Aaron Hall

Imagine the amount of money the erstwhile Chads and “Ken” must be siphoning out of DHS in the private sector to not be in the administration.

Ha ha ha

Find someone who wants you like the BIA wants to deport people to be tortured in Haitian prisons (I think that's the 3rd or 4th published case on Haitian prison torture since last January).

Matter of D-J-L- Case Caption: Where an expert witness’ background and testimony reflect a reluctance to consider contrary evidence and an inability to impartially assess matters involving the removal of persons to a given country, an Immigration Judge errs in giving the testimony of that witness significant weight.

Screenshot of text from case: In the instant case, although Ms. Karshan demonstrated expertise in her field, the Immigration Judge clearly erred in the weight she gave to Ms. Karshan’s testimony and declaration. See id. at 103–05 (describing how to evaluate the persuasiveness of an expert’s opinion). Ms. Karshan’s background includes factors that significantly weigh against the reliability and persuasiveness of her testimony. See id. at 103. DHS objected to the Immigration Judge designating Ms. Karshan as an expert because of heradvocacy background, specifically arguing that she previously advocated that no criminal deportees should be returned to Haiti. When DHS confronted Ms. Karshan on cross-examination about coauthoring an article advocating that all deportations to Haiti be stopped, Ms. Karshan conceded that there were periods of time when she believed the United States should have ceased all deportations to Haiti.

BIA drops Matter of D-J-L-:

TLDR: Witness had studied torture in Haitian prisons including torture of "criminal deportees" from the U.S., became expert in the field, formed opinion that returning people to such torture is bad, is thus unqualified to be an expert.

www.justice.gov/eoir/media/1...

NEW: Mesa County District Attorney Dan Rubenstein (R) who prosecuted Tina Peters says Gov Jared Polis (D) giving Peters clemency "would be a gross injustice." Rubenstein points out that separate case cited by Polis to justify clemency misses the purpose of sentencing ranges.

So Congress is just a vestigial tail of the government at this point?

If you have the facts, pound the facts. If you have the law, pound the law. If you have neither, yell "major questions doctrine.”

Congress very explicitly created the U Visa to help law enforcement by encouraging victims to help with investigations/prosecutions without fear of being deported. The BIA, by saying we're gonna deport you while your application is backlogged, manages to defeat the whole purpose of the statute.

Most importantly, I want the Supreme Court to rule the right way.

But also, I want the advocates for this anti-historical crackpot attack to be humiliated and shamed.

Second, in any event, the Court has never before applied the major questions doctrine in the foreign affairs context, including foreign trade. Rather, as Justice Robert Jackson summarized and remains true, this Court has always recognized the “‘unwisdom of requiring Congress in this field of governmental power to lay down narrowly definite standards by which the President is to be governed.’” Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U. S. 579, 636, n. 2 (1952) (concurring opinion) (quoting United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., 299 U. S. 304, 321–322 (1936)). In foreign affairs cases, courts read the statute as written and do not employ the major questions doctrine as a thumb on the scale against the President

I really, genuinely dislike "Calvinball" analogies to most of the recent decisions of the Supreme Court. But "we have never applied this thing we invented during COVID to this other new thing" is worthy of the designation. Thanks, Justice Kavanaugh.

I have searched the depths of Legal Arguments not yet articulated or vetted on this subject, and will be presenting an irrefutable one in the very near future.

[I think he should go ahead and vet them]

Starting to think Pam Bondi's Board of Immigration Appeals might not be on the level.

Either an epidemic of that or about the expected rate of marriages souring fast where one party exercises an outsized amount of control over the other.

Not sure which is more likely.

This couple had a child together. I realize that's not everything but there's probably another side to this story. And maybe there's a reason DHS didn't previously seek revocation (not like they are gun-shy on doing that where they see fit).

I guess they just wanted to throw the very vocal one-sided marriage fraud community a bone?

Dismiss the appeal and tell the scorned petitioner to try to DHS to pursue revocation. What are we doing?

Screenshot of text of BIA decision: the bona fides of her marriage, the petitioner submitted a joint lease agreement, joint checking account document, joint dental insurance, joint auto insurance, joint Airbnb confirmations, and photographs of the couple. USCIS approved the visa petition on May 23, 2023, along with the beneficiary’s Application to Register Permanent Residence and Adjust Status (Form I-485), and the beneficiary became a conditional permanent resident.2 According to the petitioner, she and the beneficiary formally separated in December 2023. In February 2024, the petitioner filed a petition for annulment of her marriage based on fraud. On July 15, 2025, she filed the instant appeal seeking denial of the previously approved visa petition.

Ah yes, the "it might hurt the immigrant" exception to normal appeal deadlines/procedures.

What an absolutely bizarre decision.

Icarus

What is going on in the nation's immigration courts right now is an absolute scandal.

Why have a draft? Free agency into the league resolves this, I think. The top talents will not always be signing with best teams/biggest markets because there is only so much playing time to go around and because there is a de facto salary cap.

Great work!

You do a few extrajudicial killings in Minnesota and no one in the lamestream media will talk about all the extrajudicial killings you do in the Caribbean.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FRITZ EMMANUEL LESLY MIOT, et al., Plaintiffs, Case No. 25-cv-02471 (ACR) V. DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION On December 2, 1783, then-Commander-in-Chief George Washington penned: "America is open to receive not only the Opulent & respected Stranger, but the oppressed & persecuted of all Nations & Religions." More than two centuries later, Congress reaffirmed President Washington's vision by establishing the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program. See 8 U.S.C. § 1254a (TPS statute). It provides humanitarian relief to foreign nationals in the United States who come from disaster-stricken countries. It also brings in substantial revenue, with TPS holders generating $5.2 billion in taxes annually. See Part VI. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem has a different take.? eSec Noem I just met with the President. I am recommending a full travel ban on every damn country that's been flooding our nation with killers, leeches, and entitlement junkies. Our forefathers built this nation on blood, sweat, and the unyielding love of freedom-not for foreign invaders to slaughter our heroes, suck dry our hard-earned tax dollars, or snatch the benefits owed to AMERICANS. WE DON'T WANT THEM. NOT ONE. 6:52 PM - Dec 1, 2025 - 13.2M Views ' Letter from George Washington to Joshua Holmes (December 2, 1783). 2 Dkt. 90 (Second Am. Compl.) 1110 n.91. But see supra n.l.

So says the official responsible for overseeing the TPS program. And one of those (her word) "damn" countries is Haiti. Relevant here, three days before making the above post, Secretary Noem announced she would terminate Haiti's TPS designation as of February 3, 2026. See 90 Fed. Reg. 54733 (Nov. 28, 2025) (Termination). Plaintiffs are five Haitian TPS holders. They are not, it emerges, "killers, leeches, or entitlement junkies." They are instead: Fritz Emmanuel Lesly Miot, a neuroscientist researching Alzheimer's disease, Dkt. 90 (Second Am. Compl. (SAC)) 1 1; Rudolph Civil, a software engineer at a national bank, id. 1 2; Marlene Gail Noble, a laboratory assistant in a toxicology department, id. | 3; Marica Merline Laguerre, a college economics major, id. 9| 4; and Vilbrun Dorsainvil, a full-time registered nurse, id. 9|5. They claim that Secretary Noem's decision violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. § 706(2), and the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The Government counters that the Court does not have jurisdiction, and, in any case, the Secretary did not violate the law. Plaintiffs seek to stay the Secretary's decision under 5 U.S.C. § 705 pending the outcome of this litigation. See Dkt. 81 (§ 705 Mot.). To decide their motion, the Court considers first whether it has jurisdiction. It does. See Part II. It then considers: whether Plaintiffs have a substantial likelihood of success on the merits; whether they will be irreparably harmed absent a stay; and whether a merged balance of the equities and public interest analysis favors a stay. See Part III. Each element favors Plaintiffs. See Parts IV, V, and VI.

Finally, the balance of equities and public interest favor a stay. The Government does not cite any reason termination must occur post haste. Secretary Noem complains of strains unlawful immigrants place on our immigration-enforcement system. Her answer? Turn 352,959 lawful immigrants into unlawful immigrants overnight. She complains of strains to our economy. Her answer? Turn employed lawful immigrants who contribute billions in taxes into the legally unemployable. She complains of strains to our healthcare system. Her answer? Turn the insured into the uninsured. This approach is many things— in the public interest is not one of them. For the reasons below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for a Stay Under 5 U.S.C. § 705, Dkt. 81.

BREAKING: Judge Ana Reyes, in DC, issues a stay of DHS Sec. Noem’s decision to end Haiti’s temporary protected status (TPS) designation, a decision that was to go into effect on Tuesday and could have ended legal status for up to 350,000 people overnight. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

To anyone tempted to celebrate Noem's big announcement that ICE will use body cams and that it will be expanded nationwide as funding is available...

That's already been official ICE policy for over two years.
www.ice.gov/news/release....

Text of tweet from @acyn: Johnson: The additional judicial requirement for a warrant would be a whole other layer of bureaucracy. The immigration judges have already issued warrants that the ICE officials are acting upon.

Love that policymakers haven’t even bothered to learn how the current system works.

So they wait, check in, verify nothing has changed, and leave. Over and over and over again. BI has fully staffed offices all over the country for this make-work program. The mind bogglingly massive grift by ICE contractors is one of the great scandals of modern America (stiff competition, I know).

I recently had the displeasure of spending a few mornings at the BI corporation (owned by GEO) where people checked in for ISAP appointments. People check in and meet with their BI case worker, sometimes as often as weekly. Usually, these are for cases that have their hearings set years out…