times writes this Congress give Trump his border money. No, it's not for building the wall, and this is by the editorial board. They say the editorial board represents the opinions of the board. Its editor and the publisher It is separate from the news room and the op ed section. The story starts by saying that Trump is right. There is a crisis at the southern border, just not the one he rants about, there's no pressing national security threat, no invasion of murders, drug cartels or terrorists. No matter how often Mr Trump deliver such warnings, they bear little resemblance to the truth, but as record numbers of central american families fleeing violence and poverty in their homelands. They are overwhelming United States border systems feeling a monetary in crisis of overcrowding, disease and chaos. The border patrol is now averaging one thousand two hundred daily arrests with many migrants arriving, exhausted and sick. Last week, a teenage boy from Guatemala died in government custody, the third death of a minor, since

number, as resources are strained and the system buckles the misery gross. They say something needs to be done soon. Unfortunately, political gamesmanship once again threatens to hold up desperately needed resource since the story says. The White House and Congress request for four point: five billion dollars in emergency funding to help manage the search, but they point out that for the Democrats, it's a non starter. They go I say that because several hundred million dollars would go toward shoring up boards, the operations managed by ISIS. This for Democrats is a non starter. The New York Times does. Definitely bring up a lot of really important points, and it is fast and to see that they are siding with the White House on this issue, but they do bring up other really important issues which need to be kind of fleshed out for one. They say people are fleeing violence and poverty. Poverty is not a reason for you to see.

In fact, according to the US citizenship and immigration services, they say every year, people come to the: U S seeking protection, because they have suffered persecution or fear that they will suffer persecution due to race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group political opinion on the Wikipedia page for asylum. In the US they say asylum has two basic requirements. First, an asylum applicant must establish that he or she fears persecution in their home country. Second, the applicant must prove that he or she would be persecuted on account of one of five protected grounds. Raced nationality, political opinion or particular social group. So yes, there are many people fleeing violence, but if it's violence related to something outside

categories: you are not eligible for asylum. Many people are fleeing gang violence. Gangs want them to join that may be protected because it is a particular social group. However, poverty would not be covered if you're filling your country simply because you're poor, then you will not be eligible for asylum. So there is the problem, then that some people may claim asylum falsely and then try and just enter the country. It's a serious problem. I don't know the right answer is what I do know is we have a serious fight and even then, times a sad give trump the money he needs. We need to figure out how to deal with the migrant crisis, because the amount of people coming into this country has been increasing rather dramatically. There are more people being detained now in the first five months of the year that, for the in, hi thirty of last year- and it seems like it's just going up. The New York Times pointed out one thousand two hundred people per day. Something bad is happening way to make sure we don't encourage people take long, dangerous journeys where they end up sixty hydrated and possibly even dying so far under the policy around fifteen on

people have been returned to Mexico. The store for the New York Times says that mexican officials have said that, while they disagree with the policy which they have described as a unilateral decision by the Trump administration, they would accept the asylum seekers, protect their rights and allow them to lawfully remain in Mexico, while their cases wind through the american courts. They also added the return. Asylum seekers are granted multiple entry visas enabling them to travel to the? U S, to attend court and then return to MAX. No asylum cases can take two years to be completed. The challenge for me in this debate is that unless the Democrats come forward with a plan, something that actually makes sense instead of calling it racist or immoral, I don't know what Just to say. All I know right now is that the mexican government is doing what they can to help these migrants and asylum seekers and the Trump Administration is making them wait in Mexico. What else there? like I mentioned earlier, we need to make sure we're not incentivizing people to go on dangerous journeys and hurt themselves if they don't qualify for asylum. Of course, there's an argument from the left that we should expand

asylum to cover those who are poor or otherwise don't qualify for asylum. I'm not going make that argument. Tell you what I think and what's going on and we'll leave it there, but you can. Let me know what you think in the much below will the conversation going, Follow me on mines at TIM, cast, stay tuned new videos every day at four hundred pm, Eastern and I'll have more video for you on my second channel Youtube com, slash ten cast news starting at six pm eastern that's running out, and I will see you all next time.