US President Donald Trump 's administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court to overturn deportation protections extended to roughly 300,000 Venezuelans living in the United States, accusing a lower court of issuing a “needless affront” by ruling otherwise.
The case centers on Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem ’s decision earlier this year to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS), a form of humanitarian relief granted to Venezuelan migrants .
The administration noted that, as long as the district court’s order stands, over 300,000 Venezuelans would remain in the United States despite Secretary Noem’s determination that doing so even temporarily is “contrary to the national interest.”
Beyond this policy, the case raises broader questions about how courts, including the Supreme Court, handle fast-tracked emergency appeals under Trump’s second term.
Friday’s appeal is the second emergency petition submitted to the Supreme Court that day and highlights an ongoing debate within the judiciary: how much weight lower courts should give to brief or vague Supreme Court emergency orders.
Earlier this year, in May, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with ending TPS protections while the case continued in lower courts, despite a dissent from liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. A federal judge in California later issued a new order siding with the Venezuelans, temporarily blocking the policy again.
In its latest emergency appeal, the administration criticized US District Judge Edward Chen and the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals for taking what it called an “indefensible” position by blocking the policy once more, as reported by CNN.
The administration also argued that the lack of reasoning in the Supreme Court’s initial order does not excuse lower courts from following it. “Whether those orders span one sentence or many pages, disregarding them – as the lower courts did here – is unacceptable,” it said.
Some lower court judges have expressed uncertainty over how to handle cases when the Supreme Court provides little explanation on emergency rulings. “They’re telling us nothing,” US Circuit Judge James Wynn said during an oral argument earlier this month in a case concerning whether the Department of Government Efficiency can access Social Security data.
A key issue in the case is whether Secretary Noem had the authority to end the existing TPS designation before it was scheduled to expire.
The former President Joe Biden 's administration initially granted TPS for Venezuelans in March 2021 due to political instability in the country and expanded it in 2023. Two weeks before Trump took office, the Biden administration renewed the protections for another 18 months.
Venezuelan migrants covered under TPS have challenged Noem’s reversal, arguing it violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires federal agencies to follow specific procedures when changing policies. They also contend that the decision was motivated by political and racial bias.
The case centers on Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem ’s decision earlier this year to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS), a form of humanitarian relief granted to Venezuelan migrants .
The administration noted that, as long as the district court’s order stands, over 300,000 Venezuelans would remain in the United States despite Secretary Noem’s determination that doing so even temporarily is “contrary to the national interest.”
Beyond this policy, the case raises broader questions about how courts, including the Supreme Court, handle fast-tracked emergency appeals under Trump’s second term.
Friday’s appeal is the second emergency petition submitted to the Supreme Court that day and highlights an ongoing debate within the judiciary: how much weight lower courts should give to brief or vague Supreme Court emergency orders.
Earlier this year, in May, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to move forward with ending TPS protections while the case continued in lower courts, despite a dissent from liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. A federal judge in California later issued a new order siding with the Venezuelans, temporarily blocking the policy again.
In its latest emergency appeal, the administration criticized US District Judge Edward Chen and the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals for taking what it called an “indefensible” position by blocking the policy once more, as reported by CNN.
The administration also argued that the lack of reasoning in the Supreme Court’s initial order does not excuse lower courts from following it. “Whether those orders span one sentence or many pages, disregarding them – as the lower courts did here – is unacceptable,” it said.
Some lower court judges have expressed uncertainty over how to handle cases when the Supreme Court provides little explanation on emergency rulings. “They’re telling us nothing,” US Circuit Judge James Wynn said during an oral argument earlier this month in a case concerning whether the Department of Government Efficiency can access Social Security data.
A key issue in the case is whether Secretary Noem had the authority to end the existing TPS designation before it was scheduled to expire.
The former President Joe Biden 's administration initially granted TPS for Venezuelans in March 2021 due to political instability in the country and expanded it in 2023. Two weeks before Trump took office, the Biden administration renewed the protections for another 18 months.
Venezuelan migrants covered under TPS have challenged Noem’s reversal, arguing it violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires federal agencies to follow specific procedures when changing policies. They also contend that the decision was motivated by political and racial bias.
You may also like
H-1B Visa Fee only for new petitions, not renewals: White House (IANS Exclusive)
Iran announces major weapon development and chilling nuclear update
Indore: Over 1000 Students Participate In DAVV's Internal Hackathon
Conor Maynard engaged after paternity row with Traitors star
BBC Strictly Come Dancing viewers distracted by Tess Daly's daring outfit choice
