The immigration policy that is known as the Remain in Mexico program is now on a fast track to having oral arguments heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court agreed on Friday to expedite a review of the Biden administration’s plan to do away with the program.

The Remain in Mexico program formally titled the Migrant Protection Protocols (MMP) is a Trump-era policy that allows illegal migrants to be sent back across the southern border to wait on the Mexico side for their asylum cases to be heard. Joe Biden put a stop to the program when he took office, as he did with most of the previous administration’s immigration policies. Biden essentially promised open borders when he campaigned and he has shown no interest in securing the southern border against the flood of illegal migrants crossing over from the Mexican border into the United States. In earlier judgments, lower courts have sided against the Biden administration and ruled that it has not provided adequate reasons for ending the policy. The courts have ruled that the Biden administration’s procedures for asylum seekers are unlawful.

More than a year into his term as president, the DOJ is still arguing that the Trump administration’s immigration policies were inhumane. Biden’s wrong-headed approach to illegal immigration includes burying his head in the sand and pretending the Biden border crisis does not exist. The State of Texas, for example, has filed numerous lawsuits against the Biden administration, as it is the epicenter of illegal migration. The Supreme Court refused to stop a ruling by a Texas federal judge and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit last summer that compelled the Biden administration to put the program back in place. Since then, the administration has slow-walked re-instating the program while professing compliance with the court order. The administration claims the Supreme Court must review the case, arguing that lower courts usurped the powers of the president.

Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar told the Supreme Court in her filing that the lower courts have ruled that the policies and programs of the previous administration must continue “in perpetuity.”

“And they have done so despite determinations by the politically accountable Executive Branch that MPP is not the best tool for deterring unlawful migration; that MPP exposes migrants to unacceptable risks; and that MPP detracts from the Executive’s foreign-relations efforts to manage regional migration,” she wrote.

So, the justices agreed to expedite briefing in the case. It will be heard in April which is the last month for oral arguments his term.

The problem for the Biden administration became clear in Biden’s own words. When he stopped the program, he said, “I’m not making new law. I’m eliminating bad policy.” He didn’t bring forth any compelling reasons to end the program, though, at least in the legal sense, and there was not a replacement policy offered. It looks like Biden just wants to eliminate the program because Trump made the agreement with Mexico and it worked at the time. Unfortunately, it is reasonable to come to that conclusion with politicians who are so severely Trump-deranged as Joe Biden and those around him. It’s a dangerous obsession for the United States because it clouds their judgement and harms our country. An open border and absence of common-sense immigration policies and programs is dangerous for the sovereignty of America.

The Biden administration has reopened negotiations with Mexico as it has been ordered to do but it is slow-walking their actions. The administration has also made its own changes to the program.

Since the program’s return on Dec. 6, most of the asylum seekers sent back to Mexico have been young adult men from Nicaragua and Venezuela, and the Biden administration has exempted those considered vulnerable because of mental and physical health issues, advanced age, sexual orientation or gender identity.

Biden officials returned 403 asylum seekers to Mexico in December and January, according to the administration’s most recent MPP report. Nicaraguan nationals accounted for 59 percent of those enrolled, while Venezuelans were 23 percent, and Cubans 10 percent, according to the report.

President Donald Trump returned nearly 70,000 asylum seekers to Mexico in 2019 and 2020.

The Biden administration says it is complying with the district court order to restore MPP “in good faith,” and that its ability to send back migrants has been limited by Mexican authorities and the coronavirus pandemic.

The administration says it is primarily using Title 42 to expel illegal migrants. That is a public health policy recommended by the CDC and put in effect by the Trump administration at the beginning of the pandemic. It allows border officials to bypass normal proceedings and expel migrants at the border immediately. The latest change made by Team Biden is to ask illegal migrants if they are afraid to return to Mexico. If they answer yes, their response triggers additional interviews and safeguards.

About three-quarters of the asylum seekers placed in MPP have said they are afraid to go back to Mexico, but fewer than 15 percent were determined to be in danger and exempted from the program, according to the latest figures in the report.

Migrants sent back to Mexico under Trump were frequently preyed upon by kidnappers, extortionists and other criminals while waiting months for court hearings that never came.

Under the latest version of the program, U.S. and Mexican officials are working with the United Nations’ International Organization for Migration to provide safe transport to and from U.S. border crossings, as well as to secure shelter facilities in Mexico.

The problem with simply asking if the migrants are afraid to return to Mexico is that they will be coached to say yes and be allowed to remain in the United States. We know that many of the migrants are coming because of organized efforts by cartels, human and drug traffickers, and progressive groups who call themselves immigration activists. They coach the migrants on how to make a crossing into the United States and what to tell law enforcement if they are apprehended. Those going through points of entry, as they all should be doing, simply ask for asylum because that is what they have been told to do. Most of their claims don’t meet U.S. legal requirements. While most come for jobs and opportunities not available to them in their own country, that is not reason enough to make an asylum claim.

So far, SCOTUS has looked to be leaning toward keeping the program in place. Let them hear arguments in April and make a final decision to finally end the legal challenge.