Judge Strikes Down Trump Immigration Freeze On 39 Countries

Court Delivers Major Blow To White House Strategy

A federal judge has struck down a series of Trump administration immigration policies that effectively froze applications from people born in 39 countries, ruling that the measures were unlawful and driven by impermissible anti-immigrant bias.

Chief U.S. District Judge John McConnell ruled Friday that the policies left thousands of immigrants trapped in legal limbo, unable to obtain decisions on asylum claims, work permits, green cards or citizenship applications despite following established legal procedures.

The ruling represents one of the most significant judicial setbacks yet for President Donald Trump's latest immigration crackdown.

Immigrants Left In ‘Indeterminate Legal Limbo’

In a strongly worded judgment, McConnell said the government had effectively stopped processing applications from people solely because of where they were born.

The judge said affected immigrants had complied with every legal requirement imposed by Congress and federal regulations, yet found themselves waiting indefinitely for decisions that immigration officials simply refused to make.

"USCIS's hold on adjudications cannot be attributed to anything that these individuals did wrong," McConnell wrote. "Rather, it arises solely by the happenstance of their birth." U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, he said, lacked the legal authority to impose such sweeping restrictions.

Crackdown Followed National Guard Shooting

The policies were introduced after the November shooting of two National Guard members in Washington, D.C.

Prosecutors allege the attack was carried out by Afghan immigrant Rahmanullah Lakanwal, who has pleaded not guilty.

In the aftermath, Trump pledged to "permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries" while the immigration system recovered. His administration subsequently expanded travel restrictions to cover 39 nations across Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.

Countries facing full travel bans included Afghanistan, Iran, Haiti, Somalia, Venezuela and Syria.

Judge Accuses Administration Of Breaking Immigration Law

McConnell concluded that the immigration agency adopted the policies without statutory authority and in violation of federal administrative law.

The judge said the government had allowed anti-immigrant sentiment to influence official decision-making, something federal agencies are prohibited from doing.

"But the rule of law has to apply to everyone equally," McConnell wrote. "Indeed, the agency has violated the very immigration laws that Congress has charged it with administering."

The ruling immediately halts the policy and orders immigration authorities to resume processing affected applications.

Civil Rights Groups Celebrate Victory

The lawsuit was brought by a coalition of immigrant advocacy organisations and labour unions represented by the legal group Democracy Forward.

Its president, Skye Perryman, hailed the decision as a reaffirmation that the federal government cannot shut down lawful immigration pathways based on nationality.

The Department of Homeland Security had not commented on the ruling at the time of publication.

The decision is expected to trigger another legal and political battle over immigration policy as the Trump administration weighs whether to appeal.

SOURCE

The decision is expected to trigger another legal and political battle over immigration policy as the Trump administration weighs whether to appeal.

Of course they'll appeal. District judges can only rule on cases actually brought in their district, and their rulings only apply in their district. This guy's in the District of Rhode Island, making law for the entire country.

The Department of Homeland Security had not commented on the ruling at the time of publication.

They have now... From CNN:

DHS General Counsel James Percival blasted Friday’s decision.

“The Left has been running the same gambit with so called ‘animus’ claims since 2017. It is sabotage dressed in legal clothing,” Percival said in a statement. “It goes like this: (1) the admin is racist, (2) therefore a policy I don’t like is motivated by race, (3) therefore it is invalid. They have used it on virtually every Trump era Department of Homeland Security policy.”