Trump Urges SCOTUS to Strip Humanitarian Status from 500,000 Migrants

President Donald Trump has urged the Supreme Court to eliminate legal pathways for over 532,000 migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela currently in the U.S. for humanitarian purposes. This push follows Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s revocation of a Biden-era special parole program in March, a move temporarily halted by a federal judge.

Trump’s appeal seeks to reinstate Noem’s policy, arguing it addresses a troubling trend in immigration rulings. U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer emphasized the necessity for the Court to intervene, pointing out that when lower courts overstep Congress’s directives, the Supreme Court has stepped in before.

The former president expressed concerns that maintaining the parole program could overwhelm immigration courts with removal proceedings. He stated that the district court’s decision nullified significant immigration policy changes initiated by the Trump administration.

In 2022, then-Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas utilized a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act to grant two-year humanitarian parole to the aforementioned migrants. The Trump administration contended that these mass parole programs did little to deter illegal crossings while failing to create a pathway to lawful status.

Advocacy groups have responded with a lawsuit, claiming that Noem’s policy would cause unnecessary hardships for beneficiaries and fragment families and communities. Karen Tumlin, founder of the Justice Action Center, criticized Trump’s request for the Supreme Court to intervene preemptively, labeling it as excessive and harmful.

According to Tumlin, the humanitarian parole program benefits various stakeholders, including sponsors and communities. She condemned the administration’s actions as counterproductive and unlawful.

U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani ruled in favor of the immigration advocacy groups, declaring the White House’s efforts unprecedented and not legally justified. The First Circuit declined to halt the ruling, asserting that Noem’s evidence was insufficient for an appeal.

Trump expressed disappointment with the federal courts, arguing that the judiciary should not dictate executive policy concerning immigration. Sauer further reinforced that the authority to decide on the parole status of these migrants lies with the Secretary and not the courts.

The Supreme Court has requested that immigration advocacy groups submit their response to Trump’s application by May 15.