Supreme court allows White House to revoke temporary protected status of many migrants
The US supreme court on Friday announced it would allow the Trump administration to 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 humanitarian 'parole' protections granted to 532,000 people by Donald Trump's predecessor, Joe Biden, potentially exposing many of them to rapid removal from the country, while the detailed case plays out in lower courts.
As with many of the court's emergency orders – after rapid appeals brought the case to their bench – the decision issued on Friday was unsigned and gave no reasoning. However two of the court's three liberal-leaning justices, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor, publicly dissented.
The court 'botched' its assessment of whether the administration was entitled to freeze Talwani's decision pending the litigation, Jackson wrote in an accompanying opinion.
Related: Trump administration sets quota to arrest 3,000 people a day in anti-immigration agenda
The outcome, Jackson wrote, 'undervalues the devastating consequences of allowing the government to precipitously upend the lives and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending'.
Jackson also said that 'it is apparent that the government seeks a stay to enable it to inflict maximum pre-decision damage.'
She added that those living under parole protections in this case now face 'two unbearable options'.
One option is to 'elect to leave the United States and thereby, confront 'dangers in their native countries,' experience destructive 'family separation' and possibly 'forfeit any opportunity to obtain a remedy based on their … claims', Jackson wrote.
The other option is that they could remain in the US after parole termination and 'risk imminent removal at the hands of government agents, along with its serious attendant consequences'.
To Jackson, 'either choice creates significant problems for respondents that far exceed any harm to the government … At a minimum, granting the stay would facilitate needless human suffering before the courts have reached a final judgement regarding the legal arguments at issue, while denying the government's application would not have anything close to the kind of practical impact.'
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 US. Biden, a Democrat, used parole as part of his administration's approach to handling migrants entering at the US-Mexico border.
Such a status does not offer immigrants a long-term path towards citizenship but it can typically be renewed multiple times. A report from the American Immigration Council found that halting the program would, apart from the humanitarian effect, be a blow to the US economy, as households in the US where the breadwinners have temporary protected status (TPS) collectively earned more than $10bn in total income in 2021 while paying nearly $1.3bn in federal taxes.
Trump called for ending humanitarian parole programs in an executive order signed on 20 January, his first day back in office. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 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'.
The case is one of many that the Trump administration has brought in an emergency fashion to the nation's highest judicial body seeking to undo decisions by judges impeding the president's sweeping policies, including several targeting immigrants.
The supreme court on 19 May also let Trump end TPS that had been granted under Biden to about 350,000 additional Venezuelans living in the United States, while that legal dispute plays out.
Jackson was the only justice to publicly dissent then, while House Democrats condemned the supreme court's decision.
In a bid to reduce unauthorized border crossings, Biden starting in 2022 offering limited extra pathways to come to the US legally, allowing Venezuelans who entered the US by air to request a two-year parole if they passed security checks and had a US financial sponsor. Biden expanded that eligibility process to Cubans, Haitians and Nicaraguans in 2023 as his administration grappled with high levels of illegal immigration from those countries.
The plaintiffs in this case, a group of migrants granted parole and Americans who serve as their sponsors, sued administration officials claiming they violated federal law governing the actions of government agencies.
Talwani in April found that the law governing such parole did not allow for the program's blanket termination, instead requiring a case-by-case review. The Boston-based first US circuit court of appeals declined to put the judge's decision on hold and the government appealed.
Related: US immigration authorities collecting DNA information of children in criminal database
The justice department told the supreme court that Talwani's order had upended 'critical immigration policies that are carefully calibrated to deter illegal entry', effectively 'undoing democratically approved policies that featured heavily in the November election' that returned Trump to the presidency.
The plaintiffs told the supreme court they would face grave harm if their parole is cut short given that the administration has indefinitely suspended processing their pending applications for asylum and other immigration relief.
They said they would be separated from their families and immediately subject to expedited deportation 'to the same despotic and unstable countries from which they fled, where many will face serious risks of danger, persecution and even death'.
Speaking at the White House on Friday afternoon, Trump praised the decision, saying 'a couple of hours ago we had a great decision from the supreme court that's very important'.
Reuters contributed reporting
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cromwell Board of Ed ponders next steps amid Title IX investigation
CROMWELL, Conn. (WTNH) — On Tuesday, the Trump administration launched an investigation into Cromwell Public School's Title IX policy, specifically in regards to transgender athletes. The Cromwell Board of Education held a meeting Tuesday night, where people were trying to make sense out of a federal investigation challenging their trans policies. Trump administration probes Cromwell Public Schools on Title IX Out front of Cromwell High School, more than 50 protesters gathered in support of trans rights and chanted, 'What do we want? Trans rights!' After meeting in executive session, the board came out and voted to not respond to the investigations, stating they need more time to review the federal request. 'We have informed OCR, that the decision not to sign the agreement as written, should not be interpreted as unwillingness to engage in a respectful discussion and have requested an extension of time to do so,' Cromwell Board of Education President Celina Kelleher (R) February, President Trump signed an executive order keeping men out of women's sports. Linda McMahon, the U.S. Secretary of Education, is backing it up. 'This administration will fight on every front to protect women's and girls sports, intimate spaces, dormitories, and living quarters, and fraternal and panhellenic organizations,' McMahon said. Cromwell Mayor James Demetriades (D) noted a lot hangs in the balance, nearly $1 million in federal funding. 'They're holding hostage nearly $1 million of federal funding and putting the board of education in the town of Cromwell and possible situation, capitulating on our core values of community and inclusion,' Demetriades said. In 2018, Andrea Yearwood from Cromwell was one of two transgender athletes that took the top spots in a state track competition, setting new women's records. Their participation sparked protests and later a lawsuit. Now nearly seven years later, a federal investigation. Now students are wondering how this will affect their daily lives, as no decision has been made, and policies hang in the balance. The Board of Ed and the mayor are now looking to the state for guidance. 'Reach out to your representatives, ask the state of Connecticut to help enforce its own rules and its own laws and make sure that our most vulnerable children are protected,' Demetriades said. Dr. Enza Macri, the Superintendent of Cromwell Public Schools released a statement saying in part they make it a priority to create a welcoming and nurturing environment for all students. At the same time they're fully committed to following federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination. Read the full letter below issued to Cromwell Superintendent Dr. Enza Macri. Cromwell-Schools-letterDownload Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Johnson blasts House ‘big, beautiful' bill, backs Musk
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) on Tuesday blasted the megabill featuring President Trump's tax cut and spending priorities and backed tech billionaire Elon Musk's recent comments on it. In an interview on NewsNation's 'The Hill,' host Blake Burman brought up an earlier post from Musk on the social platform X in which he called the legislation a 'disgusting abomination.' 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination,' Musk said in his post. 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' 'He's telling the truth, you know I'm — that's all I'm doing too,' Johnson said of Musk's comments. The 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' legislation, which made it through the House last month, prolongs Trump's 2017 tax cuts and bolsters funding for defense and border priorities. It also makes cuts to spending on social safety net programs like Medicaid and food aid. 'The trajectory of deficits is up, and no matter what the 'big, beautiful bill' does, it does not address that long term prospect, it does not bend the deficit curve down,' Johnson said Tuesday. 'It supports it going up.' Musk had said previously in an interview on 'CBS Sunday Morning' that he was 'disappointed' to see the 'big, beautiful' legislation make it through the House. 'I was, like, disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit … and it undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing,' Musk said in the interview. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' faces resistance from Republican senators over debt fears
President Donald Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill" is facing criticism, even from within his own party, as some lawmakers remain skeptical about the massive spending package and its potential impact on the nation's debt, despite it being under consideration by a Republican-controlled Congress. The spending bill, which the House passed late last month and is now in the Senate's hands, aims to address a number of issues, including tax policy, border security and immigration, defense, energy production, the debt limit, and adjustments to SNAP and Medicaid. However, without a serious overhaul, lawmakers like Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is still a "no" on the legislation because it will increase the nation's debt limit. He is among a group of at least four Republican senators who have expressed concerns over Trump's bill, because of the package's projected increase in the national debt. Rand Paul Says He Would Support 'Big, Beautiful Bill' If Debt Ceiling Hike Removed This week, Paul relayed his concerns to media members that the bill will raise the debt ceiling by $5 trillion. "We have never raised the debt ceiling without actually meeting that target," he said. "So you can say it doesn't directly add to the debt, but if you increase the ceiling $5 trillion, you'll meet that. And what it does is it puts it off the back-burner. And then we won't discuss it for a year or two." Read On The Fox News App As of Tuesday, the national debt, which measures what the U.S. owes its creditors, was $36.2 trillion, according to the Treasury Department. Trump pushed back on Paul's remarks about his bill. Trump Warns Rand Paul He's Playing Into 'Hands Of The Democrats' With 'Big, Beautiful Bill' Opposition "Rand Paul has very little understanding of the BBB, especially the tremendous GROWTH that is coming. He loves voting 'NO' on everything, he thinks it's good politics, but it's not. The BBB is a big WINNER!!!" Trump wrote on TRUTH Social. Meanwhile, the national deficit, which occurs when the federal government's spending exceeds its revenues, was $1 trillion as of Tuesday, according to Treasury Department data. On Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the "blatantly wrong claim that the 'One, Big, Beautiful Bill' increases the deficit is based on the Congressional Budget Office and other scorekeepers who use shoddy assumptions and have historically been terrible at forecasting across Democrat and Republican administrations alike." Sen. Ron Johnson Proposes 'Line-by-line' Cuts To Pass Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' The outlook for the federal debt level is bleak, as FOX Business previously reported, with economists increasingly sounding the alarm over the torrid pace of spending by Congress and the White House. Under the terms of the bill, the bill would add over $2 trillion to budget deficits over a decade, according to a recent analysis by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO). All together, the tax cuts and reforms in the package add nearly $3.8 trillion to the deficit over a decade – though spending reductions in other parts of the bill offset some of that to arrive at the $2.3 trillion figure. Elon Musk, who ended his tenure last week as Trump's lead in the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), doubled down on his position Tuesday that the House's reconciliation package was an "abomination." White House Stands By Tax Bill After Musk Calls It A 'Disgusting Abomination' "I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore," Musk posted on X Tuesday. "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it." The Trump administration and some congressional Republicans have pushed back on the estimates of the bill, also known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and its impact on the deficit, arguing that economic growth from the tax cuts will stimulate economic activity and lead to more tax revenue than what is projected. Speaker Johnson Clashes With Rand Paul Over 'Wimpy' Spending Cuts In Trump's Bill "Hope it does a lot to get some further cuts," Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., told Fox News about the bill. "We don't want to bankrupt the country. And what Elon also should recognize is we don't need more solar and EV credits. That actually makes it worse. He probably knows that, though." To push back on the criticism, the White House launched a website where Americans can tabulate how much the bill will personally save them. The House passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on May 22 with a narrow 215-214-1 vote that went largely along party lines. If that version of the bill is revised by the Senate, the legislation will have to go back to the House for another vote before it can go to Trump's desk and become article source: Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' faces resistance from Republican senators over debt fears