Don’t expect a real border fix

Re “On Title 42, the Supreme Court rules for a partisan agenda,” Opinion, Jan. 2

Erwin Chemerinsky, the UC Berkeley School of Law dean, argues that the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling extending Title 42 because of the COVID-19 emergency is no reason to shut out migrants from entering the country.

While it’s humane to allow migrants fleeing from violence and chaos to enter the U.S., it doesn’t make sense to allow them into the country when the facilities that have been set up to process these millions of people are overwhelmed.

While the immigration situation at the southern borders is a total mess requiring immediate legislative action, the new Republican House will prioritize probing Hunter Biden. Talk about putting political retribution over real problem solving.

Charles Blankson

Menifee

How could a person of Chemerinsky’s stature fail to mention anywhere is his entire op-ed article the fact that, although President Biden is trying to end Title 42, he has extended the national emergency on COVID-19 to March?

No matter what the dean (or a single federal judge) may think about the pandemic today, the fact remains that a U.S. state of emergency on COVID-19 is currently in effect.

Chemerinsky notes that Title 42 has kept 2.5 million migrants from entering the country. However, published reports have shown that there were more than 2 million migrant detentions at the southern border last year. Many immigrants made it into the United States.

The dean is probably correct that many of the 19 states attempting to intervene in the case are not motivated by concerns around COVID-19. Maybe none are. They are probably acting because their states are being overwhelmed by the migrant crossings that the federal government has failed to stop.

So, God bless them.

George A. Vandeman Los Angeles

The Trump administration ruse to restrain immigrant arrivals at U.S. borders through Title 42 is “senseless,” as Chermerinsky points out. To use a false premise because of the failure of immigration policy betrays political bias on the part of five justices, enough to sustain the obsolete policy.

The goals of the Supreme Court are to protect the Constitution, not to implement partisan policies that no longer have relevance.

People seeking asylum have the right, according to international law, to cross borders in search of safety and security. As Chemerinsky writes, the states looking to keep Title 42 are using it “as a pretext to close the borders.”

State attorneys general and the Supreme Court justices who justify maintaining Title 42 betray the public’s trust that they will enforce the law and protect the Constitution. It is alarming that decisions are being made by some whose disregard of the law shows they are pursuing their personal and political agendas, not the common good.

Lenore Navarro Dowling

Los Angeles