By Andrew Rice | center square
(meaningful news) – The U.S. Supreme Court appeared skeptical of immigrants’ challenges to the Trump administration’s decision to end Temporary Protected Status in Haiti and Syria.
High court justices heard arguments in Trump v. Miot and Mullin v. Doe, cases challenging special immigration status for immigrants from Syria and Haiti, respectively. The influx of immigrants from both countries brought challenges after the administration ended protected status in 2025.
Temporary Protected Status is granted to immigrants from countries that have experienced national disaster or war. The judges were charged with determining whether a lower court judge could void a designation made by the executive branch.
Advocates for Haitian and Syrian immigrants said the Trump administration did not properly consult with other executive agencies or issue notice before terminating the status of former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem.
Congress requires the DHS Secretary to consult with other agencies, including the State Department, before terminating temporary protected status. The law does not specify what those consultations should look like.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett questioned whether the consultation would need to be specifically related to ending TPS, since Congress did not specify in the statute.
Ahilan Arulanantham, a lawyer representing Syrian civilians, said the content of the review discussion is important, but not necessarily subject to review by a judge.
“Why would Congress allow review of the procedural aspect when everyone cares more about the subject matter?” Barrett asked.
Justice Samuel Alito appeared to express deep skepticism about the Syrian and Haitian immigrant arguments. He cited concerns that federal judges across the country might overrule executive branch decisions based on less solid evidence.
Quoting a phrase from Solicitor General John Sawyer, Alito said, “If we accept your arguments it will create a hole in the judicial review bar through which you can drive a convoy of trucks.”
Solicitor General John Sawyer argued that ending Temporary Protected Status for Syrian and Haitian immigrants would send a message of confidence in both countries’ political systems. He pointed to an end to the civil war in Syria in 2024 as an example.
“If we don’t end TPS, it will create a sense of doubt about that decision,” Sawyer said.
He also argued that Haitian immigrants coming to the United States are the most educated in the country and that allowing them to come to the United States would jeopardize the country’s future prosperity.
Geoffrey Pipoli, an attorney arguing for Haitian immigrants, argued that the decision to end TPS for Haitians was discrimination based on race.
The court’s justices did not seem to agree with Pipoli’s arguments, and argued that the administration was indiscriminately targeting TPS in all countries where the US still operates it.
Alito cautioned against making decisions based on the majority race living in a certain country. He said that when looking at some countries it would be difficult to see how race plays a factor in the determination.
“You have a really broad definition of who is white and who is not white,” Alito said. “I don’t like dividing the people of the world into these groups.”
However, several judges appeared sharply critical of the Trump administration’s efforts to end Temporary Protected Status. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said Trump’s past statements about countries like Haiti show racial bias in ending TPS.
“I don’t think this one statement is a prime example of a discriminatory motive in making this decision,” Sotomayor said.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson also argued that the Trump administration did not proceed through the proper means of consideration before ending the protected status. She said Noem should have more substantive conversations with the State Department and other executive agencies.
“Congress, unlike the previous administration, in this statute has directed this secretary to make certain findings, to make certain determinations,” Jackson said.
High Court judges will likely deliberate on whether to uphold TPS for Syria and Haiti in the next few months. It is expected that the court will give its verdict by July.
Reprinted with permission from Center Square.
14
People are praying right now.
💡 Do you know? One of the best ways you can support
meaningful news Simply by leaving a comment and sharing this article.
📢 Social media algorithms push content when there is more engagement – so every 👍 like, 💬 comment and 🔄 share helps more people discover the truth. 🙌
latest lol news
Former first lady of South Korea sentenced to four years in prison, plans to appeal
IDF declares “no ceasefire” as fighting continues on Israel-Lebanon border
Two Jews injured in terrorist attack in London amid rising anti-Semitism
Iran’s economy bows to the pressure of war as the crisis deepens
Supreme Court strikes down Louisiana map containing 2nd majority-Black district
Trump warns Iran: “No more Mr. Nice Guy”
Federal indictment fuels allegations of COVID cover-up, raises new questions about government transparency
IS claims attack on Nigerian village kills dozens, including Christians at risk
Military convoy attacked in Ghana violence, civilians killed amid increasing insecurity
Fair Use Notice:This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are providing such content in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific and social justice issues, etc. We believe this is a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided in Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 USC Section 107, the materials on this site are distributed without profit to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving the information included for research and educational purposes. For more information visit: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
