Tuesday, a federal magistrate halted the Biden administration's new asylum regulation for migrants.

The policy, which was instituted in May following the expiration of Title 42, denies asylum to migrants who transit a safe country en route to the United States without seeking protection there, as The Daily Caller reported.

The American Civil Liberties Union, the National Immigrant Justice Center, and the UC Hastings Center for Gender and Refugee Studies filed a lawsuit on May 11, shortly after the policy went into effect.

Obama-appointed U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Judge Jon S. Tigar ruled that the policy is "contrary to law" because it violates the intent of Congress.

What the Judge Had to Say

“The Court concludes that the Rule is contrary to law because it presumes ineligible for asylum noncitizens who enter between ports of entry, using a manner of entry that Congress expressly intended should not affect access to asylum,” Tigar wrote.

“The Rule is also contrary to law because it presumes ineligible for asylum noncitizens who fail to apply for protection in a transit country, despite Congress’s clear intent that such a factor should only limit access to asylum where the transit country actually presents a safe option.”

“The Rule operates just as the Trump administration’s prior asylum bans did: Asylum seekers subject to the Rule—all non-Mexicans—are categorically barred unless they satisfy one of the enumerated and limited conditions or exceptions,” the lawsuit filed in May alleges.

Tigar stayed the order for fourteen days so the Biden administration could file an appeal. The Biden administration filed an appeal with the Ninth Circuit shortly after the judge's ruling.

DHS Secretary's Take

Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas stated in a statement that they "strongly disagree with today's ruling and are confident that the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways rule is lawful."

“To be clear, because the district court temporarily stayed its decision, today’s ruling does not change anything immediately,” he said.

“It does not limit our ability to deliver consequences for unlawful entry. Do not believe the lies of smugglers.

"Those who fail to use one of the many lawful pathways we have expanded will be presumed ineligible for asylum and, if they do not have a basis to remain, will be subject to prompt removal, a minimum five-year bar on admission, and potential criminal prosecution for unlawful reentry.”

Concern about the issue of migration at the Southern border have been a topic of conversation amongst Americans and their elected representatives.

Accusations against the Biden administration and Secretary Mayorkas have been flying since illegal immigration spiked under the current administration.