Public opinion is deeply polarized regarding the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the Trump administration's immigration policy. While many express strong support for enforcing immigration laws and prioritize American citizens, reflecting national pride and Trump's campaign promises, there are critical voices concerned about human rights and humanitarian impacts on affected individuals. The emotional impact on families, legal implications, and fairness of revoking legal status are recurring concerns.

Supreme Court

Trump Administration

Immigrants

American Citizens

So many people in this thread are misunderstanding that this was not TPS but rather the CHNV parole program.

Regardless of how people think the laws and policies should be handled, it makes me sad to see so many people touting their opinions without actually knowing what they're talking about.

TheFlipanator

This is straight up propaganda. Read this article from before Trump became president. Biden was not going to extend the temporary parole. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/venezuelans-legal-status-chnv-program/

kifinho

It says right in the article it was mostly two year programs.  What did they expect it will happen?

LogOverall1905

prnt_of_hs_sen

Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor dissented, saying the court “undervalues the devastating consequences of allowing the government to precipitously upend the lives and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending.”

Why did Biden even give TPS when everyone knew Trump would do this? It just screws with people when TPS inevitably runs out.

Edit: some commenters didn’t understand my point. He let in people on TPS and didn’t give them any other way to transition to a visa that couldn’t be taken away by a small gust of wind. It’s a false promise to people who are uprooting their lives for a status that could end at anytime. This just created a situation where he effectively synthesized illegal immigrants who were granted legal entry.

Edit 2: seems I’ve pissed off both Blue MAGA (read: diet Republicans) and Red MAGA with this one. Very bad sign if this is our takeaway after everything that’s been going on.

TruckPsychological40

I’m sorry the United States can’t save the world. They need to close the border until congress passes an immigration bill.

Jec_atl

Let's look at Haiti.

  
They had a severe hurricane and a political coup. They are in danger of becoming a failed state. Do you want a country in the Caribbean to descend into chaos? Unable to feed itself? Unable to pay its bills? Potentially thousands (or millions) of starving refugees flooding other fragile democracies in the region? Or perhaps a civil war could engulf the region. Bodies in the streets. Which nearby democracy would have the money and authority to try to respond to a massive humanitarian and military crisis? 

Only one answer... us.

And how much would that cost?

So, a bunch of people who know waaaaaaay more about this than us have decided that letting in bunch of Haitians is the best option.  They work and send money home. There are millions of US dollars pouring into that country every week courtesy of the 500,000 Haitians on TPS.

That money KEEPS THE PEACE! People can eat. They can work. They can scratch out a living without picking up a gun and shooting people. 

And what does the United States receive in the bargain? We are spared the expense of intervening in a costly sectarian war. We get a workforce who are gladly taking jobs nobody else will do. Companies are profiting. 

It is definitionally a win-win. 

So of course trump wants all that to end.

RichardStrauss123

My daughter is dating a 20 year-old whose family came from Venezuela under this. I can't imagine what they may have to endure soon or how devastated my daughter will be to have the man she loves be deported. I just keep hoping that somehow his family will fly under the radar.

theauthenticme

DarthJiro

good. the days of the US being an open border are over. i’m sorry life sucks.

kurama666

Does that mean , they are illegal right now even if their permit hasn’t expired? And they have to leave today? Or they can still work?

AnimeCat19

Good, should have never been allowed to happen.

mmp1134

[deleted]

Vegasbutlr77

All those Cubans in FL that voted for Trump are probly feeling played. 

Usedful idiots.

razorthick_

So - because the comments seem to be ignorant regarding basic facts of TOS.

TPS was created in 1990 as part of the Immigration Act of 1990; it’s been around for 35 years.

Here’s wiki: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_protected_status

Here’s counsel of foreign relations:

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-temporary-protected-status

Here’s senate report on the bill:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/101st-congress/senate-bill/358


Knock yourselves out.

Flat_Shame_2377

916_Heathen

Soviet_Friend

qoslove7

They already here and want to stay. Give them a path and get them to pay taxes.

Jhngo

Now you’re just babbling. Also, you’re replying at 1am. Do you not have something to do at that time besides be wrong on the internet?

In an attempt for your verbiage to veer verbose you’ve merely landed your verbal vehicle squarely into the ditch of mediocrity.

AllThe-REDACTED-

The support bills for all these illegal or fake asylum Biden immigrants should be divided up between all the Liberal supporters by garnishing their wages or SS checks and then see how activist they remain.

Waste_Being7025

oh no. this is bad and inhumane. This is a mistake, even if they came using a flawed system, they followed every steps the government provided. They should not punish innocent people like this.

Will they start raiding those people home starting next week? will they give them time to leave or do they need to self deport as soon as possible?

Early-Grapefruit-294

My heart breaks for all my haitian compatriots who are thrown into this fresh hell now.

Mel_in_morphosis

Their mistake wasn’t coming “illegally”. Their mistake was not being white, like the Afrikaners who cut through millions of people to the front of the line.

Yntol

Will Cubans be sent home, too (or a 3rd country) and what does the Cuban American population of Miami think about that?  Or will special dispensation be given to that community?

HMWT

drumpf and the repugnicants are so bent over these migrants, that they dont see that most people from those countries (would) vote republican or support their ideology. But oh well, their bigotry and racism is bigger 🤷🏽

Aioros13

Welcome to r/SupremeCourt. This subreddit is for serious, high-quality discussion about the Supreme Court.

We encourage everyone to [read our community guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/supremecourt/wiki/rules) before participating, as we actively enforce these standards to promote civil and substantive discussion. Rule breaking comments will be removed.

Meta discussion regarding r/SupremeCourt must be directed to our [dedicated meta thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/supremecourt/comments/1egr45w/rsupremecourt_rules_resources_and_meta_discussion/).


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/supremecourt) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

The title of the article is sort of loaded, in my opinion.I personally don't equate the obviously negative connotation of "strip" with "allow a temporary status to expire in accordance with statute." A more neutral headline would be like SCOTUSblog said, " Allow to end." Anyways, 

&gt;The protections had been set to expire April 7, but U.S. District Judge Edward Chen ordered a pause on those plans. He found that the expiration threatened to severely disrupt the lives of hundreds of thousands of people and could cost billions in lost economic activity.

This is *always* the outcome of Temporary Protected Status, by design. TPS is exactly what the first word of the eligibility says, *temporary.* Everyone who is granted the status knows they will one day be required to return to their country at some point. The problem with TPS in actuality is that the status are granted for periods of time, or extended though legal action like the matter in front of the Court now, that by the time status is revoked, you have people that are now de facto Americans. 

I myself have written a letter of support for a friend who had been in the United States for over 20 years (infant to adult) under TPS when the status was about to be removed for folks who qualified under the event he gained the status from. 

From SCOTUSblog:

&gt;On March 31, Chen granted that request and issued an order that barred Noem from ending the designation. He called Noem’s conduct in seeking to lift an existing TPS designation “unprecedented,” and suggested that her decision had been “predicated on negative stereotypes” about Venezuelan migrants.

True or not, the motivation is moot if the change in coverage status is otherwise lawful.

&gt;. . . Congress specifically provided that courts should not be able to review the secretary’s determinations. But although the TPS statute is “unambiguous” on that point, Sauer stressed, Chen concluded that he could review Noem’s decisions because the plaintiffs had brought their challenges under the federal law governing administrative agencies.

Second article source: https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/05/trump-asks-supreme-court-to-allow-an-end-to-protected-status-for-venezuelans/

I think we as a nation, or at least the folks Congress need to be honest and realistic about what TPS looks like in actuality, and add provisions to automatically be eligible to start the naturalization process after *X* number of years, and modify the INA accordingly.

ITS_12D_NOT_6C

The Solicitor General's comment that this doesn't mean these people are going to be deported feels rather disingenuous given ice is arresting immigrants at their hearings.

tesnakeinurboot

Miami Dade is getting a headstart on the FO phase.

CrybullyModsSuck

Kagan was either in the majority or just chose not to join the dissent or publish her own.

trippyonz

The Supreme Court let the Trump administration immediately strip the legal right to temporarily live and work in the US from as many as half a million people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela.

Over two dissents, the high court cleared the Department of Homeland to end so-called parole programs that gave migrants from those four countries temporary legal status. The justices put on hold a federal trial court order that had blocked the cancellation while litigation went forward.

This story is developing. Follow along [here](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/supreme-court-lets-trump-strip-500-000-migrants-of-legal-status?utm_source=reddit.com&amp;utm_medium=lawdesk) for updates.

\- Zainab

bloomberglaw

That turns the concept "legal status" into a mockery

SiteTall

Haven’t current presidents always been able to unwind previous presidents acts? It’s settled law I thought.

Faile-Bashere

What exec branch giveth they can take away. Also, Temporary is kinda right there up front in the status.

SaggitariusTerranova

Have fun in Miami, Cuban-Trump Voters!  At least we didn’t elect a broad, amirite? (High Five)

TikiTom74

“temporary legal status” is just that…. temporary.  

if you entered the country illegally, leave and apply like the rest of us did.

1nternetTr011

It’s crazy how blatantly racist they are being. Strip legal status and deport the brown/black immigrants, but give protection to the white ones fleeing a non existent genocide 

Crazy times

darodardar_Inc

Including Kagan. So maybe trump is legally right?

pulsed19

So, Republicans tell immigrants, "Come here legally. Follow the law for immigration, and we'll be cool." But then turn around and strip them of the result of following the law for immigration. This doesn't sound like "Law &amp; Order." This sounds a lot more like "We don't like non-white people."

TheMrDetty

if the president can institute this by fiat, the president can just as easily undo it by fiat.

Petrichor_friend

And of course all these folks have the money and situations to leave immediately. /s

Pretty soon the number of people who came here illegally will be outstripped by the numbers of people who were made illegal after the fact - for no other reason than that they are here.

oldcreaker

A country has the right to enforce its immigration laws and policies.

EMP_Jeffrey_Dahmer

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA 

GOOD.

All those Cubans who voted proudly for this man, have fun enjoying Cuba again! I’m sure you’re going to have a lot of family members being sent back. So plenty of reasons to visit.

BEWMarth

Republicans:" It's not immigration we're mad about. It's ILLEGAL immigration!"

Also Republicans: ....

Peter_Easter

Fuck you that are calling this racism.  It was a TEMPORARY status.  Go complain to Ava Moore's family.

wmclay

Let's not conveniently overlook the fact that this was also Biden's plan.  It's not like Trump decided this on day 1.  This was announced in October 2024.

[https://www.nyic.org/2024/10/advocates-outraged-by-president-bidens-refusal-to-extend-humanitarian-parole-for-immigrants-in-the-u-s/](https://www.nyic.org/2024/10/advocates-outraged-by-president-bidens-refusal-to-extend-humanitarian-parole-for-immigrants-in-the-u-s/)

schrutesanjunabeets

I appreciate the accuracy the headline.  We too often see headlines claiming the Supreme Court is stripping things when in reality, it is trump.

chumpy3

Whatever the hell happened to seasonal work, where they came in, worked the fields and  had housing near their work and then left when the season was done. That was beneficial to all.

bapeach-

it's fair of him to repay the cubans fpr voting for him 😂

shivio

The Find Out phase is here, mthrfkrs!

"OMG I WILL VOTE, FOR DONALD TRUMP!"

I want to see them sign that now.

yanocupominomb

BYE cubans for Trump! 😂 still sad for the immigrants that aren’t idiots getting pulled into this.

Longjumping-Rough891

Wait. I tried they were gonna get "illegal" immigrants. If they got legal status they are here legally...... so..... what's up? I don't hear anything about gang membera being deported. Ain't seeing no videos of ICE agents raiding gangs.

CakeMadeOfHam

Mtflyboy

Wait till these clowns find out who picks fruit and vegetables, works in meat processing plants and builds our houses.

Public-Baseball-6189

The complicit SCOTUS, congress and others need to be held accountable when Trump's reign of shit ends.

Sqweech

poopzains

So, it was a labor issue/national emergency when 100k people die a year from fent, but when 500k are suddenly about to be removed from the labor pool, we're cool because they aren't white? 

Make it make sense.

CallSign_Fjor

Good. We need a couple million more though, right?

HorribleMistake24

Proving once again that it was never a matter of "just follow the law". They "just dont want minorities" outright.

NY_Knux

The SCOTUS is a moronic as the president.

Beginning_Ad_6616

I will say 2 things.

1. I am a bit surprised that John Roberts sided with the administration here,  and not Barrett, but partial dissent by Barrett seems to have been more procedural, including SCOTUS making such an important decision before arguments are heard (she did not go as far as liberal justices).
2. SCOTUS, including Justices Thomas and Alito, clarifies that those removed can file habeas petition challenge (so admin must give them notice before removal), rather than  APA challenge  as they did, but that must be done in the place they are detained, meaning in Texas, rather than DC under Judge Boasberg

So SCOTUS did not in fact quite say " admin can just accuse you of being a foreign gang member and off you go to El Salvador's dungeon."

BlockAffectionate413

&gt; Despite siding with the administration, the court's majority placed limits on how deportations may occur, emphasizing that judicial review is required.  

&gt; Detainees "must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs," the majority wrote.  

While the court lifts the block, it still put limits on the Trump admin. Of course there's a question as to what "habeas relief in the proper venue" will quantify as, but this was not a blanket "go have fun while we hammer this out". It's more of a "this was the wrong venue".  

Personally I disagree with the order (mostly because I disagree with the idea of using the 1798 law, much less using it outside of an actual war), but if those limits of habeas relief in the proper venue are actually reasonable, then I can see the courts rationale.

Iceraptor17

“ Detainees "must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs," the majority wrote”

Doesn’t this basically remove any reason that the administration would use it? The whole point was to avoid due process. Now it’s just like other immigration law?

xstegzx

A weird decision considering that the court is saying that going forward, the government is required to offer due process before removal for people who are targeted under the Alien Enemies Act. 

“More specifically, in this context, AEA detainees must receive notice after the date of is order that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs”

It seems like the court is issuing a bit of a sucks to be you. 

Also Sotomayor’s dissent seems to say it’s lucky this wasn’t a US citizen this time. 

“The implication of the Government’s position is that not only noncitizens but also United States citizens could be taken off the streets, forced onto planes, and confined to foreign prisons with no opportunity for redress if judicial review is denied unlawfully before removal”

StockWagen

Ugh.

The REAL issue here, IMO, is the fact that we are not at war w/ Venezuela.  Which makes the invocation of the Alien Enemies Act rather dubious.

It seems none of the Justices in the majority really addressed that point.  Which, I'd argue, is considerably more important than the judicial review one.

Monkey1Fball

So, this is my breakdown of the order. 

9-0 that migrants have due process rights and must be granted a meaningful chance to challenge their detention and removal using Habeas

5-4 is more about the correct venue, whether intervening like this was appropriate, the overall legality of the Executives action, and whether relief under the APA or other statutes is available.

For venue, they must challenge it in the place they are detained. So if they have you in Texas, that is where you must challenge it. This will pose a challenge for the admin has the number of district judges will limit the speed of the review. It doesn't give them a more favorable circuit court.

And that any case seeking to challenge the administrations actions must be brought under Habeas. Class based relief is available under habeas, so there is that. Although it does prevent injunctive relief. 

https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca6/18-1233/18-1233-2018-12-21.html

Order: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/24a931_2c83.pdf

WorksInIT

&gt;under 1798 law

What's with referring to laws by their year recently? 

It's like saying "Judge backs POTUS on speech under 1791 amendment."

notapersonaltrainer

I'm stunned that they even thought the Enemy Aliens Act applied.   The law starts with:

&gt;Whenever there is a **declared war** between the United States and any foreign nation or government, **or any invasion or predatory incursion** is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States **by any foreign nation or government,**

Obviously there is no declared war.   I can't see how any "textualist" would look at the other bold words and think an 18th century reader would think they applied to a criminal gang.

Ind132

I'm just baffled as to how/why legal or illegal....with NO criminal record here or there, how does a deportee end up in a Mega-Prison 🤨

Rich-Veterinarian681

In a 5-4 ruling, SCOTUS has lifted the block on the Trump administration's ability to use the alien enemies act to quickly deport Venezuelans who are accused of being gang members. The initial block was put in place by a federal judge appointed by Obama and there's been a whole lot of drama surrounding this case as the Judge accused the government of disobeying his orders. 

While the case will play out on it's merits in the courts, The Trump administration in the meantime is free to deport alleged gang members. The government still faces obstacles as this law, even though it was passed by the founding fathers seems to be at odds with the due process protections afforded by the constitution. Combine this with the ruling to at least temporarily stay the order to bring back the El Savadoran national who was recently deported, it looks like SCOTUS is giving the government a lot of leeway. Trump ran on mass deportations, the people voted for him to do it and still to this day continues to be one of the few things that polls well for Trump. 

Did SCOTUS get this right?

Cryptogenic-Hal

EnergyOwn6800

It’s absurd that this was even debated. Happy to see the administration provided every tool it needs to remove illegal aliens,

SnooDonuts5498

All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. **FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL.**

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/law) if you have any questions or concerns.*

&gt;Sauer accused the district court of stalling the administration's efforts to remove what he described as "some of the worst of the worst illegal aliens."

Sauer and Noem keep on referring to the immigrants in question as "worst of the worst", human traffickers, etc, and try to use that to justify extrajudicial deportation, but they are missing the fact that we can't take their words regarding these immigrants. Why should we trust them? I think just about every judge they make these arguments to understands that the whole point of due process is to test government accusations.

WCland

If the administration had simply provided due process in the first place, those who are subject to removal would already be gone, and those who are not subject to removal would remain. So Trump's real objective is to expand the presidents prerogative to extract whomever he wishes whenever he chooses. Meanwhile the administration refuses to comply with the Constitution.

Fluffy-Load1810

From reporter Melissa Quinn: 

The Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on Tuesday to lift a lower court order that blocked immigration authorities from removing migrants to third countries without first providing them certain due process rights while a legal battle over President Trump's deportation efforts continues.

The request for emergency relief from Solicitor General D. John Sauer stems from a preliminary injunction granted by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy last month in a challenge brought by four migrants who are subject to final orders of removal. 

**Read more:** [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-asks-supreme-court-to-step-into-court-fight-deportations-third-countries/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-asks-supreme-court-to-step-into-court-fight-deportations-third-countries/)

CBSnews

What authority does a president have to send people to third party countries anyway? Would they not be sent to their country of origin? Surely sending people to detention outside of our country just doesn’t make sense either way.

CavitySearch

They did. They shot down AEA for most of the deportations and also did a rare unanimous vote to return one that they are ignoring.

Urabraska-

Here's what I don't get about all of this. 

It isn't like non-immigrant people never commit crimes. And in fact if you look at the percentages, US citizen crimes vastly outnumber crimes committed by immigrants (in fact, the largest illegal immigrant crime committed BY FAR is one single crime: being convicted of entering the US illegally, and/or staying too long. The fraction of illegal immigrant crime falling under this is close to 60%. This data is available on the cbp.gov website [here](https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/cbp-enforcement-statistics/criminal-noncitizen-statistics). And even then, when compared to the total number of alleged illegals in the country- these figures are staggeringly low percentage wise when compared to crime figures among the population at large (I leave it to the reader to find that data, it can be found in many .gov websites). 

And that leads me to my main point. 

It seems to me that the crime problem, especially violent crimes and/or property related crimes, we have in the USA has much less to do with illegal immigrants and much more to do with the citizens of the USA. 

The entire idea of illegal immigrants ruining our country has worked so well that it becomes a rally cry to masses who believe they have somehow been left behind. The solution being carried out has much less to do with criminals and more to do with the boogeyman. 

Yet, here we are. 

I still have hope in our systems, but that hope has been fading lately. Perhaps that can change.

Cruezin

floofnstuff

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld decisions by the Trump administration to revoke temporary legal status for over 500,000 migrants. This development has put these migrants at immediate risk of deportation.

Supreme Court Backs Trump Administration's Immigration Policy

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want