Staff Reports
A federal judge has managed to throw a wrench into Trump’s plans yet again by blocking an attempt to end the wildly controversial CHNV program, which provides work permits and legal status to over half a million foreign nationals from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. This latest ruling comes from U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, an Obama appointee who appears to be more interested in protecting a Biden-era initiative than in upholding the law and the safety of American citizens.
The ruling contends that if this program, established in 2023, is terminated, these foreign nationals—who represent a hefty influx of people crossing over the southern border—would face perilous options. They could either lawfully return to their home countries and potentially encounter dangers or wait indefinitely for deportation proceedings, which is a charming choice for anyone. It seems the judge is more concerned with the safety of those here illegally than with the implications of their presence for law-abiding Americans.
The Biden administration positioned the CHNV program as a means to decrease illegal border crossings while allowing for better vetting of incoming migrants. However, this narrative quickly unraveled as reports of widespread fraud emerged, leading to a temporary pause of the program. Not to mention, several beneficiaries of this so-called humanitarian initiative were later arrested for heinous crimes, including serious offenses against children. These developments alone should raise eyebrows about the wisdom of continually coddling this program.
So, a judge is again assuming the power of the Executive.
Judge Blocks Trump Administration From Ending Biden-era Parole Program https://t.co/GThV4kJxmX
— mikedinslc (@mikedinslc) April 15, 2025
By permitting migrants and their families to fly into the U.S. under an executive mandate, the Biden administration opened the floodgates while simultaneously neglecting the rule of law. This two-year parole system afforded individuals entry into the U.S. based on sponsorship, yet, instead of fostering safety and proper vetting, it seems to have resulted in chaos—a scenario that ought to give any sensible person pause.
Interestingly, Judge Talwani emphasized the need for a case-by-case review of each individual’s situation, suggesting a certain level of review might be warranted for those benefiting from this program. One has to wonder if such meticulous scrutiny will be afforded to American citizens facing judgment from their government or if this leniency will only apply to foreign nationals. With these ongoing legal battles, it becomes increasingly clear that there are two disparate standards at play: one for Americans and another entirely for those who crossed the border hoping for a free pass.
