S.F. packs court for case against ending Temporary Protected Status

Love what you read? Love that it was free?

Mission Local will never have a paywall. All our articles are free for everyone, always. Help us keep it that way — donate to our end-of-year fundraiser to make Mission Local free for your neighbors.

Donate today!

At 2 a.m. Tuesday morning, nursing student Jhony Silva folded clothes to quiet his anxiety.

In a few hours, Silva’s attorneys would challenge the Department of Homeland Security’s July decision that terminated Temporary Protected Status for immigrants from Nepal, Honduras and Nicaragua who had fled to the United States to escape natural disasters.

Silva is among more than 60,000 people whose lives hang in the balance. Silva arrived in the United States from Honduras at the age of 3, after Hurricane Mitch devastated Central America in 1998. He remembers little of his home country. 

A recent lawsuit, filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California and partnering law firms, challenged the Trump administration’s decision to terminate Temporary Protected Status on the grounds that it did so unlawfully.

As it stands now, those left without protected status will have to decide between uprooting their lives to face tenuous conditions in their home countries or remaining in the country, where they could face  severe legal consequences. 

Inside Judge Trina Thompson’s San Francisco courtroom at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Tuesday morning, an audience filled the wooden benches for the hearing: National TPS Alliance v. Noem.

Attendees sat shoulder-to-shoulder, many wearing TPS alliance pins from the advocacy organization National TPS Alliance. Others held white roses adorned with blue ribbons; the flower is a symbol of peace, and the color references the Nicaraguan and Honduran flags.

Silva made his way through the crowd to an empty seat and sat down, nervously tapping his leg.

Thompson made the stakes clear: If the ACLU and its allies could make a strong case that San Francisco had jurisdiction, she would be able to make a summary judgment on whether or not TPS will be restored for people from Nicaragua, Honduras and Nepal.

Thompson had pored over all of the submitted evidence, she told the attorneys for the ACLU and DHS. “I probably haven’t slept in three days, due to the academic exercise you both gave me,” she said.  

Attorneys for both sides began presenting their cases. The ACLU attorney, Emi MacLean, challenged the termination of TPS on grounds that the government had failed to review the safety of the countries that TPS recipients risked being deported to before rescinding the status — a departure from decades of legal precedent.

“They made a decision based on stale information,” said the ACLU attorney.

If the secretary of homeland security had looked, MacLean’s co-council attorney Jessica Bansal said, they would have found that both Honduras and Nicaragua remain fundamentally unsafe. 

Meanwhile, Bansal said, the government published numerous highly racialized and publicized statements to justify the termination of TPS. One public statement referred to TPS holders as “criminals” and “invaders.” Another said that allowing TPS holders to stay in the United States “encourages a mass migration.”

For the next four hours, both the ACLU and DHS attorneys fought to answer Judge Thompson’s questions, as the audience gradually dwindled.

At one point, the judge questioned the government attorney’s claim that discretion to terminate TPS “solely” rests with the head of the Department of Homeland Security.

“The statute says solely?” Thompson asked.

The attorney admitted, “No, it does not.”

Thompson ultimately denied the government’s motion to dismiss the case, but it will take longer to reach a final ruling.

MacLean’s attitude was hopeful as she exited the courtroom.

“We were able to present powerful evidence that the secretary’s decision to terminate TPS was illegal, predetermined and not based on what the statute needs them to be based on,” she said. “We are hopeful that the court will recognize the illegality of these actions.”

Outside the courthouse, supporters chanted, “El pueblo unido jamás será vencido,” (the people united will never be defeated) as Silva and his legal team emerged.

Silva said he was worried about how the threat of deportation was affecting his 9-year-old child. “I couldn’t hide what is happening to my kid, but I think he understands more than enough, because he’s been anxious,” he told Mission Local.

In the background, music from a Los Angeles Central American band that had traveled to attend the hearing could still be heard, as well as chants from the crowd. 

“It’s very powerful to be a part of this movement.” Silva said, as he stepped up to address the crowd. “I have faith that the judge will rule in our favor because we all deserve better.” He looked out at the crowd with tears in his eyes. “We shouldn’t be living like this.”