Posted on 05/01/2025 5:29:14 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to strip temporary legal protections from 350,000 Venezuelans, potentially exposing them to being deported.
The Justice Department asked the high court to put on hold a ruling from a federal judge in San Francisco that kept in place Temporary Protected Status for the Venezuelans that would have otherwise expired last month.
The status allows people already in the United States to live and work legally because their native countries are deemed unsafe for return due to natural disaster or civil strife.
A federal appeals court had earlier rejected the administration’s request.
President Donald Trump’s administration has moved aggressively to withdraw various protections that have allowed immigrants to remain in the country, including ending TPS for a total of 600,000 Venezuelans and 500,000 Haitians. TPS is granted in 18-month increments.
The emergency appeal to the high court came the same day a federal judge in Texas ruled illegal the administration’s efforts to deport Venezuelans under an 18th-century wartime law. The cases are not related.
The protections had been set to expire April 7, but U.S. District Judge Edward Chen ordered a pause on those plans. He found that the expiration threatened to severely disrupt the lives of hundreds of thousands of people and could cost billions in lost economic activity.
Chen, who was appointed to the bench by Democratic President Barack Obama, found the government hadn’t shown any harm caused by keeping the program alive.
But Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote on behalf of the administration that Chen’s order impermissibly interferes with the administration’s power over immigration and foreign affairs.
In addition, Sauer told the justices, people affected by ending the protected status might have other legal options to try to remain in the country because the “decision to terminate TPS is not...
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
Venezuelans shouldn’t have temporary legal protections in the United States.
I bet the Court screws him.
We’re abut to find out who’s fishin’ and who’s cuttin’ bait.
But when Trump tries to repatriate criminal illegals, the same courts immediately spring in to action
If Robert's doe not immediately put a stop to this, he will be responsible for destroying the legitimacy of tje Judicial branch by failing to protect the very citizens who indirectly put them there.
In government speak, temporary means in perpetuity.
And let Garcia rot in his home of El Salvador and blame it on the SCOTUS for being a bunch of Constitution trashing idiots running a ACME Human Trafficking unit full of “Coyotes” in Black robes. America hating piggies.
The four females will protect their Venezuelan children, and Roberts will probably join him
I’ll go further and predict “conservative” Barrett votes with Jackson and Sotomayor
Question for SCOTUS justices:
By an executive order he may or may not have known he was making, President Biden gave blanket parole to immigrants from Venezuela, Cuba, and Haiti, bypassing the individual vetting required by law. Should President Trump be able to revoke that blanket parole by executive order?
Did Chen cite which law says a President can’t make any decisions that disrupt people’s lives?
“We’re abut to find out who’s fishin’ and who’s cuttin’ bait.”
It didn’t take Trump AG long to respond.
Will Roberts and a few others fish out again or stand up for US citizens and the President they elected?
The will and rights of the People must come before the “rights of illegal aliens.”
US citizens should not have to foot the bill for endless illegal aliens to go through the courts either!
I know Thomas and Alito won’t fish out.
If the Court opposes the President on this, I hope Trump moves to pack the court. Put 6 new justices on that bench. A majority of 8 should be easily achieved. Then go into over-drive with reforms.
Did requiring the clot shot for federal govt employees disrupt any lives? When did a judge tell Biden he couldn’t make that decision because it would disrupt people’s lives? Or when were mandated business or church closures because of Covid-19 ruled unlawful because it would slow down revenue?
There should be a lot of precedent to blow this decision out of the water. Especially since the judge who is supposed to be interpreting the laws has no law he can cite that says what he just said the laws mean.
Or did he just say, “Screw the laws. I’m a judge; I can say whatever I want and it is magically then the law of the land!!!”?
Because if that’s what he said in effect, any SCOTUS that allows it to stand belongs in Gitmo. Big time.
Trouble is, until the corruption in DC is put to an end and there are penalties for lawlessness, it doesn’t matter who gets on the court. They’re all going to be drugged and videotaped raping a child at one of the elite parties and then the cabal will keep control of everything. That’s how DC works, and it ain’t changing until heads roll.
“The Trump administration on Thursday asked the Supreme Court to strip temporary legal protections from 350,000 Venezuelans, potentially exposing them to being deported.”
Well it looks like the deportation efforts have been cancelled. We must welcome our 15 million new citizens.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIANATIONAL TPS ALLIANCE, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
KRISTI NOEM, et al.,
Defendants.Case No. 25-cv-01766-EMC
Docket No. 16
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO POSTPONE
I. INTRODUCTION
At issue is whether this Court should temporarily postpone actions by Kristi Noem, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, taken against over 600,000 Venezuelan nationals who have legal status to reside and work temporarily in the United States. The Secretary’s actions will shortly strip nearly 350,000 of these residents of their protection under the Temporary Protected Status (“TPS”) program, subjecting them to possible imminent deportation back to Venezuela, a country so rife with economic and political upheaval and danger that the State Department has categorized Venezuela as a “Level 4: Do Not Travel” country “due to the high risk of wrongful detentions, terrorism, kidnapping, the arbitrary enforcement of local laws, crime, civil unrest, poor health infrastructure.”
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/traveladvisories/venezuela-travel-advisory.html (last visited 3/30/2025). The unprecedented action of vacating existing TPS (a step never taken by any previous administration in the 35 years of the TPS program), initiated just three days after Secretary Noem took office, reverses actions taken by the Biden administration to extend temporary protection of Venezuelan nationals that have been in place since 2021.
Although the Secretary’s actions appear predicated on negative stereotypes casting class-wide aspersions on their character (insinuating they were released from Venezuelan prisons and mental health facilities and imposed huge financial burdens on local communities), the undisputed record establishes that Venezuelan TPS beneficiaries, in fact, have higher education attainment than most U.S. citizens (40-54% have bachelor degrees), have high labor participation rates (80-96%), earn nearly all their personal income (96%), and annually contribute billions of dollars to the U.S. economy and pay hundreds of millions, if not billions, in social security taxes. They also have lower rates of criminality than the general U.S. population.
Following Secretary Noem’s actions, Plaintiffs filed the instant action. Plaintiffs are seven individuals from Venezuela who are TPS holders, plus the National TPS Alliance (“NTPSA”). The NTPSA is “a member-led organization representing Temporary Protected Status (‘TPS’) holders across the country.” Compl. ¶ 2. NTPSA’s members include over 84,000 Venezuelan TPS holders living in all fifty states and the District of Columbia. See Jimenez Decl. ¶ 13. Among other things, NTPSA “engages in advocacy to defend TPS and win a path to permanent status for TPS holders.”1 Jimenez Decl. ¶ 21.
Having considered the parties’ briefs and accompanying submissions, the oral argument of counsel, and the views of Amici (a collection of various states, cities, and counties throughout the United States),2 the Court hereby GRANTS Plaintiffs’ motion. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that the Secretary’s action threatens to: inflict irreparable harm on hundreds of thousands of persons whose lives, families, and livelihoods will be severely disrupted, cost the United States billions in economic activity, and injure public health and safety in communities throughout the United States. At the same time, the government has failed to identify any real countervailing harm in continuing TPS for Venezuelan beneficiaries. Plaintiffs have also shown they will likely succeed in demonstrating that the actions taken by the Secretary are unauthorized by law, arbitrary and capricious, and motivated by unconstitutional animus. For these reasons, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ request to postpone the challenged actions pending final adjudication of the merits of this case.
[snip]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUITNATIONAL TPS ALLIANCE; et al.,
Plaintiffs - Appellees,
v.
KRISTI NOEM, in her official capacity as
Secretary of Homeland Security; et al.,
Defendants - Appellants.No. 25-2120
D.C. No.
3:25-cv-01766-EMC
Northern District of California,
San FranciscoORDER
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and DESAI, Circuit Judges.
The emergency motion (Docket Entry No. 3) to stay the district court’s March 31, 2025 order is denied. See Nken v. Holder, 556 U.S. 418, 434 (2009) (defining standard for stay pending appeal). Appellants have not demonstrated that they will suffer irreparable harm absent a stay. See Doe #1 v. Trump, 957 F.3d 1050, 1059 (9th Cir. 2020) (“[I]f we were to adopt the government’s assertion that the irreparable harm standard is satisfied by the fact of executive action alone, no act of the executive branch asserted to be inconsistent with a legislative enactment could be the subject of a preliminary injunction. That cannot be so.”); see also E. Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump, 932 F.3d 742, 778 (9th Cir. 2018).
The existing briefing schedule remains in effect. The clerk will place this case on the calendar for July 2025. See 9th Cir. Gen Ord. 3.3(g).
[Excerpt]
The TPS program “implicates particularly discretionary, sensitive, and foreign-policy-laden judgments of the Executive Branch regarding immigration policy,” [Solicitor General D. John] Sauer emphasized. And in particular, he wrote, Congress specifically provided that courts should not be able to review the secretary’s determinations. But although the TPS statute is “unambiguous” on that point, Sauer stressed, Chen concluded that he could review Noem’s decisions because the plaintiffs had brought their challenges under the federal law governing administrative agencies. Chen “issued sweeping preliminary relief that overrides” Noem’s determinations and puts her decisions on hold “indefinitely,” requiring her to allow “hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan nations to remain in the country, notwithstanding her reasoned determination that doing so is ‘contrary to the national interest,’” Sauer complained.The Supreme Court directed TPS beneficiaries to file a response to the government’s request by 5 p.m. on Thursday, May 8.
There is a very very simple solution to this have the government rent out space in the various judges areas and pack them with illegals while they await their respective hearings
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.