R.I. judge denies Trump administration’s bid to reinstate ban on immigrants

PROVIDENCE — A federal court judge denied the Trump administration’s attempts to resume policies that halted asylum, work permits, and citizenship proceedings for people from 39 African, Asian, Latin American, and Middle Eastern countries.

Read more After six years, Trump brings his election obsession to primetime at the White House

US District Court Judge John J. McConnell Jr. was immediately skeptical of the arguments made by Justice Department lawyer Tyler Becker during Wednesday’s hearing that the policies were lawful and necessary for “national security.”

McConnell had struck down those policies in early June, finding they were unlawful and “arbitrary and capricious.” The Trump administration appealed and asked McConnell to stay his order during the appeal process, saying there would otherwise be “irreparable harm.”

McConnell was unconvinced. In his 28-page opinion issued hours after the hearing, the judge made clear who he thought suffered irreparable harm.

“During the more than six months that the Challenged Policies were in effect, countless immigrants living in the United States — solely by virtue of their nationalities and not because of anything they did wrong — lost jobs, lost legal status, and lost the ability to meaningfully plan for their futures,“ McConnell wrote. ”There is overwhelming evidence of harm suffered by these individuals in the record, and there is no doubt that further injury would result if a stay were to be granted. Quite tellingly, the Government has little to say about these harms and provides no evidence to the contrary.”

A coalition of unions and nonprofits that aid immigrants and refugees, including the Refugee Dream Center in Providence and Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island, sued USCIS and the US Department of Homeland Security earlier this year. Asylum claims and immigration applications were halted, previously approved immigration cases were reopened, even those in the process of citizenship were stopped, based on their nationality.

On June 5, McConnell ruled that these policies administrated by USCIS and Homeland Security were unlawful. The judge found that the government had justified its actions with “pretextual concerns of ‘national security’ that mask anti-immigrant sentiments that it is forbidden from letting influence its decision-making.” USCIS claimed statutory and regulatory authority that it didn’t possess, made decisions without reasoned explanations, and acted without regard for the interests of the immigrant applicants, whose lives were left in legal limbo, McConnell wrote in a scathing 135-page opinion.

After a delay, USCIS complied with McConnell’s order and appealed in the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. Then, the federal agency filed for an emergency stay of McConnell’s order, claiming the policies were a matter of “national security and public safety concerns” identified by President Trump, and that there would be “irreparable harm” if they could not resume.

In Courtroom 1 — the same courtroom where naturalization ceremonies are held each month — McConnell drilled down on Becker’s arguments to vacate the order.

McConnell asked Becker for the rule in the Immigration and Nationality Act that gives USCIS the right to make a sweeping policy that targets people solely based on their nationality.

“We are talking about people in this country, sometimes decades long, who are applying legally and trying to follow the rules,” McConnell said to Becker. “Where does it give [USCIS] unbridled discretion?”

Read more Trump is taking longer to approve disaster aid and denying Democratic states more frequently

Nothing in the Immigration and Nationality Act gives USCIS the statutory authority to categorically section off countries from the timely processing of immigration benefits, McConnell said. Congress made clear decades agothat the government is prohibited from making immigration decisions based on national origin, he said.

“They chose that was not an American value,” McConnell said. “[They] cannot treat people differently based on their nationality.”

The government was complying with his order weeks before it filed a motion for an emergency stay, and showed no evidence of any harm, McConnell said. “That leads me to believe there can’t be irreparable harm, when you implemented the court order,” the judge said.

McConnell also said he was “taken aback” by an affidavit submitted by USCIS deputy director Angelica Alfonso-Royals. She defended the ban on the 39 countries by talking about the lack of vetting in Ethiopia, Liberia, and Pakistan — none of which were actually part of the ban.

“How can I take it seriously when the deputy director is putting forward evidence that is wholly inapplicable? You’ve now pointed out that countries not on the list have the same problems as countries on the list,” McConnell said. “It makes it hard to give credibility to the evidence. … There is zero evidence of irreparable harm.”

Lawyer Ryan Cooper of the Democracy Forward Foundation, part of the coalition that brought the lawsuit against USCIS and Homeland Security, told the judge the order that vacated the policies “has provided immigration communities with meaningful relief.” Some have been notified that they will be able to take the oaths of citizenship, which had been put on hold, Cooper said.

McConnell responded that not everyone praised his order. A Republican congressman from Florida, Greg Steube, introduced a resolution to impeach McConnell “for high crimes and misdemeanors.”

While USCIS has claimed that the policies were meant as a temporary measure, there was no sign that the federal governmentintended to lift the bans on those 39 countries, Cooper said. “It was an indefinite measure,” he said.

And, if McConnell decided to stay his order and let the federal government resume a freeze on asylum and immigration proceedings, it “would effectively shut down the system for these immigrants again for months, if not years,” Cooper said.

Democracy Forward president Skye Perryman praised McConnell’s decision Wednesday evening. “Families who followed the law should not be forced to endure renewed uncertainty because of discriminatory government actions,” Perryman said. “While the case continues, the court’s decision preserves critical protections for immigrant communities and reinforces a fundamental principle: our government must follow the law.”

Read more Trump expected to make election conspiracies a focus of Thursday’s national address