In Boston on Friday, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani expressed her intention to temporarily halt the Trump administration's effort to terminate a program providing temporary legal protections for over 10,000 family members of U.S. citizens and green card holders. The hearing revealed Judge Talwani's plan to issue a temporary restraining order, though the specific timing of this action remains unannounced.
This legal dispute centers on the Family Reunification Parole (FRP) program, which had extended temporary protections mainly to individuals from Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, and Honduras. These protections, established during the Biden administration, were set to expire by January 14 following a termination decision by the Department of Homeland Security in late 2023.
Justin Cox, representing plaintiffs via the Justice Action Center, criticized the government’s approach: "The government, having invited people to apply, is now laying traps between those people and getting the green card. That is incredibly inequitable." The case involves five named plaintiffs, though attorneys aim for any court ruling to extend coverage to all program participants.
Plaintiffs emphasized the significant life changes made by FRP recipients despite their temporary status: "Although in a temporary status, these parolees did not come temporarily; they came to get a jump-start on their new lives in the United States, typically bringing immediate family members with them," they stated in their motion. Since arrival, many have obtained work authorization, secured jobs, and enrolled their children in school.
Conversely, government attorneys defended the termination, arguing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem rightfully exercised authority to end the program and complied with legal notice requirements by publishing the decision in the federal registry. They further contended that national security concerns regarding insufficient vetting of participants and the optimal allocation of limited resources justified ending the FRP.
Government counsel Katie Rose Talley declared in court, "Parole can be terminated at any time. That is what is being done. There is nothing unlawful about that." Despite acknowledging the authority to end the program, Judge Talwani criticized the method of notification, demanding the government provide evidence of individual written notices—such as letters or emails—to participants regarding termination.
Judge Talwani remarked, "I understand why plaintiffs feel like they came here and made all these plans and were going to be here for a very long time... We as Americans, the United States needs to." She underscored the importance of adherence to procedural fairness towards individuals seeking to comply with the law.
Lower courts have generally supported maintaining temporary protections for affected groups, but a Supreme Court injunction earlier in May permitted the Trump administration to revoke such protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants, expanding the pool of individuals at risk of deportation to nearly one million. This ruling lifted protections for migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela after prior measures had preserved their humanitarian parole statuses. The Supreme Court’s decision was issued without detailed explanation, although it met dissent from two justices.