Supreme Court lets Trump revoke humanitarian legal status for half-a-million migrants
By
Andrew Chung,
Reuters
US President Donald Trump's administration says the migrants were not vetted properly before being allowed into the US.
Photo:
CHIP SOMODEVILLA / GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA / Getty Images via AFP
The US Supreme Court has let President Donald Trump's administration revoke the temporary legal status of hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian and Nicaraguan migrants living in the United States, bolstering the Republican president's drive to step up deportations.
The court put on hold Boston-based US District Judge Indira Talwani's order halting the administration's move to end the immigration "parole" granted to 532,000 of these migrants by Trump's predecessor Joe Biden, potentially exposing many of them to rapid removal, while the case plays out in lower courts.
Immigration parole is a form of temporary permission under American law to be in the country for "urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit," allowing recipients to live and work in the United States.
Biden, a Democrat, used parole as part of his administration's approach to deter illegal immigration at the US-Mexican border.
Trump called for ending humanitarian parole programmes in an executive order signed on 20 January, his first day back in office.
The Department of Homeland Security subsequently moved to terminate them in March, cutting short the two-year parole grants.
The administration said revoking the parole status would make it easier to place migrants in a fast-track deportation process called "expedited removal".
As with many of the court's orders issued in an emergency fashion, Friday's decision was unsigned and gave no reasoning.
Two of the nine-member court's three liberal justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, publicly dissented.
The court botched its decision by failing to account for its impact, Jackson wrote in an accompanying opinion.
The outcome, Jackson wrote, "undervalues the devastating consequences of allowing the government to precipitously upend the lives and livelihoods of nearly half a million non-citizens while their legal claims are pending".
The case is one of many that Trump's administration has brought in an emergency fashion to the nation's highest judicial body seeking to undo decisions by judges impeding his sweeping policies, including several targeting immigrants.
The Supreme Court on 19 May also let Trump end a deportation protection called temporary protected status that had been granted under Biden to about 350,000 Venezuelans living in the United States, while that legal dispute plays out.
Biden starting in 2022 let Venezuelans who entered the United States by air request a two-year parole if they passed security checks and had a US financial sponsor.
Biden expanded that to Cubans, Haitians and Nicaraguans in 2023.
A group of migrants granted parole and Americans who serve as their sponsors sued, claiming the administration violated federal law governing the actions of government agencies.
Talwani in April found that the law governing such parole did not allow for the programme's blanket termination, instead requiring a case-by-case review.
The Boston-based 1st US Circuit Court of Appeals declined to put the judge's decision on hold.
Guerline Jozef, executive director of Haitian Bridge Alliance - one of the plaintiffs - expressed dismay at Friday's decision.
"Once again, the Trump administration blatantly proves their disregard for the lives of those truly in need of protection by taking away their status and rendering them undocumented.
"We have already seen the traumatic impact on children and families afraid to even go to school, church or work," Jozef said.
The administration called Friday's decision a victory, asserting that the migrants granted parole had been poorly vetted.
Ending the parole programmes "will be a necessary return to common-sense policies, a return to public safety and a return to America First," Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said.
The Justice Department had told the Supreme Court that Talwani's order upended "democratically approved policies that featured heavily in the November election" that returned Trump to the presidency.
The plaintiffs had told the Supreme Court they would face grave harm if their parole was cut short given that the administration has indefinitely suspended processing their pending applications for asylum and other immigration relief.
Migrants with parole status reacted to the decision with sadness and disappointment.
Fermin Padilla, 32, waited two years in Chile to receive parole status and paid for his work permit.
"We complied with all the requirements the United States government asked for," said Padilla, who lives in Austin, Texas, and delivers Amazon packages.
"Now I'm left without security because we don't know what will happen. We're without anything after so much sacrifice. It's not fair."
Retired university professor Wilfredo Sanchez, 73, has had parole status for a year-and-a-half, living in Denver with his US citizen daughter, a doctor.
"I was alone in Venezuela, with diabetes and hypertension," Sanchez said. "I have been relaxed here, happy with (my daughter), her husband and my grandkids. I have all my medical treatment up to date."
"To return to Venezuela is to die, not just because of my medical conditions, but from loneliness," Sanchez added.
Carlos Daniel Urdaneta, 30, has lived in Atlanta for three years with parole status, working in a restaurant, since coming to the United States to earn money to send to his ill mother in Venezuela.
"If I have to work triple in my country, I will," said Urdaneta, whose wife and son are still in Venezuela. "I won't risk staying here undocumented with this government."
- Reuters
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
6 hours ago
- RNZ News
Public Broadcasting Service sues Trump to reverse funding cuts
By Jonathan Stempel , Reuters US President Donald Trump takes questions outside the West Wing of White House in Washington, DC, on 8 May 2025. File photo. Photo: JIM WATSON Public Broadcasting Service has sued Donald Trump over the US president's executive order to cut its federal funding , calling it an unconstitutional attack that would "upend public television". In a complaint filed on Friday (local time) in the Washington, DC federal court, PBS and a public TV station in Minnesota said Trump's order violated the US Constitution's First Amendment by making the president the "arbiter" of programming content, including by attempting to defund PBS. The 1 May order "makes no attempt to hide the fact that it is cutting off the flow of funds to PBS, because of the content of PBS programming and out of a desire to alter the content of speech", PBS said. "That is blatant viewpoint discrimination." Its programming has included Sesame Street , Mister Rogers' Neighborhood , Frontline and several Ken Burns documentaries, including The Civil War . Member stations also broadcast public affairs shows, like Washington Week. Trump's order demanded that the taxpayer-backed Corporation for Public Broadcasting cut federal funding to PBS and NPR, short for National Public Radio. All three entities are nonprofits. PBS said the Corporation for Public Broadcasting provides 16 percent of its US$373.4 million annual budget. It also said the funding ban would apply to local member stations, which provide 61 percent of its budget through dues, including millions of dollars in federal funds. White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said the Corporation for Public Broadcasting was "creating media to support a particular political party on the taxpayers' dime. Therefore, the President is exercising his lawful authority to limit funding to NPR and PBS". NPR filed its own lawsuit on 27 May to block Trump's order. Formed in 1969, PBS has 336 member stations, including the plaintiff Lakeland PBS, which serves about 490,000 people in northern and central Minnesota. The executive order was part of Trump's effort to sanction entities he believed were opposed to his political agenda. Trump said that, by funding PBS and NPR, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting ignored Americans' right to expect that taxpayer dollars going to public broadcasting "fund only fair, accurate, unbiased and nonpartisan news coverage". The White House separately accused PBS and NPR of using taxpayer money to spread "radical, woke propaganda disguised as 'news'". In its complaint, PBS said Trump's order "smacks of retaliation for, among other things, perceived political slights in news coverage". The Corporation for Public Broadcasting receives funding from Congress two years in advance to shield it from political interference. It sued Trump last month, after he sought to fire three of its five board members. The case is Public Broadcasting Service et al v Trump et al, US District Court, District of Columbia, No. 25-01722. - Reuters
Otago Daily Times
12 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Defence Minister Judith Collins endorses Trump's Golden Dome
By Phil Pennington of RNZ US President Donald Trump's Golden Dome missile defence project has won endorsement from New Zealand. The vision is of a vast shield of sensors, missiles and even laser beams designed to take out conventional and nuclear missiles. Critics of the proposed system say it may fuel an arms race in space, and China and Russia have condemned it. But Defence Minister Judith Collins told a security summit in Singapore it was justified. "It's a defence mechanism," she said during a panel on cyber, space and undersea challenges. "I don't see it as an attack mechanism. It's a defence mechanism. "And if people did not feel they needed to defend themselves, they wouldn't waste the money on it." The chorus of major defence contractors signalling their readiness to work on the Golden Dome has been growing, joined recently by New Zealand-founded and California-based company Rocket Lab. Rocket Lab used a $460 million acquisition of the parent company of Arizona firm Geost, to state how the deal secured "core capabilities" for achieving Pentagon goals in space, "like the proposed Golden Dome". Prime (major) contractor Lockheed Martin said on its website: "This next generation defence shield will identify incoming projectiles, calculate trajectory and deploy interceptor missiles to destroy them mid-flight, safeguarding the homeland and projecting American Strength [sic]." SpaceX, controversial software innovator Palantir and drone-maker Anduril also feature in media reports and speculation about the Dome. Trump has said it would be operational by the end of his term and over the next decade cost $300 billion, but many analysts doubt the timing, while the Congressional Budget Office has estimated it could cost as much as $1.4 trillion over two decades. Lockheed called it "a Manhattan Project-scale mission". Minister Collins told the Shangri-La Dialogue that taxpayers' money was hard-fought for. "Let me tell you, we are defence ministers, we know how that feels, we have to go in every day and try to get more money. "And we're not going to do it unless there's some reason to do it. So you know, don't be aggressive in space, we won't need Golden Dome or any other sort of dome." Collins told the summit New Zealand's proportion of defence spending on emerging technology would grow, noting that tech made in New Zealand was being used in the Ukraine war. "We are going to be using some of that," she said. Tauranga company Syos makes drones that have been used in Ukraine. 'Everyone wants a piece' China, Russia and North Korea have all condemned Trump's revival of a high-tech form of the Ronald-Reagan era Star Wars missile defence plan, 400 times larger than Israel's Iron Dome. Despite this and critics' fears, defence and high-tech military-linked contractors have begun jockeying for action. "Everyone Wants a Piece of Trump's 'Golden Dome' Defense Plan," a Wall Street Journal headline said. Reuters has reported that Elon Musk's SpaceX - the most prolific satellite launcher ever - was in partnership with two tech firms that had been muscling into the defence industry to become Golden Dome frontrunners. The Times of India asked if the Dome was a shield for the US "or just to make Elon Musk richer?" One of Musk's reported partners is Anduril, a supercharged start-up that has plans for a billion-dollar military drone factory, and the other is New Zealand citizen Peter Thiel's software firm Palantir. The US Army recently tested a Palantir system called Maven for rapid targeting, saying it allowed a 20-person unit to do more than a 2000-strong unit was able to target during the 2003 Iraq war. The track record with the US Army had boosted Palantir, market analysts said. Smart targeting is envisaged as part of Golden Dome, with the Pentagon saying that by 2029 it would deploy smart sensors in space that can distinguish missile threats from clutter. Canada's Globe and Mail reported a range of stocks were benefiting from Trump's talk of the Golden Dome, noting that Palantir was now worth more than Lockheed Martin. The SpaceX link-up with tech firms reported by Reuters, is a challenge to the entrenched defence industry players like Lockheed, Northrop Grumman, Boeing and RTX (Raytheon), though these "primes" do figure in an Act introduced in February to enable Golden Dome, alongside a Trump executive order. Rocket Lab said in its media release citing the Golden Dome it was "positioning itself as disruptive prime to US national security". The Street financial news site said the Geost deal put the company that launches out of both Mahia and Virginia, "firmly in the national security conversation". America's Defence Intelligence Agency in mid-May profiled the forecast missile threat across six categories, including two hypersonics and two types of nuclear ballistic missiles. The Chatham House thinktank said the Golden Dome might suck resources from regional missile defence and cyber resilience, to go into unproven shield technology. "The plan also has potentially dangerous strategic consequences," it said. "A system that aspires to make the US invulnerable to missile attack would almost certainly be seen by its adversaries as an attempt to undermine the logic of nuclear deterrence. If Washington is perceived to be developing a shield that could one day neutralise a retaliatory nuclear strike, it risks triggering a dangerous global arms race."
Otago Daily Times
12 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Judith Collins endorses Trump's Golden Dome amid contract frenzy
By Phil Pennington of RNZ US President Donald Trump's Golden Dome missile defence project has won endorsement from New Zealand. The vision is of a vast shield of sensors, missiles and even laser beams designed to take out conventional and nuclear missiles. Critics of the proposed system say it may fuel an arms race in space, and China and Russia have condemned it. But Defence Minister Judith Collins told a security summit in Singapore it was justified. "It's a defence mechanism," she said during a panel on cyber, space and undersea challenges. "I don't see it as an attack mechanism. It's a defence mechanism. "And if people did not feel they needed to defend themselves, they wouldn't waste the money on it." The chorus of major defence contractors signalling their readiness to work on the Golden Dome has been growing, joined recently by New Zealand-founded and California-based company Rocket Lab. Rocket Lab used a $460 million acquisition of the parent company of Arizona firm Geost, to state how the deal secured "core capabilities" for achieving Pentagon goals in space, "like the proposed Golden Dome". Prime (major) contractor Lockheed Martin said on its website: "This next generation defence shield will identify incoming projectiles, calculate trajectory and deploy interceptor missiles to destroy them mid-flight, safeguarding the homeland and projecting American Strength [sic]." SpaceX, controversial software innovator Palantir and drone-maker Anduril also feature in media reports and speculation about the Dome. Trump has said it would be operational by the end of his term and over the next decade cost $300 billion, but many analysts doubt the timing, while the Congressional Budget Office has estimated it could cost as much as $1.4 trillion over two decades. Lockheed called it "a Manhattan Project-scale mission". Minister Collins told the Shangri-La Dialogue that taxpayers' money was hard-fought for. "Let me tell you, we are defence ministers, we know how that feels, we have to go in every day and try to get more money. "And we're not going to do it unless there's some reason to do it. So you know, don't be aggressive in space, we won't need Golden Dome or any other sort of dome." Collins told the summit New Zealand's proportion of defence spending on emerging technology would grow, noting that tech made in New Zealand was being used in the Ukraine war. "We are going to be using some of that," she said. Tauranga company Syos makes drones that have been used in Ukraine. 'Everyone wants a piece' China, Russia and North Korea have all condemned Trump's revival of a high-tech form of the Ronald-Reagan era Star Wars missile defence plan, 400 times larger than Israel's Iron Dome. Despite this and critics' fears, defence and high-tech military-linked contractors have begun jockeying for action. "Everyone Wants a Piece of Trump's 'Golden Dome' Defense Plan," a Wall Street Journal headline said. Reuters has reported that Elon Musk's SpaceX - the most prolific satellite launcher ever - was in partnership with two tech firms that had been muscling into the defence industry to become Golden Dome frontrunners. The Times of India asked if the Dome was a shield for the US "or just to make Elon Musk richer?" One of Musk's reported partners is Anduril, a supercharged start-up that has plans for a billion-dollar military drone factory, and the other is New Zealand citizen Peter Thiel's software firm Palantir. The US Army recently tested a Palantir system called Maven for rapid targeting, saying it allowed a 20-person unit to do more than a 2000-strong unit was able to target during the 2003 Iraq war. The track record with the US Army had boosted Palantir, market analysts said. Smart targeting is envisaged as part of Golden Dome, with the Pentagon saying that by 2029 it would deploy smart sensors in space that can distinguish missile threats from clutter. Canada's Globe and Mail reported a range of stocks were benefiting from Trump's talk of the Golden Dome, noting that Palantir was now worth more than Lockheed Martin. The SpaceX link-up with tech firms reported by Reuters, is a challenge to the entrenched defence industry players like Lockheed, Northrop Grumman, Boeing and RTX (Raytheon), though these "primes" do figure in an Act introduced in February to enable Golden Dome, alongside a Trump executive order. Rocket Lab said in its media release citing the Golden Dome it was "positioning itself as disruptive prime to US national security". The Street financial news site said the Geost deal put the company that launches out of both Mahia and Virginia, "firmly in the national security conversation". America's Defence Intelligence Agency in mid-May profiled the forecast missile threat across six categories, including two hypersonics and two types of nuclear ballistic missiles. The Chatham House thinktank said the Golden Dome might suck resources from regional missile defence and cyber resilience, to go into unproven shield technology. "The plan also has potentially dangerous strategic consequences," it said. "A system that aspires to make the US invulnerable to missile attack would almost certainly be seen by its adversaries as an attempt to undermine the logic of nuclear deterrence. If Washington is perceived to be developing a shield that could one day neutralise a retaliatory nuclear strike, it risks triggering a dangerous global arms race."
