Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #nationwideinjunctions, aggregated by home.social.
#SCOTUS’ decision restricted the #power of lower-court judges to issue #NationwideInjunctions.
The states have argued #Trump’s #BirthrightCitizenship order is blatantly #unconstitutional & threatens millions of dollars for #HealthInsurance contingent on #citizenship. The issue is expected to move quickly back to SCOTUS.
The #SCOTUS June decision to scale back the ability of lower #courts to issue #NationwideInjunctions, & the administration’s success at persuading the justices to overturn about a dozen temporary blocks on its agenda in recent months, might only embolden #Trump officials to defy lower courts, several #legal experts said.
#law #judiciary #Constitution #democracy #SeparationOfPowers #Autocracy #AbuseOfPower
But #SCOTUS raised the possibility that #NationwideInjunctions are still permissible in certain circumstances, including #ClassActions, in which similarly situated people sue as a group, or if they are the only way to provide "complete relief" to litigants in a particular lawsuit.
Friday's hearing will shed light on how lower courts plan to address what providing complete relief entails, said George Washington University law professor Paul Schiff Berman.
In that 6-3 ruling authored by conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, #SCOTUS directed lower court #judges like Sorokin that had blocked #Trump's policy to reconsider the scope of their orders.
Rather than address the legality of #Trump's executive order, the justices used the case to discourage nationwide, or “universal,” injunctions — in which a single district court judge can block enforcement of a federal policy across the country.
#Trump’s EO directs US agencies to refuse to recognize the #citizenship of children born in the #US after Feb 19 if neither their mother nor father is a US #citizen or lawful permanent resident.
The #states' case is back in Sorokin's courtroom so he can assess the impact of #SCOTUS’ *landmark* [insane] June 27th decision.
The #DOJ has argued that #Trump's order conforms with the #Constitution & has asked Laplante to find that the plaintiffs cannot sue as a #class.
#SCOTUS’ ruling did not address the legal merits of Trump's order, which the Republican president issued as part of his hardline #immigration agenda on his first day back in office in January.
#law #BirthrightCitizenship #NationwideInjunctions #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
The 3 judges who issued #NationwideInjunctions found that #Trump's directive likely violates #citizenship language in the US #Constitution's #14thAmendment. The amendment states that all "persons born or naturalized in the United States, & subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States & of the state wherein they reside."
#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
Under #SCOTUS’ decision, Trump's #ExecutiveOrder would take effect on July 27.
Looking to seize upon an exception in the Supreme Court's ruling, the lawyers for the plaintiffs argued that the decision allows #judges to continue to block #Trump policies on a nationwide basis in #ClassAction lawsuits.
#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #NationwideInjunctions #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
The judge said he would stay his ruling for a few days to allow the #Trump admin to appeal & would issue a written decision by the end of the day.
The #ACLU & others filed the suit just hours after #SCOTUS on June 27 issued a 6-3 ruling, by its conservative majority, that narrowed 3 #NationwideInjunctions issued by #judges in separate challenges to Trump's directive. The suit was filed on behalf of non-US citizens living in the #UnitedStates whose babies might be affected.
U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante in Concord, New Hampshire, made the ruling after #ImmigrantRights advocates implored him to grant #ClassAction status to a lawsuit they filed seeking to represent any babies whose #citizenship status would be threatened by implementation of #Trump's directive.
#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #NationwideInjunctions #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
Judge blocks #Trump #BirthrightCitizenship order despite #SCOTUS ruling [because they are hella wrong]
A federal judge on Thursday has again barred the Trump admin from enforcing his #ExecutiveOrder limiting birthright citizenship nationwide after the #US #SupremeCourt restricted the ability of judges to block his policies using #NationwideInjunctions.
#law #immigration #Constitution #judiciary
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/judge-weigh-blocking-trump-birthright-citizenship-despite-supreme-court-ruling-2025-07-10/
Separately, on July 2, U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy during a hearing in Boston raised the possibility that he could on the same basis continue to block the US Department of #Defense from sharply cutting federal #research #funding provided to #universities throughout the country.
"There’s a strong argument that CASA doesn’t apply at all," Murphy said.
#law #SCOTUS #NationwideInjunctions #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
#Judges have used other legal tools to block #Trump admin policies on a nationwide basis, including by finding the govt failed to comply w/ administrative #law, another exception in #SCOTUS’ ban on #NationwideInjunctions.
Judges did so in 2 separate rulings last week blocking the admin from ending a program that allows 500k Haitians to stay & work temporarily in the #US, & requiring #HHS to restore govt websites that had been scrubbed early in Trump's tenure following an EO.
The process to certify a class can often take months. A snr White House ofcl told Reuters the #Trump admin will be watching #class certification decisions closely & plans to aggressively challenge them to prevent “abuse”of the process.
The govt says the named class plaintiffs in the New Hampshire case are too different from one another to be able to proceed as a #ClassAction. They include an #asylum seeker & someone on a #StudentVisa.
#ClassActions must follow what is known as #Rule23, which requires the plaintiffs to meet several elements including proving that the proposed #class members suffered the same #injury. Conservative #SCOTUS Justice Samuel #Alito warned lower courts against certifying nationwide classes without "scrupulous adherence to the rigors of Rule 23.”
#law #NationwideInjunctions #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
The #Trump admin appealed the ruling, which White House *aide* #StephenMiller called a judge's attempt to "circumvent" #SCOTUS’ ruling by recognizing "a protected global 'class' entitled to admission into the United States."
"I think there's going to be a lot more #ClassActions," said Lee Gelernt, an attorney with the #ACLU, which brought the #asylum case.
#law #SCOTUS #NationwideInjunctions #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
On July 2, US District Judge Randolph Moss in Washington determined that #Trump's denial of #asylum to migrants on the southern #border exceeded the president's #authority.
He then certified a #class that covered all individuals subject to the presidential proclamation on asylum & issued an injunction to protect the class -- effectively a nationwide injunction.
#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #NationwideInjunctions #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
The plaintiffs are asking US District Judge Joseph Laplante, who previously issued a more narrow #injunction blocking #Trump's EO, to go further this time by allowing the plaintiffs to sue as a #nationwide #class & issuing an order blocking Trump's ban from being enforced against members of the class.
At least one other #judge has already followed this formula.
#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #NationwideInjunctions #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
The plaintiffs in the NH #BirthrightCitizenship case are looking to seize upon one of the major exceptions to #SCOTUS’ ruling. They argue it allows #judges to continue to block #Trump policies on a nationwide basis in #ClassAction lawsuits.
The lawsuit, which was filed by the #ACLU & others hours after the Supreme Court ruled, seeks class action status on behalf of babies who would be subject to Trump's #ExecutiveOrder & their parents.
Issued on #Trump’s first day back in office in January, the EO directs federal agencies to refuse to recognize the #citizenship of #children born in the #UnitedStates who do not have at least one parent who is an American #citizen or lawful permanent resident.
#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #NationwideInjunctions #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
One of the biggest tests of the impact of #SCOTUS’ ruling in #Trump v. CASA will come on Thurs, when a federal judge in NH will
consider whether to prevent Trump's #ExecutiveOrder curtailing #BirthrightCitizenship from taking effect nationally on July 27.
That EO was at the heart of SCOTUS’ ruling, which did not address the legality of the policy, but held that #judges likely lack #authority to issue #NationwideInjunctions & ordered 3 judges to reconsider rulings…
In the short time since the ruling, lower-court #judges have already blocked #Trump's #asylum ban at the US-Mexico #border, prevented his admin from ending temporary #deportation #protections for Haitian immigrants & forced the govt to restore #health websites deemed to run afoul of Trump's efforts to squash "gender ideology."
#law #SCOTUS #BirthrightCitizenship #NationwideInjunctions #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
The #Trump admin said it would move quickly to challenge #NationwideInjunctions. However, the ruling by #SCOTUS’ 6-3 conservative majority contained exceptions, allowing federal #judges to continue to issue sweeping rulings blocking key parts of Trump's agenda.
#law #BirthrightCitizenship #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #AbuseOfPower
#Judges keep blocking Trump's policies despite #SCOTUS injunction curbs
#Trump called SCOTUS’ June 27 decision limiting the ability of federal judges to use #NationwideInjunctions to block his policies “a monumental victory”but his #legal win may be less definitive than it first seemed.
SCOTUS’ decision curtailed the ability of judges to issue #UniversalInjunctions stopping the govt from enforcing a policy against anyone, anywhere in the entire country.
#law #Judiciary
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/judges-keep-blocking-trumps-policies-despite-us-supreme-court-injunction-curbs-2025-07-09/
Now that the smoke has cleared there is a federal injunction out of #Massachusetts in favor of 28 states against Trump's deranged anti-birthright citizenship executive order that remains standing in the smoldering ashes of the recent SCOTUS decision on #NationwideInjunctions
youtu.be/89F2hyTRGYM?...
SCOTUS Ruling HAUNTS Trump as ...
Lazy Caturday Reads: Yes, Fascism is Coming to America.
East is a delicate matter, by Zakir Akhmadov
Good Afternoon!!
I don’t see any good news out there today. I wonder if things are just going to continue getting worse until fascism completely takes over our country. It’s already true that we are a failing democracy; and it’s not clear whether we can recover.
We still have some hope that the federal courts can rescue us, but the Supreme Court is making that less likely with each passing day. Yesterday, Dakinikat wrote about the latest nightmare decision from SCOTUS in the birthright citizenship case, and reactions to that decision are still dominating today’s news and opinion, and there are differing opinions about the fallout from the decision.
I also want to highlight some immigration horror stories that demonstrate how fascism really is coming to America, as Dakinikat suggested yesterday.
The Birthright Citizenship Decision
Nicholas Bagley at The Atlantic (gift link): The Supreme Court Put Nationwide Injunctions to the Torch. That isn’t the disaster for birthright citizenship that some fear.
Yesterday, in a 6–3 decision in Trump v. Casa, the United States Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration in a case involving an executive order that purports to eliminate birthright citizenship.
Confusingly, the Court’s decision wasn’t about the constitutionality of the birthright-citizenship order. Instead, the case proceeded on the assumption that the order was unconstitutional. The only question for the justices was about remedy: What kind of relief should federal courts provide when a plaintiff successfully challenges a government policy?
The lower courts had, in several birthright-citizenship cases across the country, entered what are known as “universal” or “nationwide” injunctions. These injunctions prevented the executive order from applying to anyone, anywhere—even if they were not a party to the case. The Trump administration argued that nationwide injunctions were inappropriate and impermissible—injunctions should give relief only to the plaintiffs who brought the lawsuit, no one else.
In a majority opinion by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration and put nationwide injunctions to the torch. That’s a big deal. Not only does it represent a major setback to the states and advocacy groups that brought the lawsuit, it also amounts to a revolution in the remedial practices of the lower federal courts.
But it is not, as the dissenting Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson would have it, “an existential threat to the rule of law.” It won’t even mean the end of sweeping injunctions in the lower federal courts. To the contrary, the opinion suggests that relief tantamount to a nationwide injunction will still be available in many cases—including, in all likelihood, in the birthright-citizenship case itself.
Cat of Morocco by Isy Ochoa
The author, Nicholas Bagley, is a law professor at the University of Michigan and in the past served as legal counsel to Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. He writes that Barrett’s decision was based on history. Nationwide injunctions did not become commonplace until fairly recently in U.S. history; therefore she argued that ‘The federal courts thus lack the power to issue nationwide injunctions. Period. Full stop.” Bagley’s take:
In my book, that’s a positive development. In 2020 testimony to the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Senate, I argued that nationwide injunctions “enable opportunistic behavior by politically motivated litigants and judges, short-circuit a process in which multiple judges address hard legal questions, and inhibit the federal government’s ability to do its work. By inflating the judicial role, they also reinforce the sense that we ought to look to the courts for salvation from our political problems—a view that is difficult to square with basic principles of democratic self-governance.”
Although the Supreme Court divided along partisan lines, with the liberal justices dissenting, I don’t see this as a partisan issue. (The outrageous illegality and sheer ugliness of President Donald Trump’s executive order that lies underneath this fight may go some distance to explain why the three liberals dissented.) Nationwide injunctions are equal-opportunity offenders, thwarting Republican and Democratic initiatives alike. Today, it’s Trump’s birthright-citizenship order and USAID spending freezes. Yesterday it was mifepristone, the cancellation of student debt, and a COVID-vaccine mandate. Why should one federal judge—perhaps a very extreme judge, on either side—have the power to dictate government policy for the entire country? Good riddance.
ven as it ended nationwide injunctions, the Supreme Court left the door open for other forms of relief that are not nationwide injunctions—but that look a whole lot like them. That’s good news for opponents of the birthright-citizenship order.
You’ll need to read the rest at The Atlantic to understand Bagley’s arguments.
Jonathan Last [who is not a lawyer] at The Bulwark: The Supreme Court Just Made America a Dangerous Place.
The Supreme Court issued its birthright citizenship ruling this morning and it’s worse than just about everyone feared it could be.
The Court’s ruling is composed of two main parts.
The first is its declaration that it is possible that the president can contradict the plain-text reading of the Constitution by issuing an executive order doing away with birthright citizenship.
The second is that lower courts can no longer issue nationwide injunctions against blatantly unconstitutional policies imposed by the executive. Injunctions must now be created on a patchwork basis.
I want to impress upon you how dangerous this is. SCOTUS has empowered the president to impose whatever he likes—irrespective of its constitutionality—and then prevented judicial overview except at the localized level.1 Meaning that we will now have two sets of laws. One that operates in Red America and one that Operates in Blue America.
Separate, but unequal. A house divided against itself.
I think the majority believes it is being clever—that it has found a way to pretend to give Trump a win while (they tell themselves) ackshually delaying a substantive verdict.
But what they have done is not mere make-believe. They have set in motion a calamity.
Mr. Angel, Sir, Some Other Dude Done It, Elisheva Nesis, Israeli artist
I’m going to give you a bit more, because this article is behind a paywall. Last notes that the case before the SCOTUS was not about birthright citizenship, so they didn’t need to deal with that, and they didn’t specifically do that. That question will require further litigation.
The Supreme Court could have jumped ahead and simply ruled that the action proposed by the president’s executive order was unconstitutional. This would have meant widening the scope of the specific question in Trump v. Casa. But scope gets widened all the time.2 The Supreme Court is the Supreme Court. It can do whatever it wants.
The fact that the majority chose to delay answering this question is, all on its own, a statement. My theory is that at least two members of the majority do not believe that the birthright citizenship order is constitutional—but they want to delay making that judgment as long as possible.
And so, by constructing this new idea—that universal stays are now verboten—they tell themselves that they have handed Trump a tactical victory but set him up for a strategic defeat on the substance of his EO later on.
The Supreme Court majority thinks it’s being clever by playing within the rules. They’re actually being fools, because Trump isn’t playing within the rules. Their conception that injunctions should be limited just to the parties in each particular case works only if (1) similar cases will be decided similarly, and (2) the government knows this fact and won’t try to break the law. But the government is, right now, in the process of finding ways to ignore the courts—including the Supreme Court—with as little political price as possible. And the government has shown already—repeatedly—that it will break the law.
That’s very true. See this article at The Washington Post: Trump says he will move aggressively to undo nationwide blocks on his agenda.
An emboldened Trump administration plans to aggressively challenge blocks on the president’s top priorities, a White House official said, following a major Supreme Court ruling that limitsthe power of federal judges to issue nationwide injunctions.
Government attorneys will press judges to pare back the dozens of sweeping rulings thwarting the president’s agenda “as soon as possible,” said the official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal deliberations.
Priorities for the administration include injunctions related to the Education Department and the Department of Government Efficiency, as well as an order halting the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the official said.
“Thanks to this decision, we can now promptly file to proceed with numerous policies that have been wrongly enjoined on a nationwide basis,” President Donald Trump said Friday at a news conference in which he thanked by name members of the conservative high court majority he helped build.
Trump on Friday cast the narrowing of judicial power as a consequential, needed correction in his battle with a court system that has restrained his authority.
Scholars and plaintiffs in the lawsuits over Trump’s orders agreed that the high court ruling could profoundly reshape legal battles over executive power that have defined Trump’s second term — even as other legal experts said the effects would be more muted. Some predicted it would embolden Trump to push his expansive view of presidential power.
“The Supreme Court has fundamentally reset the relationship between the federal courts and the executive branch,” Notre Dame Law School Professor Samuel Bray, who has studied nationwide injunctions, said in a statement. “Since the Obama administration, almost every major presidential initiative has been frozen by federal district courts issuing ‘universal injunctions.’”
For another take, see this article at Slate by Matt Watkins: The United States Is About to Embark on a Terrifying Experiment in Mass Statelessness.
Huffpost’s Jennifer Bendery reports on the reactions of the ACLU and other civil liberties groups to the SCOTUS decision: Groups File Nationwide Class Action Lawsuit Over Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Order.
Immigrants rights’ advocates on Friday filed a nationwide class action lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship, just hours after the Supreme Court partially blocked nationwide injunctions challenging Trump’s order.
The lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Legal Defense Fund and other groups, was brought on behalf of a class of babies subject to the executive order, along with their parents. It charges the Trump administration with flouting the Constitution, congressional intent, and longstanding Supreme Court precedent.
Bohemio et el gato, Luis Garcés
It is also a direct response to the Supreme Court’s decision earlier Friday that puts new limits on nationwide injunctions, and reflects a new legal pathway that groups will likely turn to when challenging the Trump administration’s unlawful actions.
In a 6-3 decision along ideological lines, the high court struck down nationwide injunctions against Trump’s birthright citizenship order, narrowing their scope to provide relief to the specific plaintiff who is suing in a case rather than anyone who would be affected by the order. In addition to drawing sharp criticism from constitutional experts, the court’s decision is a major blow to pro-democracy groups that have been successfully challenging Trump’s lawlessness through the use of injunctions.
But the justices left the door open to challenging the administration in other ways, like class action lawsuits. The ACLU and its cohorts wasted no time using this legal pathway.
In a statement, the groups behind the new lawsuit noted that three lawsuits previously obtained nationwide injunctions protecting everyone subject to Trump’s executive order, but the Supreme Court’s decision narrowed those injunctions and potentially leaves children without protections.
“Every court to have looked at this cruel order agrees that it is unconstitutional,” Cody Wofsy, deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project and lead attorney in this case, said in a statement. “The Supreme Court’s decision did not remotely suggest otherwise, and we are fighting to make sure President Trump cannot trample on the citizenship rights of a single child.”
Read the rest at HuffPost.
Immigration Horror Stories
First, two incidents in California, which is still under Trump’s thumb with his commandeering of the National Guard and his stationing marines in Los Angeles and with masked ICE gangs roaming the streets. We aren’t getting as much coverage about the situation in California, but protests and ICE raids are still going on.
The Guardian: Federal agents blast way into California home of woman and small children.
Federal agents blasted their way into a residential home in Huntington Park, California, on Friday. Security-camera video obtained by the local NBC station showed border patrol agents setting up an explosive device near the door of the house and then detonating it – causing a window to be shattered. Around a dozen armed agents in full tactical gear then charged toward the home.
Jenny Ramirez, who lives in the house with her boyfriend and one-year-old and six-year-old children, told NBC through tears that it was one of the loudest explosions she heard in her life.
“I told them, ‘You guys didn’t have to do this, you scared by son, my baby,’” Ramirez said.
Ramirez said she was not given any warning from the authorities that they wanted to enter her home and that everyone who lives there is a US citizen.
The raid comes as federal agents have ramped up immigration enforcement in Los Angeles and across southern California over the last few weeks. Huntington Park is in Los Angeles county. Immigrants have been swept up in raids at court houses, restaurants and straight off the street. Some of the people targeted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) have been US citizens. In one incident, Ice agents detained a Honduran woman seeking asylum and her children, one of which was a six-year-old boy who had been diagnosed with leukemia.
The agents who raided Ramirez’s home in Huntington Park on Friday also reportedly sent a drone into the house after setting off the explosive device.
Two cats on a colorful cushion, woodcut by Theophile Steinlen
More details from ABC 7: Federal agents blast door off, shatter window during raid in Huntington Park.
Dramatic video shows the moment federal agents blew up the front door of a residence in Huntington Park early Friday morning, using a drone to search room by room for a man they say rammed a federal vehicle last week during immigration raids.
“They were right here with their rifles and we heard some screaming up in the front but we couldn’t see because everything was blocked, but it was pretty shocking,” said Lourdes Salazar.
That man, Jorge Sierra-Hernandez, was not home at the time, but his girlfriend and two young children were, leaving them shaking with fear due to the aggressive tactics of those agents.
He is now back home with his family after turning himself in Friday.
After the break-in and drone search:
Once the drone went out, at least nine agents moved in with guns drawn. They eventually escorted Ramirez and her children outside.
“They didn’t identify themselves until I came out, they told me they were from Homeland Security, from ICE,” said Ramirez.
She said pleaded with them to give her an explanation, but instead of giving her an answer, they said “when we find him he’s going to know why.” [….]
The agents claimed that Ramirez’s car ran into a truck carrying federal agents. It’s not clear if it was deliberate. The agents were also angry because protesters were throwing rocks at them during the incident. Why does that justify terrorizing a mother and two small children? DHS and ICE are on an out-of-control power trip.
Channel 4 Los Angeles reported on another incident: Family outraged after federal agents detain US citizen, accuse her of assault.
A 32-year-old U.S. citizen was released from federal custody Thursday evening after her family said she was wrongfully detained by agents during an immigration enforcement operation in downtown Los Angeles.
According to her attorney, Andrea Velez was released on bond after being detained by immigration enforcement agents on Tuesday and then charged with assaulting a federal officer. The Department of Homeland Security said Velez “forcefully obstructed an ICE officer,” but her family said that’s not the case.
Estrella Rosas documented the frantic moments as she saw her sister being thrown to the ground before being arrested and forced into an unmarked car by unidentified officers near 9th and Main Street in downtown Los Angeles.
Woman with a cat, by Marijan Trepše.
“We dropped off my sister to go to work like we always do, all of a sudden, my mom in the rearview mirror she saw how a man went on top of her. Basically, dropped her on the floor and started putting her in handcuffs and trying to arrest her,” said Rosas, recounting the arrest.
In the video, Velez’s mother and sister can be heard pleading for help. “That’s my sister. They’re taking her. Help her, someone. She’s a U.S. citizen,” said Rosas.
In the criminal complaint, prosecutors alleged that during an immigration enforcement Tuesday morning, “Velez stepped into an officer’s path and extended one of her arms in an apparent effort to prevent him from apprehending a male subject he was chasing and that Velez’s outstretched arm struck that officer in the face.”
In her court appearance Thursday, Velez did not enter a plea in federal court. Velez’s family said she was just walking on her way to work as a marketing designer and did nothing wrong.
Both sisters are U.S. citizens, but these days that doesn’t seem to matter.
One more awful immigration story from The Washington Post: DHS ends deportation protection for Haitians, says Haiti is ‘safe.’
The Trump administration announced an end to temporary legal protections for Haitian migrants in the United States, leaving hundreds of thousands of people at risk of deportation.
The temporary protected status for Haitian nationals in the United States, granted after a 2010 earthquake near Port-au- Prince caused up to 200,000 deaths, will terminate Sept. 2, the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement Friday.
“This decision restores integrity in our immigration system and ensures that Temporary Protective Status is actually temporary,” DHS said in a statement Friday. The “environmental situation in Haiti has improved enough that it is safe for Haitian citizens to return home,” DHS said, and Haitian nationals may “pursue lawful status” through other means if they are eligible.
The statement did not elaborate on why it considered Haiti safe for citizens.
That’s because Haiti is not safe.
Meanwhile, the U.S. government continues to advise Americans against all travel to Haiti, which has been under a state of emergency since March 2024 because of “kidnapping, crime, civil unrest, and limited health care.” The State Department’s travel advisory adds that “mob killings and assaults by the public have increased” and that crimes including “robbery, carjackings, sexual assault and kidnappings for ransom” are common.
Bedtime Story, by Jeanette Lassen
The U.S. Embassy in Port-au-Prince this week noted that some domestic air travel had resumed, and urged Americans to leave the country “as soon as possible.”
In a federal register notice of the decision, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi L. Noem said she decided to terminate the TPS designation for Haiti “because it is contrary to the national interest to permit Haitian nationals … to remain temporarily in the United States.”
“Widespread gang violence in Haiti is sustained by the country’s lack of functional government authority. This breakdown in governance directly impacts U.S. national security interests, particularly in the context of uncontrolled migration,” she said in the notice. While the situation in Haiti was “concerning,” she wrote, “the United States must prioritize its national interests.”
The puppy murderer has spoken.
More Important Stories to Check Out
NBC News: Senate Republicans release 940-page bill for Trump’s agenda as they race to vote this weekend.
Politico: Fresh megabill text overnight: what’s in and what’s out.
Bryce Edgmon and Cathy Giessel at The New York Times: Alaska Cannot Survive This Bill.
The New York Times: Senate Blocks War Powers Resolution to Limit Trump’s Ability to Strike Iran Again.
Ryan J. Reilly at NBC News: Pam Bondi fires three Jan. 6 prosecutors, sending another chill through DOJ. workforce.
CNN: University of Virginia president resigns amid pressure from the Trump administration.
Stars and Stripes: Trump eyes staff cuts to top spy agency as he sweeps aside Iran intelligence.
The Washington Post: DOGE loses control over government grants website, freeing up billions.
That’s all I have for you today. What’s on your mind?
#ACLU #BirthrightCitizenship #California #executiveOrders #fascism #federalCourts #haiti #immigrationHorrorStories #nationwideInjunctions
#ACLU, #DemocracyDefendersAction, #NAACP, #LDF, #LULAC et al have also now filed a #ClassAction to hold #Trump's #BirthrightCitizenship order #unconstitutional nationwide.
https://assets.aclu.org/live/uploads/2025/06/Barbara-complaint.pdf
#FuckSCOTUS #law #SCOTUS #NationwideInjunctions #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #SeparationOfPowers #AbuseOfPower
@Nonilex lower-court judges are relying on #NationwideInjunctions to stop all the illegal activities this administration is conducting!
The terms "universal injunction" and "nationwide injunction" are frequently used interchangeably. They are not the same.
A universal injunction applies to the defendant(s) in regard to people who are not plaintiffs.
A nationwide injunction is an injunction which applies *only* to the plaintiffs, but to the plaintiffs *anywhere* in the United States.
People: please stop misusing these terms
CASA (plaintiff in Maryland #BirthrightCitizenship case) has now filed an amended complaint seeking class certification for similarly situated individuals impacted by #Trump’s #ExecutiveOrder.
…and so it begins. The thousands of #ClassAction certification requests.
Have fun #FederalCourts!
#FuckSCOTUS #law #SCOTUS #NationwideInjunctions #immigration #Constitution #Judiciary #SeparationOfPowers #AbuseOfPower
— $2 billion in congressionally appropriated #ForeignAid flowing through the #State Dept & #USAID frozen by #Trump
— >25k children face deportation without lawyers because the admin cut off a contract that pays for their legal representation
And that’s just a few of the cases with #NationwideInjunctions.
#FuckSCOTUS #law #SCOTUS #Constitution #democracy #Judiciary #SeparationOfPowers #ExecutiveBranch #PresidentialPower #AbuseOfPower
Some of the policies that the #Trump administration has tried to bring into effect, only to be blocked by #NationwideInjunctions that remain in force, for now:
— A (redundant) #voter ID #ExecutiveOrder that requires proof of #citizenship
— Federal Funding Freeze that froze trillions of dollars of federal #grants & #loans
— an order by the #Education Dept that demanded that #PublicSchools either eliminate programs promoting #diversity & #equity, or lose their federal #funding.
Still, #SCOTUS’ ruling doesn’t mean they will instantly evaporate. Experts say the next step is for individual courts to apply the new precedent in their own cases. In some instances, the #DOJ will likely challenge existing #NationwideInjunctions to see if they need to be pared back under the Supreme Court’s new precedent.
#FuckSCOTUS #law #Constitution #democracy #Judiciary #SeparationOfPowers #Trump #ExecutiveBranch #PresidentialPower #AbuseOfPower