A federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from revoking work permits and legal status for over 530,000 migrants flown into the United States under a Biden-era parole program, setting up a high-stakes constitutional fight over executive immigration powers.
At the center of the dispute is a legal question about whether a temporary immigration benefit created with executive authority under one president can be ended by another president using the same discretion as the one who started it.
Recommended Stories
- Ritchie Torres warns 'any American' could be treated like Kilmar Abrego Garcia
- Bondi says Democrats who visit Kilmar Abrego Garcia are 'detached from reality'
- White House eyes 1 million deportations — but hitting that number won't be easy
In Monday’s ruling, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee in Massachusetts, halted President Donald Trump’s order to terminate the so-called CHNV parole program, which granted two-year entry to migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.
Talwani found that the Trump administration’s plan to revoke status en masse without individualized review was unlawful, writing that affected migrants face “two unfavorable options: continue following the law and leave the country on their own, or await removal proceedings.”
The ruling throws a wrench into one part of Trump’s immigration crackdown, including the Department of Homeland Security‘s warnings last month that parolees must self-deport by April 24 or face arrest. But the Biden-originated program, long criticized by Republicans for fraud and poor vetting, was always intended to be temporary.
Mike Davis, founder of the conservative Article III Project, said the judge’s ruling was the equivalent of saying it is “a-okay for Biden to illegally mass-parole criminal illegal aliens, including international gang members and foreign terrorists.”
“But it’s illegal for Trump to reverse? These activist judges are lawless clowns,” Davis said.
Let’s get this straight:
— ???????? Mike Davis ???????? (@mrddmia) April 15, 2025
It was a-okay for Biden to illegally mass-parole criminal illegal aliens, including international gang members and foreign terrorists.
But it’s illegal for Trump to reverse?
These activist judges are lawless clowns. https://t.co/3YepC9jr0R
George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley said the case exposes a deeper tension over executive power.
“Parole is not a legal status under immigration laws,” Turley wrote in a blog post. “It is a status created by executive action and is now being curtailed under that same authority.”
“The question is whether a temporary program created by executive fiat can be treated as creating a type of vested right,” he added.
Yet Talwani suggested the Trump team lacked a “reasoned decision” for cutting short the parole term. DHS countered that it followed the same process used to implement the program, publishing the changes in the Federal Register and giving parolees 30 days to leave unless granted an extension.
“The harms to the public,” DOJ lawyers argued, “outweigh the harms to the parolees,” especially since the migrants admitted under the program had no guarantee of re-parole and were already expected to leave or adjust their status by the end of the two years.
Individual determinations of half a million cases would present an overwhelming burden and easily run out the time granted under the program for these individuals. Indeed, the appellate process could exceed the two-year period of parole in many cases. https://t.co/rikKHKV21l
— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) April 15, 2025
But the ruling creates a logistical nightmare. If upheld, the administration could be forced to conduct half a million case-by-case reviews, effectively grinding deportations of affected migrants to a halt and letting the clock run out on many parole grants.
For now, the decision is a temporary win for “hundreds of thousands of people who were at risk of having their humanitarian parole terminated early, starting on April 24,” according to Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow for the American Immigration Council.
“This saves those people from immediate terminations. However, just as under Biden, the parole will expire at two years,” he said.
BIG news: potentially hundreds of thousands of people were at risk of having their humanitarian parole terminated early, starting on April 24.
— Aaron Reichlin-Melnick (@ReichlinMelnick) April 15, 2025
This saves those people from immediate terminations. However, just as under Biden, the parole will expire at two years. https://t.co/WjaiK97yEF
The prospects of parole ending, regardless of the court’s decision, serve as another example of legal battles creating headaches for the administration as it seeks to accomplish its goal of deporting illegal migrants. Thousands of people in the parole category will eventually become ineligible to remain in the country regardless of Talwani’s future decisions.
DHS NOTIFIES 531,000 IMMIGRANTS PAROLED INTO US UNDER BIDEN: SELF-DEPORT NOW
Turley warned that a ruling like Talwani’s sets a dangerous precedent that could create an “overwhelming burden” on the administration and noted the appellate process could surpass the two-year parole period for these half-a-million migrant cases.
The CHNV parole case now joins a growing list of courtroom showdowns between the Trump administration and federal judges — one that may also find its way to the Supreme Court.