- Following the US operation in Venezuela, many of our community members find themselves even more confused than before about what their potential options are. In the immediate aftermath of the raid, Secretary Noem claimed that Venezuelans in the US could apply for refugee status, but that is not correct; you must be outside the US to apply for refugee status. Asylum has been effectively blocked off due the fact that the administration has effectively suspended the asylum process, refusing to continue processing many applications or even dismissing them outright. Venezuela faces greater instability following the US raid, and reports have emerged of increased political repression in the aftermath. Yet, US officials are now telling Venezuelans that they should be happy that it is safe for them to go home. In these troubling times, viable options for many of our Venezuelan neighbors remain elusive, and we encourage people to seek reliable legal advice to see what might be available to them.
- In recent court victories, two federal judges have blocked some of the administration’s attempts to rescind Temporary Protected Status. Just before the New Year, a judge here in Boston temporarily blocked the administration’s attempts to end TPS for South Sudan. Despite ongoing conflict in the nation, the administration decided that it was safe enough for people to return. This temporary reprieve will last only until the judge has time to more fully consider the arguments and make a ruling. In a separate case, another federal judge found that plaintiffs had made a plausible argument that the administration’s attempts to terminate TPS for Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua were motivated by racism and restored the programs for these countries. We expect the administration to quickly appeal this decision.
- In a welcome but surprising move, the Supreme Court blocked the deployment of National Guard troops in Chicago. The Court noted that the administration had “failed to identify any source of authority that would allow the military to execute the laws in Illinois.” Following the decision, and in the face of numerous similar lawsuits, the administration announced last week that it was dropping its push to deploy national guard members in immigrant friendly cities across the country for now.
- Despite these court wins, there was also a concerning loss at the end of last year when a federal judge allowed for the limited sharing of information between Health and Human Services and the Department of Homeland Security. While the case in ongoing, the judge issued a ruling that limited information sharing to cases where (1) the data is from a Medicaid program (2) relates only to people unlawfully present in the United States and (3) data provided only relates to immigration status, contact information, date of birth, and Medicaid ID.
- While advocates here in MA seek to end immigration detention in the state, the Trump Administration is looking just across the border at Merrimack, NH as a possible site for a new detention facility. Just before Christmas, the Washington Post reported that ICE was looking at warehouses across the country as possible detention facilities, with the location in NH as an option. Local officials say they first heard of the plan from the Post article, and local advocates are planning a protest of the plan at Merrimack town hall.
- Earlier this week, a number of US Senators, led by Ruben Gallego of Arizona, sent a letter to the administration expressing concern that the push for civil immigration enforcement is having a negative impact on federal criminal enforcement. The letter references an ICE document that shows that 28,000 federal law enforcement personnel have been pulled away from their normal duties to enforce civil immigration law. In the letter, the Senators note that, “In a world in which we must prioritize the use of limited resources, an agent arresting primarily non-violent immigrants necessarily means one less agent available to catch child predators and drug traffickers. This diversion represents a deliberate choice: a stunning abdication of the basic responsibilities of the executive branch to the American people, and a direct threat to the security of communities across the country.”