A federal appeals court has cleared the Trump administration to move forward with ending humanitarian parole protections for more than 430,000 migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela.
The Friday ruling by a three-judge panel of the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court order and allows the administration to begin dismantling the program while litigation continues. Humanitarian parole provided temporary legal status and work permits, usually for two years, to people fleeing instability in their home countries.
The court acknowledged the potential consequences for those affected in its ruling. “We recognize the risks of irreparable harm persuasively laid out in the district court’s order: that parolees who lawfully arrived in this country were suddenly forced to choose between leaving in less than a month — a choice that potentially includes being separated from their families, communities, and lawful employment and returning to dangers in their home countries,” the judges wrote. “But absent a strong showing of likelihood of success on the merits, the risk of such irreparable harms cannot, by itself, support a stay.”
The ruling marked a legal win for the Trump administration, though it does not immediately alter conditions on the ground. A district court had previously blocked the policy in April, but the Supreme Court lifted that stay in May, signaling that the government had broad discretion to rescind parole programs.
Esther Sung, legal director of the Justice Action Center and co-counsel in the case, criticized the outcome. “People who came here from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela did everything the government asked of them, and the Trump administration cruelly and nonsensically failed to hold up the government’s end of the bargain,” Sung said. “While we are deeply disappointed by this decision, we will continue to advocate zealously for our clients and class members as the litigation continues.”
Government lawyers argued that parole was always intended as a temporary measure and that the Department of Homeland Security has the authority to revoke it without judicial interference. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the court that reviewing cases individually would be “a gargantuan task” and would obstruct deportation efforts. “The Secretary’s discretionary rescission of a discretionary benefit should have been the end of the matter,” the government’s brief stated.
Plaintiffs countered that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem acted unlawfully by canceling the program wholesale without considering individual humanitarian claims. Attorneys for the migrants urged the appeals court to uphold the district court’s ruling. “The district court applied the law correctly and did not abuse its discretion when it concluded that Secretary Noem’s action inflicted irreparable injury on the class members (among others) and that the public interest and balance of the equities tip sharply in favor of preliminary relief,” they wrote.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs also described the administration’s decision as unprecedented. They called it “the largest mass illegalization event in modern American history,” marking the first time the U.S. government has revoked humanitarian parole for such a large group at once.
READ ALSO: Trump threatens troops for Portland protests, but mayor insists city can handle it
President Donald Trump has tagged the move as part of his broader campaign pledge to deport millions and roll back Biden-era immigration policies that expanded legal pathways for migrants.
