he US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the Trump Administration is allowed to end Temporary Restricted Status (TPS) for hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Syria.
This is the second huge immigration win for the Trump Administration today.
The high court, in a 6-3 vote, ruled that the Temporary Protected Status is… temporary!
The three liberal justices Sotomayor, Kagan and Jackson dissented.
The Trump Administration will strip TPS from 350,000 Haitians and 6,000 Syrians.
A federal judge earlier this year blocked the Department of Homeland Security from ending the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for 350,000 Haitians.
The Biden Regime gave Temporary Protected Status to hundreds of thousands of Haitians and allowed them to obtain work permits.
In 2024, the Biden Regime extended the TPS program and allowed the Haitians and Syrians to live in the US indefinitely.
US District Judge Ana Reyes, a wicked Biden appointee, said then-DHS Chief Kristi Noem “does not have the law on her side” in a scathing opinion.
The TPS designation was set to expire in February. Judge Reyes blocked the DHS from ending the TPS designation at the eleventh hour.
Judge Reyes unleashed on Noem over an X post in which she called Haitians and other 3rd world migrants “killers leeches and entitled junkies.”
The Supreme Court lifted the lower court’s block and cleared the way for the Trump Administration to deport the Haitians and Syrians.
More at:
Trump’s most ruthless immigration weapons unlocked as Supreme Court hands him stunning double victory
The Supreme Court on Thursday handed Donald Trump two rare wins in a huge victory for his hardline immigration agenda.
The Court cleared the way for Trump to revoke temporary protections for hundreds of thousands of Haitian and Syrian nationals living in the United States – siding with the President on one of the most closely watched and consequential immigration cases this term.
And the Justices also decided to give Trump more authority to limit asylum seekers in the US coming from Mexico.
In Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, the high court ruled 6-3 to grant Trump administration’s request to revive a controversial ‘metering’ policy that allows federal immigration officers to turn away asylum seekers at the US-Mexico border.
Justices ruled along ideological lines that migrants seeking refuge do not ‘arrive’ in the country by ‘attempting, and failing, to step foot’ in the United States – clearing the way for the administration to restart its so-called ‘turn back’ policy.
And in Mullin v. Doe, justices decided that courts do not have the power to review the constitutionality over TPS designations. The ruling permits Trump to end such protections for Syrian and Haitian nationals.
Combined, the rulings represent a significant victory for the Trump administration as it seeks to implement the President’s hardline immigration enforcement agenda, including for asylum seekers.
US Solicitor General D John Sauer had urged the high court to enforce the asylum policy, describing it as a ‘critical tool for addressing border surges.’
Justices ruled in both cases along ideological lines, and, in a rare move, Justice Sonia Sotomayor responded to the asylum case by reading aloud a summary of her dissent from the bench.
The Supreme Court in March agreed to review the Trump administration’s bid to revoke Temporary Protected Status (TPS) status for more than 350,000 Haitian recipients and roughly 7,000 Syrian recipients living in the United States.
But they declined at the time to grant the administration’s request to stay a lower court order that would allow them to immediately halt TPS designations for the migrants in question.
That detail is expected to put outsize weight on Thursday’s ruling, which could make hundreds of thousands of individuals in US suddenly eligible for deportation, including many who have been living and working in the country legally for years.
It also comes as the Trump administration has moved to unwind TPS designations for individuals from at least 13 countries since the start of his second term last January, and the high court ruling likely clears the way for Trump to undo TPS protections for other migrants living in the US under the program as well.
TPS grants individuals from certain countries temporary legal status to live and work in the United States if they cannot return to their home countries due to natural disasters, armed conflicts, or other extraordinary circumstances.
Haiti was first granted TPS status in 2010, following a devastating earthquake that killed more than 200,000 individuals in the country and left some 1.5 million individuals in the country homeless.
Syria, for its part, was granted status in the throes of the country’s civil war.
Thursday’s opinion day comes as the high court races to issue remaining decisions on major cases before the end of its term, which officially ends in June.
Justices have yet to rule on some of the most consequential cases reviewed this term, including President Donald Trump’s attempt to fire Federal Reserve Board Governor Lisa Cook and end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S.
Those cases are among the most closely watched this term — though the court appeared deeply skeptical of the Trump administration’s arguments in both cases.
Thursday’s opinion day, however, is likely to be touted by the Trump administration as a major victory — and one that allows the President to proceed with some of his get-tough immigration policies.
The case ‘presents a straightforward question’: whether someone is considered having ‘arrived’ to the US must while still at the US-Mexico border, or when they are physically present in the United States, Justice Samuel Alito said, writing for the majority for Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, the asylum case.
‘The Court today holds that the Executive Branch may circumvent all these mandatory procedures by having US immigration officers stand at the border and physically block noncitizens from setting a foot onto U.S. soil,’ Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent, easily one of the most scathing that was penned this term.
‘They may do so even if the asylum seeker is at the threshold of a port of entry designated to receive all noncitizens who seek entrance into the country,’ Sotomayor continued. ‘Even if the port of entry has ample capacity to inspect that person, including an available asylum officer trained to process asylum applications. Even if the asylum seeker is certain to be persecuted, or killed, if she is turned away.’
More at:
Attack on Ship in Strait of Hormuz; UPDATE: Iran Rejects UN Plan to Speed Traffic Out of Gulf
I have been waiting for the Iranians to harass shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, and it appears to have happened.
I should say, it’s not CONFIRMED that the attack was committed by Iran, but SOMEBODY shot at the bridge of a tanker transiting the Strait, and the attack took place mere hours after Iran warned that ships that did not get permission from the Persian Gulf Strait Authority would face “consequences.”
While it’s unconfirmed that Iranians are responsible, the link between the Iranian warning and the subsequent attack, which apparently used live ammunition but caused little damage, seems remarkably coincidental to Iranian warnings.
As I have warned, we should expect a pattern from Iran similar to what we saw during the “ceasefire” pre-MOU, with the IRGC “testing the waters,” so to speak, to harass its adversaries, assert its dominance, and to remind everybody that it is in a position to do damage should they so desire.
Iran has made it clear that they own the Strait, nominally in cooperation with Oman, which borders the Strait on the South side. They insist that after the initial 60 days, they will demand “fees,” and that for the moment, all ships must get permission from Iran before they transit.
More at:
More Stories
The latest dating dealbreaker: Not being a reader
JUST IN: Senate Democrats Block Congressional Stock Trading Ban
Supreme Court allows Trump administration to use citizenship database ahead of midterms