{"id":17719,"date":"2018-10-11T13:21:16","date_gmt":"2018-10-11T17:21:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/live-immigrationreform.pantheonsite.io\/?p=17719"},"modified":"2018-12-28T09:46:25","modified_gmt":"2018-12-28T14:46:25","slug":"more-judicial-arrogance-in-california","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.immigrationreform.com\/2018\/10\/11\/more-judicial-arrogance-in-california\/","title":{"rendered":"More Judicial Arrogance in California"},"content":{"rendered":"

In a decision issued on Wednesday, in the matter of Ramos v. Nielsen<\/em><\/a>, U.S. District Judge Edward M. Chen, issued a temporary injunction blocking the Trump administration\u2019s rescission of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haiti, Sudan, Nicaragua and El Salvador. TPS allows foreign nationals who hail from countries experiencing natural disasters or ongoing armed conflict to remain in the U.S. temporarily, until conditions in their home country improve.<\/p>\n

Judge Chen suggested that the decision to terminate TPS for nationals of these countries did not comply with the Administrative Procedure Act<\/a> (APA) and was based on racism. Therefore, it likely violated constitutional due process and equal protection requirements. However, there are a number of serious flaws in Judge Chen\u2019s reasoning.<\/p>\n

First off, the provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) authorizing TPS<\/a> specifically states, \u201cThere is no judicial review of any determination of the [Secretary of Homeland Security] with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state under this subsection.\u201d It\u2019s hard to imagine Congress expressing its will more explicitly.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, Judge Chen held that this clause does not prohibit the courts from reviewing \u201cgeneral collateral practices or certain colorable constitutional claims.\u201d He did not explain how it would be possible to evaluate any such claims without also calling into question the Secretary of Homeland Security\u2019s rescission decree.<\/p>\n

In addition, Judge Chen\u2019s decision is filled with legally vacuous pronouncements such as:<\/p>\n