Dinesh
LightNews LightNews
dineshkmc.bsky.social
Dinesh
@dineshkmc.bsky.social
290 followers 580 following 57 posts
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Dinesh
tylermcbrien.com
Martinez is recounting her harrowing experience: after being shot by CBP agents, she drove a mile to the safety of an auto shop where she called 911, got treatment at a hospital for 7 bullet wounds, then was immediately taken into custody by federal agents.
February 3, 2026 at 8:50 PM
Reposted by Dinesh
reichlinmelnick.bsky.social
Finally, Judge Reyes gets to the Equal Protection claim and makes it clear; there is just no possible way you can look at Trump saying racist things against Haitians for years in a row, including specifically about Haitian TPS-Holders, and not draw a line from point A to point B.
. President Trump has expressed racially motivated animus President Trump has made—freely, at times even boastfully—several derogatory statements about Haitians and other nonwhite foreigners. To start, he has repeatedly invoked racist tropes of national purity, declaring that “illegal immigrants”—a category he wrongly assigns to Haitian TPS holders—are “poisoning the blood” of America. § 705 Mot. at 47. He has, Plaintiffs allege, complained that recently admitted nonwhite Africans would “never ‘go back to their huts’ in Africa.” SAC 90 ¶ 66. He has complained further that nonwhite immigration is an “invasion,” creating a “dumping ground” that is “destroying our country.” Id. ¶¶ 94, 101. He has described immigrants as “not people,” id. ¶ 86, “snakes,” id. ¶ 84, and “garbage,” id. ¶ 107, who have “bad genes,” id. ¶ 98. He has also stated that he prefers immigrants from “nice”—predominantly white—countries like Norway, Sweden, and Denmark over immigrants from “shithole countries,” id. ¶¶ 102, 108. President Trump has referred to Haiti as a “shithole country,” suggested Haitians “probably have AIDS,” and complained that Haitian immigration is “like a death wish for our country.” § 705 Mot. at 47. He has also promoted the false conspiracy theory that Haitian immigrants were “eating the pets of the people” in Springfield, Ohio. Even after that (ridiculous) claim was debunked, he claimed they were eating “other things too that they’re not supposed to be.” Id. at 47–48. About two weeks after the Termination, he again described Haiti as a “filthy, dirty, [and] disgusting” “shithole country.” Id. at 48. He stated: “I have also announced a permanent pause on Third World migration, including from hellholes like Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia and many other countries.” Id. at 48 n.53. Then continued, “Why is it we only take people from shithole countries, right? Why cannot we have some people from Norway, Sweden, just a few, let us have a few, from Denmark.” Id. It is not a coincidence that Haiti’s population is ninety-five percent black while Norway’s is over ninety percent white. SAC 90 ¶ 70. Plaintiffs allege that after taking office, putting words to practice, “President Trump made his preference for white immigrants the official policy of the United States.” Id. ¶ 103. On the one hand, his administration eliminated “the lawful immigration status not only of Haitians but of immigrants from other predominantly nonwhite countries.” Id. On the other, it “gave special priority” to white South African immigrants, admitting them into the United States as refugees. Id. And, of course, Plaintiffs further allege that President Trump targeted the TPS designations of nonwhite countries. He described utilizing the TPS program as “a certain little trick,” and groused that TPS recipients “are illegal immigrants as far as [he is] concerned.” Id. ¶ 91.31 Yes, Secretary Noem is supposed to make the decision. But here is what occurred instead: January 29: Secretary Noem explained that “[w]hen the President gives a directive, the Department of Homeland Security will follow it.” § 705 Mot. at 34. February 22: President Trump stated that “[t]his week I also cancelled temporary protective status for migrants from Haiti, they are pouring into our country, pouring in.”34 (emphasis added). February 24: Secretary Noem published the decision of the partial vacatur of then-Secretary Mayorkas’s July 2024 extension of Haiti’s TPS designation. See 90 Fed. Reg. at 10511. The Court need do nothing more than take the President and Secretary at their word in concluding that Secretary Noem only followed orders. At a minimum, President Trump influenced Secretary Noem’s decision through his many public statements, which Secretary oem has acknowledged. See supra Section IV.B.2.a. Indeed, the Government concedes that DHS communicated and met with White House officials to discuss Haiti’s TPS designation.35 In any event, Plaintiffs also identify statements and actions by Secretary Noem that reinforce the inference of racial animus. Secretary Noem has described Haitians—and people from eighteen other nonwhite countries—as “leeches,” “entitlement junkies,” and “foreign invaders” who “suck dry our hard-earned tax dollars,” and has expressly claimed that “WE DON’T WANT THEM. NOT ONE.” See SAC ¶¶ 109–10. And recall that that X post and her recommendation that President Trump ban anyone from Haiti coming into the U.S. occurred a mere three days after she made the Termination decision. See supra n.2.36 Plaintiffs allege that she separately accused TPS holders of being “poorly vetted migrants” who include “MS-13 gang members to known terrorists and murderers.” SAC ¶ 111. Though a closer call, even if the Court ignored President Trump’s statements altogether, Secretary Noem’s expressed animus towards nonwhite foreigners would support a stay. * * * Taken together, the record strongly suggests that Secretary Noem’s decision to terminate Haiti’s TPS designation was motivated, at least in part, by racial animus. The mismatch between what the Secretary said in the Termination and what the evidence shows confirms that the termination of Haiti’s TPS designation was not the product of reasoned decision-making,
February 3, 2026 at 2:15 AM
Reposted by Dinesh
reichlinmelnick.bsky.social
Judge Reyes also concludes that Noem's decision was entirely pretextual, because she is just terminating every single TPS designation the moment it comes up for review, rather than doing any individualized review.
Plaintiffs’ pattern-and-practice allegations, see SAC ¶¶ 240–43; Dkt. 108 at 10–13, claim just that. They assert that “[t]he fact that the administration has terminated every TPS designation that it has reviewed despite the disparate conditions in those countries is evidence that the administration is terminating TPS designations, including Haiti’s TPS designation, based on a predetermined agenda rather than a good-faith, fact-based, country-specific review as required by 8 U.S.C. § 1254a(b)(3)(A).” SAC ¶ 241. In fewer words, they allege that the Secretary impermissibly engaged in a “habitual[]” “practice” or “de facto policy” of terminations across the board. Hisp. Affairs Project, 901 F.3d at 386–88. The Government concedes that twelve designated countries have come up for periodic review since January 20, 2025, and Secretary Noem has terminated all twelve. Dkt. 113.24 It is, to the Court’s knowledge, unprecedented in the thirty-five years since the establishment of the TPS program for a DHS Secretary to terminate every TPS designation that crosses her desk for review. See Jan. 7 Hr’g Tr. at 11–15, 60–68. This unprecedented, acrossthe-board nature of the Secretary’s terminations strongly suggests that each decision sprang from a “de facto policy” and “shrug[ed] off” the “statutory command” that she engage in an individualized review of the conditions of each country. Hisp. Affairs Project, 901 F.3d at 386– 88. This is not only educated speculation. Secretary Noem has failed to consult, as required, appropriate agencies in making other termination decisions. As this Court does with Haiti, courts have concluded that she failed to consult before terminating the TPS designations for Burma, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, despite her statutory obligation to do so. See Doe, 2026 WL 184544 at *14 (Burma); Nat’l TPS Alliance, 2025 WL 4058572 at *22–23 (Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua); NTPSA IV, 798 F.Supp.3d at 1118 (Venezuela). These consistent judicial findings support a broader pattern of terminating TPS designations writ large. Whatever the “Administration’s priorities,” Dep’t of Com., 588 U.S. at 781, the Secretary has no authority to contravene an act of Congress. A pattern and practice of doing so is “arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law, in violation of the APA.” Hisp. Affairs Project, 901 F.3d at 386. Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their pattern-and-practice APA claim.
February 3, 2026 at 2:05 AM