The Supreme Court lets the Trump administration legally revoke the status of more than 500,000 immigrants in our legal way

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday let President Donald Trump's administration revoke temporary legal status for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan, Cuba, Haiti and Nicaraguan immigrants and strengthen the driver of the Republican president to strengthen deportation.

The court held an order from Boston-based U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani to halt the administration’s move to end the immigrant “parole” granted by Trump’s predecessor, Joe Biden, to 532,000 immigrants. This could cause many of them to evacuate quickly, and the case took place in the lower court.

Like many court orders issued in an emergency, the decision was unsigned and without any reason. Two of the three liberal judges in the court have publicly opposed it.

“The results underestimate allowing the government to dramatically subvert the lives and livelihoods of nearly 500,000 non-citizens, and their legal requirements hold legal requirements,” Jackson wrote.

Immigration parole is a temporary form of licensing under U.S. law that allows recipients to live and work in the United States for “emergency humanitarian reasons or a huge public interest.”

Government seeks to “accelerate demolition”

Biden, a Democrat, used parole as part of his administration to prevent illegal immigration from the U.S.-Mexico border.

Trump called for an end to the humanitarian parole program in an executive order signed on January 20, his first day in office. The Department of Homeland Security then relocated to terminate them in March, cutting two years of parole grants. The government said revoking parole status would make it easier for immigrants to put immigrants in a rapid deportation process called “accelerating dismissal.”

The case is one of many cases where the Trump administration brings emergency means to the highest U.S. judiciary, which revokes decisions by hindering his comprehensive policies, including several judges targeting immigration. The Supreme Court also allowed Trump to end a deportation protection on May 19, known as the temporary protection status, which has been resided in the United States at about 350,000 Venezuelans granted by Biden, while the legal dispute holds.

To reduce illegal border crossings, Biden has allowed Venezuelans to enter the United States through the air starting in 2022, requiring them to be parole for two years if they pass a security check and have a U.S. financial sponsor.

Biden has expanded the process to Cubans, Haitians and Nicaragua in 2023 as his government fights illegal immigration to these nationalities.

“Destructive” Decision: Plaintiff's Lawyer

The plaintiff, a group of Americans who immigrants parole and serve as sponsors, sued government officials for alleging that the government violated federal laws on government agencies' actions.

Haiti Bridge Alliance executive director Guerline Jozef, one of the plaintiffs, was frustrated by Friday's decision.

“Again, the Trump administration has blatantly proved that they ignored the lives of people who really need protection by taking their status and filing them,” Jozv said.

“I can't exaggerate how devastating it is: The Supreme Court allows the Trump administration to unleash widespread chaos not only for our clients and class members, but also for their families, workplaces and communities,” added Karen Tumlin, director of the Center for Justice Action.

Talwani discovered in April that laws governing such parole do not allow the general termination of the program, but require case-by-case review. The Boston-based First Circuit Court of Appeals refused to put aside the judge's ruling.

The Justice Department told the Supreme Court in its filing that Talwani's order subverted “critical immigration policies that have been carefully calibrated to prevent illegal entry” and “effectively” cancelled the large number of democratically approved policies in November's elections.

Trump has campaigned for a promise to see the biggest wave of deportation in the U.S. for decades, though it is unclear how his administration does it operationally.

In some cases, the United States has not reached an expatriate agreement with certain immigrants’ countries of origin, but the current government has taken action to send some immigrants to completely different countries, including some in conflict-related countries. In addition, some deported attorneys asserted in court that they were deprived of any ability to dismiss notice or challenge decisions.

In this case, the plaintiff told the Supreme Court that they would face serious harm given that the government has suspended applications for shelter and other immigration relief indefinitely.

They said they would be separated from their families and immediately accelerated to deportation, “fleeing to the authoritarian and unstable country where they fled, many will face serious risks of persecution and even death.