Mullin v. Al Otro Lado · ¶72

The District Court acknowledged that our interpretation of §1252(f )(1) in Aleman Gonzalez barred this relief. 619 F. Supp. 3d, at 1045. It correctly concluded that Aleman Gonzalez “squarely” controls this case, such that the requested injunctive relief “must be construed as enjoining or restraining the operation of §1225 because it would have the effect of interfering with the Government’s efforts to operate §1225.” 619 F. Supp. 3d, at 1045 (internal quotation marks omitted; alterations adopted). After all, by requiring border officials to carry out §1225’s inspection and asylum- interview procedures for the class members, the requested injunction would “order federal officials to take” actions to “implement” or “carry out” a covered provision. Aleman Gonzalez, 596 U. S., at 550.

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.