US appeals court says Noem’s decision to end protections for Venezuelans in US was illegal
The Trump administration acted unlawfully when it ended legal protections that allowed hundreds of thousands of people from Venezuela to live and work in the United States, a federal appeals court ruled late Wednesday.
A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem exceeded her authority in ending temporary protected status for Venezuelans.
But the decision will not have an immediate effect in practice after the U.S. Supreme Court in October allowed Noem’s decision to take effect pending the justices’ final decision.
There was no immediate response to an email sent to the Department of Homeland Security late Wednesday night.
The 9th Circuit panel also upheld the lower court’s finding that Noem overstepped her authority by deciding to end TPS early for hundreds of thousands of people from Haiti.
A federal judge in Washington is expected to rule on the request to halt TPS any day while a separate lawsuit to terminate TPS for Haiti continues. The country’s TPS designation is scheduled to expire on February 3.
Ninth Circuit Judges Kim Wardlaw, Salvador Mendoza, Jr. and Anthony Johnstone said in Wednesday’s decision that TPS legislation passed by Congress does not give the secretary the authority to revoke an existing TPS designation. All three justices were nominated by Democratic presidents.
“The law contains numerous procedural safeguards that ensure that individuals with TPS enjoy predictability and stability during periods of extraordinary and temporary circumstances in their home countries,” Wardlaw, who was nominated by President Bill Clinton, wrote for the panel.
Wardlaw said Noem’s illegal actions have real and significant consequences for Venezuelans and Haitians who rely on TPS in the United States.
“The record is replete with examples of hard-working, contributing members of society who were deported or detained after losing their TPS, who were mothers, fathers, wives, husbands, and partners of U.S. citizens, who paid taxes and had no criminal record,” he wrote.
Temporary Protected Status or TPSAuthorized by Congress as part of the Immigration Act of 1990, it allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to grant legal immigration status to individuals fleeing countries due to civil unrest, environmental disaster, or other “extraordinary and temporary circumstances” that prevent them from safely returning to their home countries.
Assignments are given for periods of six, 12 or 18 months, with extensions possible if conditions are difficult. The status prevents holders from being deported and allows them to work but does not give them a path to citizenship.
Ending the protections, Noem said conditions in both Haiti and Venezuela had improved and that allowing immigrants from the two countries to remain under a temporary program was not in the national interest.
Millions of Venezuelans have fled political unrest, mass unemployment and hunger. The country is mired in a protracted crisis caused by years of hyperinflation, political corruption, economic mismanagement and ineffective government.
Haiti was first designated for TPS in 2010, after a devastating magnitude 7.0 earthquake killed and injured hundreds of thousands of people and left more than 1 million homeless. Haitians face widespread hunger and gang violence.
Separately, Mendoza wrote that there was “ample evidence of racial and national origin animus” that reinforced the lower court’s conclusion that Noem’s decisions were “predetermined and her reasoning pretextual.”
“It is clear that the Secretary’s unauthorized actions were not actually based on substantive policy considerations or actual differences with the previous administration’s TPS procedures, but rather on the stereotype-based diagnosis that immigrants from Venezuela and Haiti are dangerous criminals or mentally disturbed,” he wrote.
Government lawyers argued that the secretary had clear and broad authority to make decisions regarding the TPS program and that those decisions were not subject to judicial review. They also denied that their actions were motivated by racial hostility.
