Haiti TPS: Attorneys say Supreme Court should dismiss case after newly discovered messages |

Attorneys for Haitian nationals with temporary protected status are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to dismiss the federal government’s appeal before the high court that seeks to end TPS for Haiti, citing what they say is new evidence that indicates the Trump Administration unlawfully tried to revoke the designation.

Newly discovered behind-the-scenes communications reveal that subject matter experts within the Department of Homeland Security recommended extending Haiti’s TPS before then-DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announced she was canceling the designation, said Geoff Pipoly, lead counsel for Haitian TPS holders.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in late April for the case, which has the potential to impact more than 330,000 Haitian nationals living in the United States, including thousands of residents in the Springfield area. The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling in the case by early July. A decision could come any day now.

Pipoly filed a motion Tuesday, June 16, that asks the highest court in the land to dismiss the government’s petition as improvidently granted — a type of filing also known as a DIG request.

The motion says new internal DHS documents show that Noem did not consult with the State Department before she decided to terminate Haiti’s TPS. Plaintiffs’ attorneys say the DHS secretary by statute is required to consult relevant agencies to determine country conditions before making any TPS determination.

The federal government has claimed Noem did consult before reaching a decision.

Experts within U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and career staff with DHS recommended to extend Haiti’s protected status designation, the motion states.

Pipoly said legal counsel for TPS holders continue to obtain DHS documents that are relevant to their claims, and the Supreme Court should reject the federal government’s appeal and allow a district court case challenging Haiti’s TPS termination to proceed as more information is gathered.

“The right thing to do here is to dismiss the appeal, send it back to the trial court for further factual development,” he said. “What we’re saying here is the Supreme Court, we think, jumped the gun by taking the case as quickly as it did, before all the facts were out in the world.”

This story will be updated.