President Donald Trump and his administration have had great success in pushing forward their policies thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, especially as mostly Democrat-appointed federal judges keep trying to interrupt them.
According to the Daily Caller, the Trump administration chalked up another SCOTUS win after the high court allowed the administration to end the protections in place for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan nationals.
Last month, a federal judge appointed by former President Barack Obama stopped the administration from ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for those Venezuelan nationals, ruling that it violated the law.
Trump's Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which leads such issues, was hamstrung by U.S. District Judge Edward Chen.
This week, the Supreme Court stepped in and lifted Chen's September ruling, marking a massive victory for the Trump administration's deportation initiatives.
“Although the posture of the case has changed, the parties’ legal arguments and relative harms generally have not,” the court’s order states. “The same result that we reached in May is appropriate here.”
The May reference was due to an earlier ruling this year that involved the high court lifting a similar order.
The Trump administration, in its efforts to have the high court step in, argued why TPS for the Venezuelan nationals should be ended.
“So long as the district court’s order is in effect, the Secretary must permit over 300,000 Venezuelan nationals to remain in the country, notwithstanding her reasoned determination that doing so even temporarily is ‘contrary to the national interest,'" the administration wrote.
Not surprisingly, Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, who make up the liberal side of the high court, dissented, saying they would not have made the same call.
Justice Jackson called the situation "another grave misuse of our emergency docket" in her dissent.
“Having opted instead to join the fray, the Court plainly misjudges the irreparable harm and balance-of-the-equities factors by privileging the bald assertion of unconstrained executive power over countless families’ pleas for the stability our Government has promised them,” Jackson wrote.
She added, "Because, respectfully, I cannot abide our repeated, gratuitous, and harmful interference with cases pending in the lower courts while lives hang in the balance, I dissent.”
It doesn't really matter, as Jackson's dissent certainly isn't going to keep the president up at night.
