On May 13, 2024 Eduardo, his wife María del Carmen and his minor daughter arrived in the United States from Havana thanks to the Humanitarian Parole Program (PPH) implemented by President Joe Biden.
After having passed through the paperwork of rigor, within a few weeks they began working on the type of jobs reserved by the labor market for newcomers, regardless of the professional ownership of each one, in case of having it. María del Carmen was located in a factory. Eduardo began working as a driver of a VAN of the Fedex company.
In January of the following year, with the new administration, signs began to see that they could have problems. On January 20, President Trump signed the Executive order entitled “Protecting The American People Against Invasion” which basically laid the foundations for the suspension of the Humanitarian Parole Program (PPH) of the previous government.
On February 28 a collective claim (Class Action) presented by Justice Action Center (JAC) and Human Rights First (HRF) before the Massachusetts district court, challenged several actions raised by the Administration with the aim of affecting immigrants; Among them, to finish “the special processes for nationals of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela” and deporting their beneficiaries that they did not have “other migratory relief.” The case was coded as Svitlana doe v. Kristi Noem.
The administration announced that the PPH would be eliminated from April 24 and that thereafter the work permits would not be valid. Suddenly, those involved began seeing that information in their mailboxes or on the United States citizenship and immigration service page (USCIS). They would be in a limbo shortly.
Obviously, it was a strategy designed to, among other objectives, reinforce the self -export announced by the Government in March with the so -called CBP Home, a back upside down of the mechanism established by Biden to grant interviews / access to the border. And a way to save costs once the purpose of deporting one million people during Trump’s first year.
Eduardo and María del Carmen had a certain respite when on April 14, ten days before the Government put into practice the announced, a district court chaired by the federal judge Indira TalwaniBoston, temporarily prevented the federal government from completely canceling the program.
Two were the central elements that fed their decision. The first, which was not of public interest to declare that hundreds of thousands of people benefiting from the PPH “are no longer legally present in the country, so that they cannot work legally in their communities or keep themselves or their families.”
The second, that the legal status of the beneficiaries of the PPH (which includes the permanence and work permit) should be maintained until its natural expiration; that is, until the two years allowed from the beginning for these people were completed.
It was, in effect, a victory and a relief. The administration had to freeze, provisionally, its plans to get rid of those immigrants. There was no choice but announce as follows:
On April 14, 2025, the United States District Court for the Massachusetts district issued a preliminary order that suspended part of the notification of the Federal Registry published on March 25, 2025, entitled “Termination of the temporary permanence permit process for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans (CHNV)”. See Svitlana Doe, et al., V. Noem, et. Al., No. 25-CV-10495 (D. Mass., April 14, 2025). By virtue of the order, the notifications of termination of the permits of temporary permanence (parole) sent to foreigners of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela, in accordance with the notification published in the Federal Registry, are suspended and, therefore, are not in force. New requests for temporary permanence (Parole) will not be processed for CHNV.
The emergency application to the Supreme Court and the Parole Program
The government appealed. But on May 5 the Court of Appeals of the First Circuit, based in Boston and composed of two liberal and one conservative judges, gave the reason to the judge and, therefore, denied the official application.
“The District Court determined that article 8 USC § 1182 (d) (5) (a) does not grant the Secretary of National Security not reviewable to cancel probation, except in case of case,” the three magistrates wrote.
Eduardo and María del Carmen were then able to continue with their work pending the new permits they requested for having requested to accept the Cuban adjustment law. Thanks to that, the family aid, a year and one day of having entered the airport they could pay $ 1400 for each one, plus the cost of the new work permit for the residence (Green Card): $ 260 per person.
On May 8, the Government went to the Supreme Court with an emergency application (docket). And on Friday 30 of the same month the Court announced, in a 7-2 decision, that the Trump administration could revoke the PPH until there was a pronouncement of the lower courts.
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor disagreed and warned the devastating consequences of the move for immigrants before legal claims were resolved.
In other words, and contrary to what is usually believed, the supreme decision did not close the case, but it did allow the government to continue deportations and revoke work permits. As a result, PPH beneficiaries instantly lost their legal status.
It is considered the largest mass delegalization event in the history of the United States.
Supreme Court authorizes the end of humanitarian parole: half a million immigrants at risk
The officials did the expected: send again emails to those involved with the news that their permits were suspended. And update the E-verifythat is, a labor verification system on-line operated by USCIS available to employers. All work permits under category C11 – that of the PPH – had lost their validity.
Many employers also made the expected: to leave those workers in the street, in a few cases under protest and even speaking for the elbows of a immigration policy that, in fact, was affecting their respective businesses.
Now it is the first appeal circuit to decide whether the Base Court (Talwani) was exceeded or not in his authority by allowing the continuation of the PPH. That circuit established an accelerated calendar of allegations at the request of the parties. The defendants filed theirs on June 11. The plaintiffs, on 25. The oral arguments were presented on July 29 at 2:00 pm in Boston itself.
The new thing in this case is that an organization, the Public Rights Projecthas presented a writing Amicus Curiae on the abrupt termination of several humanitarian probation programs. They have done it on behalf of 14 local governments and 18 leaders of these.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e1oumo9ydy
There they hold: “Our document details how the completion of this and other humanitarian probation programs will directly harm local governments and their communities. Deporting hundreds of thousands of community members damage social networks, it has negative economic consequences and overload public services.”
Later: “Economic losses will be felt in the sectors of health, manufacturing, hospitality and construction. In addition, the elimination of legal protections for immigrants will erode confidence among members of the community.”
And they conclude: “Our letter urges the first circuit to confirm the decision of the District Court to maintain the current program.”
Eduardo and María del Carmen expect, without working. The USCIS page announces that their new work permits will be granted in September of this year.
