Trump Seeks to End Legal Shield for 350,000 Venezuelans

The Trump administration wants the Supreme Court to revoke Temporary Protected Status for 350,000 Venezuelans, continuing its efforts to reduce immigration protections.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Trump Seeks to End Legal Shield for 350,000 Venezuelans

The Trump administration has requested the US Supreme Court to revoke Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for 350,000 Venezuelan migrants, a move that could result in widespread deportations.

This legal protection, which shields individuals from being deported due to unsafe conditions in their home countries, was set to expire last month. However, a federal judge in San Francisco extended the status, prompting the Justice Department to escalate the matter to the Supreme Court.

Justice Department Moves Against Court Ruling

The administration’s appeal follows a federal appeals court’s decision to reject its earlier request to end TPS. Now, the Department of Justice wants the Supreme Court to pause the lower court’s ruling and allow the expiration of TPS to proceed.

TPS is typically granted in 18-month periods and is designed for people already in the United States who cannot return home safely due to natural disasters, political unrest, or civil conflict.

Broad Rollback of Immigrant Protections

This move is part of a broader campaign by the Trump administration to roll back protections for immigrants. In addition to Venezuelans, TPS protections have also been targeted for termination for 500,000 Haitians and other migrant groups.

President Trump’s administration has consistently aimed to reduce immigration and eliminate pathways that allow migrants to stay in the US legally without going through traditional immigration systems.

Impact on Venezuelan Community

If the Supreme Court agrees to the administration’s request, thousands of Venezuelan families could face immediate deportation risks. Advocacy groups argue that returning these individuals to a country facing economic collapse and political instability could put their lives in danger.

Legal experts suggest that the case could set a major precedent in determining how future administrations handle similar humanitarian protections.