Supreme Court lets DHS revoke humanitarian parole for some noncitizens

The Supreme Court on Friday issued an order allowing the Trump administration to revoke humanitarian parole for some migrants. Friday's order affected as many as 500,000 noncitizens from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. The order effectively overruled a previous decision by the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts halting the revocations.

What is humanitarian parole? Humanitarian parole allows individuals to temporarily live in the United States if they have a significant reason. A qualifying reason could include the need for medical treatment, a need to visit a sick family member, or a need to participate in a legal case, according to the National Immigration Forum. It does not provide a visa or a path to citizenship.

Why is it so controversial? Humanitarian parole came under review after President Donald Trump in January signed an executive order related to immigration. The order reiterates that humanitarian parole should only be granted on a case-by-case basis. The requesting individual must also demonstrate that parole is either necessitated by an urgent humanitarian need or would result in a significant public benefit.

The Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, responded to Trump’s executive order by issuing a directive to review the humanitarian parole program and end any identified cases of abuse. That directive said humanitarian parole should only be granted on a case-by-case basis and that any paroles that did not meet the requirements specified in Trump’s order should be terminated.

After the DHS directive, individuals whose paroles were terminated filed a legal challenge with the federal district court of Massachusetts in Svitlana Doe v. Noem. They argued that DHS terminated their parole without proper individual consideration. After the district court sided with the plaintiffs, DHS appealed.

What does the high court’s order mean? The Supreme Court granted the appeal on Friday until the case can be further reviewed. The order allows the Trump administration to cancel humanitarian parole for the affected migrants while the case is reviewed. The decision also raises the threshold for the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to grant humanitarian parole, which could lead to additional cancellations.

What do critics of the high court’s ruling have to say? Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the order. They argued that the Trump administration failed to demonstrate the need for the high court to grant the revocations, while ignoring the consequences for migrants whose humanitarian parole was being revoked. The case can be appealed and could potentially return to the Supreme Court in the future.

Dig deeper: Read Christina Grube's report about a Trump administration offer of stipends to illegal migrants who self-deport.