Assam CM Himanta Says 1950 Law Allows Deportation Of Illegal Foreigners: What Is Immigrants Act?
Last Updated:
Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma said: 'The SC recently said the Immigrants (Expulsion From Assam) Act, 1950, is still valid, and the state can use it to deport illegal foreigners…"
Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma recently said that his government can deport illegal foreigners using an old law passed in 1950.
He said, 'The Supreme Court recently said that the Immigrants (Expulsion From Assam) Act, 1950, is still valid, and the state government can use it to deport illegal foreigners without approaching courts…This time, if someone is identified as a foreigner, we will not have to take up the case with the foreigners' tribunal to push back the person…The existence of this law came to light recently. Therefore, the state government will use this act to pushback illegal immigrants…"
In our vigorous fight against illegal infiltration, we draw strength from a special provision which empowers DCs to identify and expel infiltrators from Assam.📍Assam Assembly pic.twitter.com/Al92MJcqDG
— Himanta Biswa Sarma (@himantabiswa) June 9, 2025
The Act states that if the Central Government is of the opinion that the presence of any person or persons who come into Assam from outside is detrimental to the interests of the general public of India or of any section of public or of any Scheduled Tribe in Assam, the Central Government may direct them to leave Assam, and issue orders to remove them from Assam.
While this power has been given to the central government, the Act empowers the central government to delegate the power to any officer of the central government or any officer of the governments of Assam, Meghalaya and Nagaland.
While upholding the validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship in Assam in the judgement issued in October 2024, the Supreme Court said, 'The provisions of the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Act, 1950 shall also be read into Section 6A and shall be effectively employed for the purpose of identification of illegal immigrants." The Supreme Court also stated the Immigrants Expulsion law is not contradictory to the of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, and both can co-exist.
THE OPPOSITION
Minority-based opposition party All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF) meanwhile has petitioned Governor Lakshman Prasad Acharya, protesting 'continued" harassment of Indian Muslims on the pretext of identifying and apprehending 'so-called illegal foreigners" in the state.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
13 minutes ago
- Hans India
Assam CM slams Rahul Gandhi for ‘betraying' nation; praises Owaisi, Tharoor
Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Monday praised several opposition leaders for defending India's stance on international platforms following the country's retaliation to the Pahalgam terror attack, while launching a scathing attack on Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, accusing him of undermining national interests. Speaking during a discussion in the Assam Assembly about the successful 'Operation Sindoor', CM Sarma acknowledged the efforts of opposition figures like Shashi Tharoor, Asaduddin Owaisi and Supriya Sule, commending them for standing up for India on foreign soil. 'I am thankful to Congress and other opposition leaders, especially Shashi Tharoor, who have strongly defended India's position abroad. Leaders like Asaduddin Owaisi and Supriya Sule also upheld the nation's honour outside the country,' CM Sarma said. However, the Chief Minister drew a sharp contrast with Rahul Gandhi, accusing the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha of betraying both the nation and the armed forces. 'Rahul Gandhi did not stand with the country. He betrayed the nation. He betrayed our armed forces,' the Assam CM alleged, criticising Rahul Gandhi for raising questions about India's military losses during the conflict. CM Sarma claimed that while Gandhi repeatedly sought details on India's casualties during the operation, he showed no concern about the damage inflicted on Pakistan. 'There's a difference between questioning losses after a military operation and doing so while it's ongoing. Rahul Gandhi chose the latter — and never once asked what losses Pakistan suffered,' the Chief Minister asserted. Operation Sindoor was launched in response to the deadly Pahalgam terror attack, and the resolution in the Assembly marked a unified acknowledgment of the Indian armed forces' role in the counter-offensive. Earlier on Monday, CM Sarma asserted that the government would speed up the process of deporting illegal immigrants from the state to safeguard the indigenous community. While speaking at the Assembly, CM Sarma said: "The state government is set to use the 1950 law to expel the illegal immigrants here. The apex court of the country has also given a nod regarding this. The administrative machinery will work accordingly to make Assam free from illegal immigrants.' The Chief Minister also pressed for safeguarding the interests of Assamese people. He said, 'I am an Assamese first and a Chief Minister later.' The Assam government has decided to invoke a little-known law from 1950 -- the Immigrants (Expulsion from Assam) Order -- to fast-track the deportation of undocumented immigrants, bypassing the usual judicial process.
Mint
27 minutes ago
- Mint
Donald Trump's new travel ban is coming into effect
The executive order banning travel from 12 countries, which comes into effect on June 9th, is more methodical than previous iterations. In his first batch of executive orders, issued on January 20th, President Donald Trump directed several top advisers to compile a list of countries with insufficient screening standards for potential migrants, which they considered to be a national-security risk. The order warned that people from these countries could be barred from coming to America. It was a signal that Mr Trump intended to resurrect the travel ban, one of the most controversial immigration policies of his first term. Most of the countries targeted in this, the fourth version of the policy, are in the Middle East and Africa. Nationals from seven other countries, including Cuba and Venezuela, face partial restrictions. A country might find itself on the travel-ban list if its citizens tend to overstay their visas; if it has refused to take back deportees; if instability within the country prevents proper screening or information sharing; or if it 'has a significant terrorist presence'. A tally from David Bier and Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank, suggests that 116,000 immigrants, and more than 500,000 visitors (including students and temporary workers) could be affected by the ban over the next four years. The way the ban was rolled out and how the proclamation was written shows how the White House has learned from its earlier failures. When Mr Trump first tried to ban travel from seven Muslim-majority countries in 2017, chaos ensued. Travellers who had already been issued visas or were approved for refugee resettlement were held at airports. Some green-card holders were detained. The ban followed through on a campaign promise for 'a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on'. Thousands of Americans, joined by Democratic Party leaders, gathered at big-city airports to protest. This was early in Mr Trump's first term and the #resistance was in full swing. Federal judges issued nationwide injunctions to block the first and second iterations of the travel ban. A third version of the policy ended up in front of the Supreme Court by virtue of Trump v Hawaii. Writing for the court, Chief Justice John Roberts found that the Immigration and Nationality Act gives the president exceptional discretion to bar certain people, including specific nationalities, from the country so long as he can argue that their presence is 'detrimental to the interests of the United States'. The ruling offered yet more evidence for what Adam Cox of New York University has termed 'immigration exceptionalism': the court's profound deference to the president where immigration policy is concerned. That opinion influenced the way the Trump administration resurrected the policy for his second term. The president halted refugee admissions in January (except for white South Africans) and waited until June to implement the new travel ban, to try to avoid the kind of protests and litigation that took place last time around. The proclamation announcing the new ban lists each country and the justification for its inclusion on the list. There are exemptions, including for green-card holders, athletes travelling to America for the World Cup or the Olympics in coming years, Afghans who worked for the American government and the immediate families of Americans, so long as they can prove their relationship. This is a 'much more defensible executive order than the iterations in Trump 1.0', says Muzaffar Chishti of the Migration Policy Institute. But just because travel ban 4.0 looks like it will hold up in court doesn't mean it makes sense. Like slapping tariffs on allies to bring back American manufacturing or declaring a foreign invasion to speed up deportations, Mr Trump's justification for banning foreigners from these countries does not hold up to much scrutiny. The president suggested that the ban would help neutralise national-security threats such as the recent attack on Jewish marchers in Boulder by an Egyptian man who overstayed his visa. Yet Egypt is not on the list. A Department of Homeland Security report confirms that most listed countries do indeed have high visa-overstay rates. But, with the exception of Haiti and Venezuela, the total number of people from restricted countries who didn't leave America when they were supposed to is relatively small. Meanwhile some 40,000 Colombians and 21,000 Brazilians, who are not subject to travel restrictions, overstayed their tourist and short-term work visas (see chart), yet their countrymen are not banned. The travel ban also sends a message. It is yet another signal—along with the detention of international students for their political views and immigration raids in big cities—that America is becoming much more hostile to foreigners. When the Supreme Court decided Trump v Hawaii in 2018, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote a concurring opinion in which he describes an 'anxious world' watching to see whether America's leaders 'adhere to the Constitution and to its meaning and its promise'. That warning looks ever more prescient.
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Formulation of central rules under Waqf Act in advanced stage: Minority Affairs Ministry
Marking 11 years of the Modi government, the Ministry of Minority Affairs on Monday highlighted the notification of the landmark Waqf (Amendment) Act among its achievements and said the formulation of central rules under the legislation is at an advanced stage. All schemes are now executed or administered through dedicated portals, ensuring complete transparency and accessibility for beneficiaries, a ministry statement said, adding it was committed to maintaining accountability, inclusivity and effective service delivery. "Following extensive deliberations by the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), the landmark Waqf Amendment Act was notified, strengthening Waqf governance and community welfare," it said. Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Este es el aliado número 1 de los hombres con disfunción. ¡Convertite en un Hombre Viril hoy mismo! Undo On June 6, 2025, the Ministry launched the UMEED Central Portal, a pivotal digital platform aimed at streamlining welfare schemes and empowering minority communities. The formulation of Central Rules under the Act is at an advanced stage, expected to further bolster the implementation of the legislation, the statement said. Live Events Secretary Chandra Shekhar Kumar chaired an event by the Ministry of Minority Affairs (MoMA) celebrating the transformative journey of the Modi government over the 11 years, with senior officials from the ministry and its affiliated bodies among those present. The celebration highlighted key milestones achieved during this period, underscoring the Ministry's commitment to transparency, inclusivity and effective service delivery, an official statement said. The ministry said rigorous third-party reviews and audits are conducted for all schemes to maintain accountability and improve effectiveness. Pointing to inclusive policy-making , the ministry said states and stakeholders have been actively involved, with their valuable inputs incorporated into policy frameworks to ensure ground realities are addressed. Secretary Chandra Shekhar Kumar highlighted these achievements as foundational steps in the Ministry's mission to uplift minority communities. He reiterated the Ministry's resolve to work diligently towards the vision of ViksitBharat@2047, pledging continued dedication to inclusive development. The event concluded with officials and employees collectively taking an oath to contribute wholeheartedly to realizing a prosperous and equitable India by 2047.
