Judge blocks Trump's early termination of temporary protections for Haitian immigrants
Cogan, an appointee of President George W. Bush, held that Noem's termination was unlawful because the government ignored provisions in the TPS statute that seek to provide early notice to recipients, including barring termination until a previous extension expires.
The judge noted that Haitian TPS recipients have enrolled in schools, taken jobs and began medical treatment in reliance on the U.S. government's previous representations about the duration of the protections.
'When the Government confers a benefit over a fixed period of time, a beneficiary can reasonably expect to receive that benefit at least until the end of that fixed period,' Cogan wrote.
'Secretary Noem cannot reconsider Haiti's TPS designation in a way that takes effect before February 3, 2026,' the judge added.
TPS designations are based on conditions in a particular country, including whether there is armed conflict, civil strife or widespread human rights violations. Noem said the 'environmental situation in Haiti has improved enough that it is safe for Haitian citizens to return home.' The State Department, meanwhile, advises Americans to 'not travel to Haiti due to kidnapping, crime, civil unrest, and limited health care.'
The Trump administration has sought to revoke immigration parole programs and protected status for more than a million people from countries including Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Cameroon and Afghanistan.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
3 hours ago
- Newsweek
Some Social Security Recipients Will See Wage Garnishment in Just Weeks
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. In roughly 20 days, some Social Security recipients could experience wage garnishment as a higher Social Security claw back rate returns. Roughly 2 million Americans owed money to the Social Security Administration due to overpayments in 2023, according to KFF and Cox Media group. Starting July 24, the higher wage garnishments will go into effect until the full overpayment has been resolved. Why It Matters President Donald Trump has implemented a wide range of changes to the Social Security Administration (SSA). In addition to ending the use of paper checks by October, Trump also appointed former Fiserv CEO Frank Bisignano as the new SSA commissioner. The Department of Government Efficiency also instructed the agency to cut 7,000 SSA jobs. For beneficiaries who have been mistakenly overpaid, losing Social Security benefits could have severe consequences on their ability to pay for basic necessities. Roughly 21 percent of married couples and 45 percent of single recipients rely on Social Security for 90 percent or more of their income, according to SSA estimates. A sign is seen outside a US Social Security Administration building, November 5, 2020, in Burbank, California. A sign is seen outside a US Social Security Administration building, November 5, 2020, in Burbank, California. VALERIE MACON/AFP via Getty Images What To Know In some circumstances, the SSA overpays Social Security recipients due to either miscalculations on their part or the recipient failing to update their earnings information. In March, the SSA said it would be bringing back its 100 percent claw back rate for Social Security recipients who were mistakenly overpaid by the government. During Joe Biden's presidency, that rate was set at 10 percent to allow seniors more breathing room to pay for their basic necessities. However, the SSA updated that garnishment rate to 50 percent in April. "When we determine an individual receiving Title II benefits is overpaid, we send them a notice requesting a full and immediate refund and inform them of their right to request reconsideration or a waiver of recovery," the SSA said in April. "We usually provide 90 days for the individual to request a lower rate of withholding, a reconsideration, or waiver." The 90-day period from the SSA's statement on April 25 ends July 24, meaning more than a million recipients could see their payments impacted. However, those who have been overpaid can file for an overpayment waiver. Form SSA-632BK asks for forgiveness for the overpayment if it was not your fault and it would create financial hardship. To get this approved, you'll need proof that repaying the money would create a significant hardship. Beneficiaries can also file Form SSA-561 to appeal the claim you were overpaid. Newsweek reached out to the SSA for comment via email. What People Are Saying Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek: "Most recipients don't realize they've been overpaid until they receive a letter from the SSA. Without regularly reviewing your earnings history and benefit statements, overpayments can go unnoticed. Even if the error wasn't your fault, you're still responsible for repayment—unless you appeal, request a waiver, or set up a payment plan within the 90-day period." What Happens Next The loss of income could be dire for many Social Security recipients who rely on the benefits for most if not all of their income. A recent report from Gallup found 86 percent rely on Social Security as a "major" or "minor" income source. "The consequences can be significant, especially for retirees living on a fixed income. With inflation still elevated, a 50 percent reduction in benefits could severely impact housing, food, and healthcare," Thompson said. "For many, Social Security is their only source of income—making these garnishments potentially devastating."
Hamilton Spectator
4 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
What if killing Canada's digital services tax is just the beginning for Donald Trump?
OTTAWA—Call it a prudent climbdown, a show of weakness, or an unavoidable concession. There are several ways to look at Prime Minister Mark Carney's 11th-hour decision to cancel the federal government's Digital Services Tax last weekend. But what if it's also a tangible example of exactly what Carney warned would happen? The Liberal leader won a minority government on April 28 with a pitch that no one was better placed than himself to protect Canada from Donald Trump. The U.S. president has mused about using 'economic force' to annex Canada. As if taunting or teasing this country, he questions why it exists, and keeps floating the prospect of it becoming the '51st state' of the U.S. Two days before the election, Carney spelled out how he understood all of this. 'The U.S. is trying to put economic pressure on us to gain major concessions, to the extreme of a level of integration of our countries that would impinge our sovereignty,' Carney said that day in King City, north of Toronto. Carney, in his final campaign conference, ruled out any prospect the U.S. would use military Flash forward to last week. There was Trump, posting on social media that Canada's incoming Digital Services Tax — a policy that would force American tech giants and other firms, including Canadian ones, to pay up — was nothing short of a 'blatant attack' on the United States. Trump declared he had cut off all negotiations to resolve the trade war that started earlier this year with his wave of tariffs on Canadian goods. In other words, Canada's most important commercial and military partner, the destination for 76 per cent of all exports last year , was willing to ditch talks and dictate terms that could jeopardize thousands of jobs and hundreds of billions of dollars in economic activity. All over a domestic policy the Americans didn't like. Barely 48 hours later, shortly before midnight on a Sunday, the government announced the tax was dead. Not only would Canada not implement the policy as planned, it would repeal the 2024 law that created it. Is this Trump using economic pressure to force Canada's hand? 'It is exactly that,' said Lawrence Herman, a veteran trade lawyer and special counsel with the firm, Cassidy Levy Kent. 'It's an example of, on a particular issue, how much pressure can be brought to bear to force Canada to abandon not only a policy, but a law that has been in force for 18 months.' In Herman's view, the decision looks like a 'significant retreat' by the government, which shows 'how dependent we are on a reasonable relationship' with Canada's largest trading partner. Other policies that Trump has complained about, such as the supply management system for dairy and poultry, could be next, he said. Pete Hoekstra, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, told the CBC this week that he has a 'strong belief' Canada could water down that system by changing a law designed to protect it if that becomes part of a new trade deal. 'It's not a particularly good start to this so-called new economic and security relationship,' Herman said. He was referring to Carney's stated goal of talks that are now continuing under an agreement struck at the Group of 7 summit in the Alberta Rockies last month to strive for a deal to redefine the relationship by July 21. Others have been harsher in their judgment. Lloyd Axworthy, a former Liberal foreign affairs minister, posted online that Carney was acquiescing to Trump in a way that contradicts his 'elbows up' mantra on the campaign trail. 'Forget any dreams of a more sovereign, self-directed Canada. We're doubling down on the corporate cosiness and U.S. dependency that's defined our last half-century,' he wrote on Substack. Axworthy did not respond to an interview request Thursday. For Jean Charest, a former Quebec premier who sits on the government's Canada-U.S. advisory council, the situation illustrates the 'chaos' of dealing with Trump, whose administration is grappling with trade talks and tariffs threats against most countries on the planet. This meant that Carney's government was operating 'in a world of very bad choices,' Charest said. Deciding to scrap the Digital Services Tax, in that context, was 'certainly a legitimate choice,' he said. 'We are not in an ordinary world of negotiations,' Charest added. 'It would be nice to think, 'You give, I give ... we compromise.' It doesn't work that way with Donald Trump, and we're making our way through this by trying to protect essentially what's the most important for us in the short term, and that's a negotiation that has some legs.' Charest noted that there was opposition inside Canada to the Digital Services Tax, which would have applied back to 2022 with a three per cent tax on Canadian revenues from digital services companies with more than $1.1 billion in global earnings and $20 million inside Canada. The U.S. also pushed back against the policy when Joe Biden was in power. David Pierce, vice-president of government relations with the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said his business lobby group felt the Digital Services Tax should be paused. He also said it would have been wrong to proceed with it after the U.S. dropped a controversial provision from Trump's major budget bill last week: the so-called 'revenge tax' that would have hit the U.S. assets of foreign businesses and individuals. That decision came as the G7 agreed to exempt American firms from a co-ordinated effort to ensure corporations pay a minimum tax, which was 'absolutely a win' for the U.S. Even so, Pierce said Canada likely had no choice but to drop the policy, given Trump's exploitation of Canada's 'weakness' — its major economic reliance on trade with the U.S. 'We just hope that this now paves the way for a good renewed deal,' said Pierce. The ultimate goal of the federal government in that deal, at least publicly, has been to return to the terms of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), which Trump signed in 2018 during his first term, after disparaging North American free trade as unfair to his country. That would mean lifting the rounds of tariffs Trump has imposed since the winter, with import duties tied to concerns about drugs and migration over the border, and others that Trump slapped on Canadian autos, steel and aluminum in a bid to promote those sectors in the U.S. Canada has responded with countertariffs on its own that the government says hit more than $80 billion worth of American imports to Canada. Canada's lead trade negotiator with the Trump administration, Ambassador Kirsten Hillman, was not available for an interview this week, the embassy in Washington told the Star. Charest, however, said he believes it is possible that Canada could accept some level of tariffs in a July 21 deal, so long as they have no material effect. Such 'zero-effect' tariffs could only kick in at levels of trade that Canada doesn't or likely won't achieve, for example. Yet there's a question of how much any deal can be relied upon, so long as Trump is in the White House, unilaterally imposing tariffs that Canada views as 'illegal' violations of the 2018 trade deal. 'Trump is arguing about supply management and the (Digital Services Tax), but it's the U.S. that is in flagrant breach of its trade obligations. It's abandoned the CUSMA, virtually behaving as if it did not exist and the U.S. signature has no meaning,' Herman said. 'So we are in a world where rules and the rules-based system, and the stability that that treaty was supposed to provide, have gone by the board.' That means, at least for now, the Carney government is operating in a world where Canada's foremost ally, the colossus to the south, will use economic force to get what it wants.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Noem fast-tracks construction for water barriers in Texas along Rio Grande to keep migrants from crossing into US
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has fast-tracked construction for about 17 miles worth of floating border barriers in the Rio Grande River in Texas, expanding the rapidly growing Trump administration footprint on the US-Mexico border. Noem signed a waiver bypassing environmental laws so about 17 miles of 'waterborne barrier' technology could be built in the Rio Grande Valley in South Texas, the Department of Homeland Security announced on Thursday. 'A capability gap has been identified in waterways along the Southwest border where drug smuggling, human trafficking and other dangerous and illegal activity occurs,' the department said in a statement. The project, which will be paid for with previously allocated funds, marks the sixth time Noem has used such a waiver. It revives a strategy that was a source of controversy under the previous administration, when the Biden administration sued the state of Texas for putting a 1,000 feet of razor-tipped barriers in the Rio Grande, in a case that was ultimately unsuccessful on appeal. Texas's much smaller floating barrier effort cost about $1 million, and Rep. Henry Cuellar, Democrat of Texas, warned Border Report that the latest DHS version of a river barrier could cost vastly more. 'When you talk about constructing a fence it could be $30 million per mile. This water structure is going to be expensive,' he said. Residents of the low-income, largely Hispanic region are divided over such border projects. The Rio Grande Valley voted for Trump in 2024, but some argue the border build-up in the area has drained needed resources and led to profiling against Latinos. 'This is like a rights-free area,' Michelle Serrano, of the local advocacy group Voces Unidas RGV, told The Independent last year. 'We're talking about an area where they freely racially profile us. It feels like a separate but equal situation.' In addition to expanding border construction, the second Trump administration has also transferred nearly 400 miles of border land to military control, as a means of expanding the use of troops in direct immigration enforcement, while deploying Marines and National Guard troops internally in response to anti-immigration raid protests in Los Angeles. Prior to Trump returning to office, states like Texas embarked on their own border infrastructure sprees, erecting razor barriers, walls, and floating buoys. As part of the Trump administration's Big, Beautiful Bill spending package, the federal government will spend over $13 billion reimbursing states like Texas for their efforts. The Biden administration also waived environmental laws and continued the military-style security construction at the border, though at a lesser pace than the first Trump term.
