The radical left’s favorite weapon—lawfare—struck again, this time from a federal courtroom in Washington, D.C., where a Biden-appointed judge stepped in to halt the Trump administration’s effort to finally end a long-abused immigration loophole.
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes blocked the Department of Homeland Security from terminating Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for more than 350,000 Haitian nationals, even though the designation was originally granted after a catastrophic earthquake more than 15 years ago and was never meant to last indefinitely. The ruling not only freezes enforcement but also reads like a political screed aimed directly at DHS Secretary Kristi Noem.
Reyes, a Uruguayan-born, openly homosexual judge appointed under Joe Biden, went far beyond the legal questions and accused Noem of acting with racial animus—suggesting the decision to end TPS was “preordained … because of hostility to nonwhite immigrants,” adding, “This seems substantially likely.”
In an extraordinary passage that sounded more like a cable news monologue than a judicial order, Reyes mocked the cabinet secretary’s public statements and social media activity:
“There is an old adage among lawyers. If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither, pound the table,” wrote Reyes. “Secretary Noem, the record to-date shows, does not have the facts on her side–or at least has ignored them. Does not have the law on her side–or at least has ignored it. Having neither and bringing the adage into the 21st century, she pounds X (f/k/a Twitter).”
The judge took particular offense at a December post from Noem calling for tougher border controls, including a sweeping travel ban: “full travel ban on every damn country that’s been flooding our nation with killers, leeches, and entitlement junkies.”
Noem later doubled down in another post that also made its way into the court filing: “Our forefathers built this nation on blood, sweat, and the unyielding love of freedom–not 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.”
Reyes countered by highlighting the personal résumés of the five plaintiffs in the case—individuals whose legal standing could affect tens of thousands of others—including “a neuroscientist, a software engineer, a laboratory assistant, a college economics major, and a registered nurse.”
But critics say cherry-picking sympathetic examples misses the point entirely. TPS was never designed as a backdoor amnesty or a lifetime residency program, yet that’s exactly how it has been weaponized by past administrations and now protected by activist judges.
The Department of Homeland Security wasted no time firing back. DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin posted bluntly on X: “Supreme Court, here we come.This is lawless activism that we will be vindicated on.”
She later added:
“Haiti’s TPS was granted following an earthquake that took place over 15 years ago, it was never intended to be a de facto amnesty program, yet that’s how previous administrations have used it for decades. Temporary means temporary and the final word will not be from an activist judge legislating from the bench.”
This isn’t Reyes’ first foray into headline-grabbing intervention. She is the same judge who previously blocked President Trump’s ban on transgender individuals serving in the military—a pattern critics say reveals a jurist more interested in ideology than impartial law.
As the case barrels toward the Supreme Court, conservative voices are growing louder, demanding accountability for judges who repeatedly override elected officials and rewrite national policy from the bench.
