Thousands of Afghans in the US face deportation after court refuses to extend their protected status
A three-judge panel of the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Virginia said in a ruling late Monday there was 'insufficient evidence to warrant the extraordinary remedy of a postponement" of the administration's decision not to extend Temporary Protected Status for people from Afghanistan and Cameroon.
TPS for Afghans ended July 14, but was briefly extended by the appeals court through July 21 while it considered an emergency request for a longer postponement.
The Department of Homeland Security in May said it was ending Temporary Protected Status for 11,700 people from Afghanistan in 60 days. That status — in place since 2022 — had allowed them to work and meant the government couldn't deport them.
CASA, a nonprofit immigrant advocacy group, sued the administration over the TPS revocation for Afghans as well as for people from Cameroon — those expire August 4, saying the decisions were racially motivated. A federal judge allowed the lawsuit to go forward but didn't grant CASA's request to keep the protections in place while the lawsuit plays out.
A phone message for CASA on Tuesday was not immediately returned. Without an extension, TPS holders face a 'devastating choice -abandoning their homes, relinquishing their employment, and uprooting their lives to return to a country where they face the threat of severe physical harm or even death, or remaining in the United States in a state of legal uncertainty while they wait for other immigration processes to play out," CASA warned in court documents.
In its decision on Monday, the appeals court said CASA had made a 'plausible' legal claim against the administration, and urged the lower court to move the case forward expeditiously.
It also said many of the TPS holders from the two countries may be eligible for other legal protections that remain available to them.
Temporary Protected Status can be granted by the Homeland Security secretary to people who face safety concerns in their home countries because of armed conflict, environmental disaster or other conditions. They can't be deported and can work legally in the U.S., but they don't have a pathway to citizenship.
The status, however, is inherently precarious because it is up to the Homeland Security secretary to renew the protections regularly — usually every 18 months. The Trump administration has pushed to remove Temporary Protected Status from people from seven countries, with Venezuela and Haiti making up the biggest chunk of the hundreds of thousands of people affected.
At the time that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem ended the temporary protected status for Afghans, the department wrote in the decision that the situation in their home country was getting better.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Guardian Essential poll: most Australians doubt we will ever receive Aukus submarines amid Trump uncertainty
The majority of Australians believe the defence force will never receive the Aukus submarines, as doubts grow over America's commitment to the military pact and the reliability of the US president, Donald Trump. The latest Guardian Essential poll gives a lukewarm assessment of Sussan Ley's first months as opposition leader, with voters evenly split between approval, disapproval and those who 'don't know'. While Anthony Albanese remains in his post-election honeymoon period, some voters say Australia should be prepared to negotiate with the US on medicines, biosecurity and crackdowns on tech giants to get a better deal on tariffs. The Guardian Essential poll of 1,012 voters found 38% of voters thought the Aukus submarine deal would make Australia more secure, 21% thought it would make Australia less secure, and 41% thought it would not affect Australia's security. The sentiments were broadly similar to results when that question was last asked a year ago. Sign up: AU Breaking News email But when asked how likely that the US would deliver nuclear submarines to Australia, only 6% said it was very likely, and another 34% said quite likely, while 60% said they thought it was not likely. The US is conducting a review of Aukus amid doubts about America's shipbuilding capacity. Australia will buy three to five secondhand Virginia class nuclear submarines from America in the 2030s, before the new Aukus submarines start rolling off production lines in Australian shipyards. But US submarine fleet numbers are a quarter below their target, with the country producing boats at just over half the rate it needs to service its own defence requirements. The US Navy estimates it needs to build Virginia-class submarines at a rate of 2.00 a year to meet its own defence requirements, and about 2.33 to have enough boats to sell any to Australia. It is building Virginia-class submarines at a rate of about 1.13 a year, senior admirals say. Just 40% of poll respondents thought Australia had a positive relationship with the US, down from 65% the last time this question was asked in November 2023 when Joe Biden was president. That figure compared to 69% of voters believing Australia had a positive relationship with the United Kingdom, 59% with the European Union and Pacific nations, and 31% with China. Trump on Tuesday indicated he may pursue higher base tariff rates. While Australia is still seeking exemptions or favourable deals on key exports, most voters want the government to stick by key policy positions – but a large number think some should be up for negotiation. About 60% of voters want Australia to stand by the pharmaceutical benefits scheme, but 31% say we should be prepared to negotiate and 9% think we should scrap it to avoid higher tariffs; 57% favour standing by the social media ban, with 42% saying it should be negotiated or scrapped; on biosecurity, 54% say current settings should stay, but 45% say negotiate or scrap those rules. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion The numbers were higher for proposed new rules on American companies, with 47% saying Australia should negotiate or scrap plans to make American companies pay more tax here, and only 46% saying the government should stand by its plan to make tech platforms pay for local news under the mooted news media bargaining incentive. Separately, 31% of voters say Australia should consider levelling our own tariffs on the US, while 45% say we should prioritise staying on good terms with Trump and keep negotiating for exemptions. Staying with international affairs, only 15% of Australians believe Israel is justified in continuing its military action in Gaza. Some 41% of voters want Israel to permanently withdraw its military action, while 25% want a temporary ceasefire. In Ley's first Essential poll on her performance, 33% of Australians approved of the job she was doing, with 35% disapproving. The remainder, around a third of voters, answered 'don't know'. Albanese retains his net positive approval rating in the first poll of his second term. Half of voters approved of the job he is doing, with 41% disapproving, for a net approval of +8.
The Independent
5 hours ago
- The Independent
Higher US tariffs part of the price Europe was willing to pay for its security and arms for Ukraine
France's prime minister described it as a 'dark day' for the European Union, a 'submission' to U.S. tariff demands. Commentators said EU Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen's handshake with President Donald Trump amounted to capitulation. The trouble is, Europe depends mightily on the United States, and not just for trade. Mirroring Trump, Von der Leyen gushed that the arrangement she endorsed over the weekend to set U.S. tariff levels on most European exports to 15%, which is 10% higher than currently, was 'huge.' Her staff texted reporters insisting that the pact, which starts to enter force on Friday, is the 'biggest trade deal ever.' A month after NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte ingratiated himself with Trump by referring to him as 'daddy,' the Europeans had again conceded that swallowing the costs and praising an unpredictable president is more palatable than losing America. 'It's not only about the trade. It's about security. It's about Ukraine. It's about current geopolitical volatility. I cannot go into all the details,' EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič told reporters Monday. 'I can assure you it was not only about the trade,' he insisted, a day after 'the deal' was sealed in an hour-long meeting once Trump finished playing a round of golf with his son at the course he owns in Scotland. The state of Europe's security dependency Indeed, Europe depends on the U.S. for its security and that security is anything but a game, especially since Russia invaded Ukraine. U.S. allies are convinced that, should he win, President Vladimir Putin is likely to take aim at one of them next. So high are these fears that European countries are buying U.S. weapons to help Ukraine to defend itself. Some are prepared to send their own air defense systems and replace them with U.S. equipment, once it can be delivered. 'We're going to be sending now military equipment and other equipment to NATO, and they'll be doing what they want, but I guess it's for the most part working with Ukraine,' Trump said Sunday, sounding ambivalent about America's role in the alliance. The Europeans also are wary about a U.S. troop drawdown, which the Pentagon is expected to announce by October. Around 84,000 U.S. personnel are based in Europe, and they guarantee NATO's deterrent effect against an adversary like Russia. At the same time, Trump is slapping duties on America's own NATO partners, ostensibly due to concerns about U.S. security interests, using Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, a logic that seems absurd from across the Atlantic. Weaning Europe off foreign suppliers 'The EU is in a difficult situation because we're very dependent on the U.S. for security,' said Niclas Poitiers at the Bruegel research institution in Brussels. 'Ukraine is a very big part of that, but also generally our defense is underwritten by NATO.' 'I think there was not a big willingness to pick a major fight, which is the one (the EU) might have needed with the U.S.' to better position itself on trade, Poitiers told The Associated Press about key reasons for von der Leyen to accept the tariff demands. Part of the agreement involves a commitment to buy American oil and gas. Over the course of the Russia-Ukraine war, now in its fourth year, most of the EU has slashed its dependence on unreliable energy supplies from Russia, but Hungary and Slovakia still have not. 'Purchases of U.S. energy products will diversify our sources of supply and contribute to Europe's energy security. We will replace Russian gas and oil with significant purchases of U.S. LNG, oil and nuclear fuels,' von der Leyen said in Scotland on Sunday. In essence, as Europe slowly weans itself off Russian energy it is also struggling to end its reliance on the United States for its security. The Trump administration has warned its priorities now lie elsewhere, in Asia, the Middle East and on its own borders. That was why European allies agreed at NATO's summit last month to spend hundreds of billions of dollars more on defense over the next decade. Primarily for their own security, but also to keep America among their ranks. The diplomacy involved was not always elegant. 'Europe is going to pay in a BIG way, as they should, and it will be your win,' Rutte wrote in a private text message to Trump, which the U.S. leader promptly posted on social media. Rutte brushed off questions about potential embarrassment or concern that Trump had aired it, saying: 'I have absolutely no trouble or problem with that because there's nothing in it which had to stay secret.' A price Europe feels it must pay Von der Leyen did not appear obsequious in her meeting with Trump. She often stared at the floor or smiled politely. She did not rebut Trump when he said that only America is sending aid to Gaza. The EU is world's biggest supplier of aid to the Palestinians. With Trump's threat of 30% tariffs hanging over European exports — whether real or brinksmanship is hard to say — and facing the prospect of a full-blown trade dispute while Europe's biggest war in decades rages, 15% may have been a cheap price to pay. 'In terms of the economic impact on the EU economy itself, it will be negative,' Poitiers said. 'But it's not something that is on a comparable magnitude like the energy crisis after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, or even COVID.' 'This is a negative shock for our economy, but it is something that's very manageable,' he said. It remains an open question as to how long this entente will last. ___
Telegraph
5 hours ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's charm is lost on Britain, but he has won Trump's heart
You couldn't help but get the impression that Trump found opening a new golf course at least as important as running a country. I can't actually recall any past president combining the launch of his own private business venture with the office of the presidency in this fashion but there we are. It's a new world order. He did make the point in his celebratory speech that stopping a war was, after all, rather more valuable an achievement than creating a golf course so perhaps that's reassuring. What had become clear once again on this visit – which had been described as a private holiday but was, in fact, the scene of some major diplomatic developments – was that our own dear Prime Minister was far and away the US president's favourite foreign leader. We must, of course, be grateful for this fact even if we do find it totally mystifying. Sir Keir's charm may be lost on the home audience but he is the undoubted favourite of the Trump White House and this is not solely because he is the messenger for our Royal family whom the president obviously adores. No, it is the Starmer personality itself which appears to have won Trump's heart. Why? My own guess, borrowing on my recollection of American responses to various brands of foreign behaviour is that Starmer's personality represents what Americans tend to regard as quintessential Britishness: a preternatural calmness in the face of difficulties (which is to say, a face that remains expressionless at all times) and a sycophantic courtesy which somehow manages to remain dignified. We got a hint of this when Trump referred to Sir Keir's 'beautiful accent'. Perhaps the contrast with the Macron vanity and arrogance has helped too, but whatever it is, we must acknowledge that the Starmer magic has pulled off a pretty favourable result. And ironically enough, it is precisely our separateness from the European Union – which Sir Keir is trying to undo – that made this favoured position possible. Rather less happily for the Starmer government, the president offered some advice on how to pull the UK out of its spiral of decline. Stop the boats and cut taxes was the magic formula, Mr Trump suggested presumably in a spirit of helpfulness. The problem with this counsel is that both those things are almost impossible to achieve at the moment and they are, as it happens, precisely what the most threatening Opposition parties are urging. That was rather tactless and it suggests that this alliance with Trump's Right-wing Republicanism is not going to be an easy ride. But whatever it was in Starmer's approach that did it, he is currently able to influence the Trump White House at a time when global affairs are dangerously inflamed. That may or may not be an enviable position to be in. On the Middle East and Ukraine, as well as the economic future of the West, the moral responsibility of being the 'Trump whisperer' is going to be daunting.
