Law Office of In-Chul Sohn

A setback for TPS beneficiares from Honduras, Nicaragua, and Nepal

***A federal appeals court has given the Trump administration the go-ahead to end deportation protections and revoke work permits for more than 63,000 immigrants from Nicaragua, Honduras and Nepal, despite a lower court judge’s conclusion that the administration’s action was driven by racism.

A 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel voted, 3-0, Wednesday to grant the Justice Department’s request for an emergency order allowing it to proceed with the termination of Temporary Protected Status for citizens of the three countries while litigation over the issue continues.

The appeals court’s two-page order did not offer a detailed rationale for putting on hold the fiery ruling U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson, a Biden appointee, issued last month. ...

During oral arguments before the appeals court panel on Tuesday, Justice Department attorney Drew Ensign said Thompson’s conclusion was based on thin evidence. He dismissed as “ancient” President Donald Trump’s comment from 2023 that immigrants are ”poisoning the blood of our country” and said only a single social media post Thompson mentioned, from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, even related to one of the three countries at issue in the case.

Ensign also argued that courts have no authority to review Noem’s decisions on TPS. He pointed to a May ruling from the Supreme Court allowing DHS to proceed with plans to end the protections for 350,000 Venezuelans, arguing the ruling made clear that the appeals court should allow the wind-down for citizens of Nicaragua, Honduras and Nepal. ...

The 9th Circuit panel declined to put a hold on the proceedings before Thompson, saying such a move wasn’t justified simply because DOJ might move to disqualify her in the future.***

The 9th Circuit panel did not provide any reasoning and did not delve into the evidentiary finding of racial animus. The government was only asking for a stay of the postponement granted by the federal district court; and the government cited the recent Supreme Court decision to deny stay of the TPS termination for Venezuelans.

Since the panel's ruling was unanimous (3-0), the plaintiffs may have difficulty getting a rehearing by the full court (en banc). These appellate judges may not feel like dealing with the racial animus issue when the government is only asking for a stay of the postponement of the TPS.

There will still be a hearing on the merits in the federal district court, in November. But the government may start deporting some of the TPS beneficiaries before the November hearing. Others with pending asylum applications or withholding of deportation do not face immediate prospect of deportation.

Appeals court panel clears way for Trump admin to end TPS for Hondurans, Nepalis and Nicaraguans A federal appeals court panel overturned a lower court order that had paused the move.

The termination of TPS for these group is postponed until November when the court would hold a hearing on the merits. The court found the termination of TPS to be based on racial animus. Thus, unless the Trump administration could show a compelling government interest to justify the termination of the TPS, the courts would extend the TPS for a while.

Federal judge delays expiration of TPS for Hondurans, Nicaraguans and Nepalese The Trump administration has said the conditions in the three countries have improved, therefore the immigrants can return back to their homelands. But federal Judge Trina Thompson suggested Trump's motives are discriminatory.

***For example, the Health and Human Services Department said it would make DACA recipients ineligible for the federal healthcare marketplace in June. Then last week, the Education Department said it was looking into five universities that offer financial help for DACA recipients. Also, immigration enforcement officers have arrested and detained DACA recipients throughout the country, which immigrant advocates said weakens protections of this group. ...

McLaughlin added that any DACA recipient may be subject to arrest and deportation for a number of reasons, including if they've committed a crime. McLaughlin then urged recipients to self-deport.***

So even DACA recipients are asked to leave the US. The latest news shows that the Trump administration is determined to carry out deportation of illegal immigrants, whatever their situation.

Some illegal immigrants are hoping that Congress would pass something like the Dignity Act proposed by Congresswoman Maria Salazar (R), to prevent deportation of long-term illegal immigrants.

But the cold reality is that there is little to no chance for Congress to pass any kind of bipartisan bill to stop the ongoing deportation of illegal immigrants. While only 43% of voters support Trump's immigration policies, an overwhelming majority, about 85% of Republican voters, support continuing crackdown on illegal immigration such as workplace raids and even penalizing employers of illegal immigrants.

DHS is urging DACA recipients to self-deport "DACA does not confer any form of legal status in this country," said DHS assistant press secretary Tricia McLaughlin, who then encouraged "every person here illegally" to self-deport.

***pero el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional (DHS) anunció que la terminación entrará en vigor 60 días después de la publicación de los avisos en el Registro Federal.***

Pero este intento de terminación será bloqueado por los tribunales. El gobierno no había dado un aviso requerido de 60 días para el final del período de reinscripción del TPS el 5 de julio de 2025, por lo que el TPS se considera renovado automáticamente hasta enero de 2026.

Sin embargo, la administración Trump está decidida a poner fin al TPS para hondureños y nicaragüenses muy pronto, independientemente de los desafíos judiciales que pueda enfrentar por ahora.

Trump cancela TPS para inmigrantes de Honduras y Nicaragua - La Opinión El Departamento de Seguridad Nacional confirmó el fin del Estatus de Protección Temporal para miles de nicaragüenses y hondureños

***“En última instancia, vamos a poder obtener protección a través de la demanda colectiva para todos en el país cuyo bebé podría estar potencialmente cubierto por la orden ejecutiva, suponiendo que tengamos éxito”, dijo William Powell, asesor principal de ICAP. ...

Al ser demandas colectivas, si un juez apoya a los demandantes, la decisión se extendería a todos los hijos de indocumentados y de extranjeros con visas temporales en el país, aunque es posible que la batalla legal llegue a la Corte de Apelaciones y, eventualmente, a la Corte Suprema nuevamente. ...

Los expertos enfatizaron en que la ciudadanía por nacimiento es un mandato constitucional y eso defenderán ante tribunales, luego de que la Corte Suprema no se decidió al respecto.***

Después del fallo de la Corte Suprema, ya se presenta una demanda colectiva para determinar la legalidad de la orden ejecutiva de Trump sobre la ciudadanía por nacimiento. En última instancia, la Corte Suprema tomará la determinación.

Nuevas demandas colectivas contra orden de Trump para bloquear ciudadanía por nacimiento - La Opinión Tras la decisión de la Corte Suprema, organizaciones civiles y madres migrantes presentaron una demanda colectiva en Maryland

***The Supreme Court reasoned that the Judiciary Act of 1789, which authorizes federal courts to issue equitable remedies, does not extend to universal injunctions, as such remedies were not traditionally available in the High Court of Chancery in England at the time of the founding. The Court said the only “analogous” form of relief is the type of relief modern U.S. courts are only authorized to provide in class actions under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. ***

So now, if you want to challenge a presidential executive order and obtain an equitable relief affecting a broad group of people, you must bring your complaint in a class-action lawsuit. This CASA ruling is a legal earthquake.

For example, if you want your federal district court to rule that US-born children of parents who are illegal immigrants should not be denied US citizenship, the complaint must be brought in a class-action suit and the ruling by the particular federal district court may influence only similarly-situated parties within that federal district at most, not in other federal districts.

Obtaining a broad, nationwide ruling on Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship may now take a fight all the way to the Supreme Court. This is my initial impression of the case today and should not be regarded as a legal advice. I may provide updates on interpretatin of the case.

Supreme Court Rules Federal District Courts Likely Lack Authority for Universal Injunctions On June 27, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States held that federal district courts likely lack the authority to issue universal injunctions blocking presidential actions nationwide, a ruling that is likely to allow the Trump administration to continue enforcing executive orders (EO) or other...

I handle most civil and criminal matters. My fees are:

1) civil cases: $300 for initial consultation up to 1 hour and additional $3,700 for pre-suit representation, for a total of $4,000;

2) If you want to file or defend a lawsuit, i) small cases (up to $40,000 in damages) have a fixed fee of $7,000 plus filing fees, and ii) larger cases have a fixed fee of $3,000, filing fees, and contingency fee of 40-50% of the recovered amount.

3) criminal cases have $400 initial consultation fee plus pre-trial fees of: i) $1,500 for Class C misdemeanor cases; ii) $4,000 for Class B misdemeanor cases: iii) $7,000 for Class A misdemeanor cases; and iv) for felony cases, fees would depend on the individual circumstances.

4) criminal trials and appeals: fees vary upon individual circumstances.

I handle all the work myself from intake to trial and appeal. You can reach me 24/7 on urgent matters. Call me at 832 428-9911 NOW.

Call now to connect with business.

But on another case, a punitive damage award of $500,000 was found excessive. This particular case with debtors named Moon and a lender named Rushmore, started in 2019 and as of early 2024, the parties were still battling each other in courts. Back in 2020, the Debtors were awarded $100,000 in compensatory and $200,000 in punitive damages by the bankruptcy court, as well as attorney's fees. But the parties appealed and went up and down the court system for 5 years, it seems. The amount of damages went up and down with each court over time.

The moral of the story is that, not settling for a reasonable amount early on, just led to years of litigation with uncertain outcome for the plaintiffs and their attorney. In my own case, I knew I could not go on for years battling my landlord, and I settled within a year when I had a good chance.

Overall, settlements and judgments in the low 6-figures are reasonable for an outrageous violation of automatic stay and discharge injunction. Many landlords may violate bankruptcy law by trying to evict tenants who declare bankruptcy. Fortunately for tenants, state and federal laws protect tenants and even award significant damages against the landlords.

Punitive Damages for Stay Violation Were Excessive – National Consumer Bankruptcy Rights Center The punitive damages awarded by the bankruptcy court were unconstitutionally excessive where they were seven times greater than actual damages and the bankruptcy court increased the damages on remand because it found the lender’s success at the BAP level would eliminate a substantial disincentive ...

***A California bankruptcy judge handed down a $45 million penalty against Bank of America Corp. (“BofA” or “Bank of America”), decrying the manner in which the bank treated a California couple who attempted to save their property from foreclosure.***

In this 2017 case, Bank of America had $45 million in punitive damages against it for violating the automatic stay of the plaintiff couple's bankruptcy filing.

I myself filed a case against my landlord in June 2022, seeking damages for violations of automatic stay and discharge injunction. The case reached a confidential settlement last year and the case was closed on 6/20/2023, about a year ago.

I didn't receive anything close to $45 million in settlement, but the landlord hopefully learned a good lesson in obeying the bankruptcy law. I may comment a bit more about this case in another post.

California Bankruptcy Court Slaps BofA With A $45 Million Penalty - Geraci Law Firm A California bankruptcy judge handed down a $45 million penalty against Bank of America Corp. (“BofA” or “Bank of America”), decrying the manner in which the

I just had my phone stolen, so I deactivated my phone. My phone number would not work. I'll post a new phone number if I get a new phone.