designation

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will hear arguments this week over whether the Trump administration may revoke temporary protected status for about 350,000 Haitian and 6,100 Syrian immigrants.

TPS allows people who are already in the United States to legally reside and work here if they are unable to safely return to their home country because of a sudden emergency such as war or a natural disaster. The humanitarian program, enacted by Congress in 1990, has since been used by Republican and Democratic administrations alike.

Since President Trump returned to office last year, his administration has terminated such protections for immigrants from 13 countries. Court challenges on behalf of Haitians and Syrians have been consolidated into a single case, Mullin vs. Doe, which the justices will hear Wednesday.

The high court’s ruling could eventually have sweeping repercussions for all 1.3 million immigrants from the 17 countries that were designated for TPS at the start of this administration. That’s because the federal government is arguing that decisions regarding the program are almost entirely immune from review by courts.

“Temporary means temporary and the final word will not be from activist judges legislating from the bench,” a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson, who did not provide their name, wrote in response to a request for comment.

Lower courts have repeatedly deemed the administration’s actions improper.

“We’re seeing clear gamesmanship from government to insulate all TPS decision-making from any oversight,” said Emi MacLean, a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, who is counsel in the case for Syrians and in other cases challenging five of the terminations. “They’ve created a farce of a process to justify the ends that they sought, which was to strip humanitarian protections from over a million people.”

In the Trump administration’s appeal, Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer argued that Congress gave the Homeland Security secretary the power to grant or end the temporary protected status for troubled countries and barred judges from intervening.

He pointed to a provision that says: “There is no judicial review of any determination of the [secretary] with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation, of a foreign state.”

Citing this hands-off provision, Trump’s lawyers won brief emergency orders last year that allowed the administration to strip legal protections from about 600,000 Venezuelans. In that case, then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had quickly reversed an extension granted by the Biden administration three days before Trump was sworn in.

The circumstances surrounding the Syria and Haiti cases are different. Advocates for the immigrants argue that the administration failed to conduct the required process to properly evaluate each country’s conditions.

They point to emails in July from a Homeland Security official to a State Department official. The Homeland Security official listed TPS designations coming up for review — Syria, South Sudan, Myanmar and Ethiopia. In response, the State Department official wrote: “I confirm that State has no foreign policy concerns with ending these TPS designations.”

State Department travel advisories for both countries warn people against traveling to either because of the risk of terrorism, kidnapping and widespread violence. U.S. citizens are advised to prepare a will.

For Syria, the advisory cites active armed conflict since 2011. For Haiti, it says the country has been under a national state of emergency since March 2024.

But Federal Register notices announcing the terminations said country conditions had sufficiently improved. The notice for Syria, for example, says “the Secretary has determined that, while some sporadic and episodic violence occurs in Syria, the situation no longer meets the criteria for an ongoing armed conflict that poses a serious threat to the personal safety of returning Syrian nationals.”

If the government loses, Homeland Security officials would have to reevaluate the TPS decisions in consultation with the State Department and make a decision based entirely on the country conditions themselves.

The government could start over, in that case, and still find that TPS is no longer warranted — if the process bears that out.

In a friend-of-the-court brief led by immigration law scholars at Georgetown and Temple universities, they explained that before TPS existed, similar forms of humanitarian relief were determined by the executive branch “without reference to any statutory criteria or constraints, and with little if any explanation for why nationals of certain countries received protection while others did not.”

With TPS in 1990, Congress sought to end that “unfettered discretion,” they wrote. Instead, the statute requires the Homeland Security secretary to terminate TPS if the review finds that conditions justifying the designation no longer exist. Otherwise, the law states, it “is extended.”

“The point of the TPS statute was to depoliticize humanitarian decisions,” said MacLean, the ACLU attorney. “Secretary Noem in all of her TPS decisions has completely undermined that fundamental goal.”

Ahilan Arulanantham, who is arguing for the Syria case on Wednesday, added that if the government wins, “it also means they could probably grant TPS to countries that don’t deserve it.” Arulanantham, co-director of the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA, has represented the National TPS Alliance in separate litigation during this administration and Trump’s first.

Top Homeland Security and State Department officials from the George W. Bush, Obama, Trump and Biden administrations filed a brief arguing that the Trump administration’s terminations of TPS for Syria and Haiti were “not based on evidence and sharply departed from past inter-agency practices.”

Haiti was originally designated for TPS in 2010 after a massive earthquake devastated the country and redesignated because of subsequent natural disasters and gang violence. In November, Noem announced that she would terminate TPS for Haiti, effective Feb. 3. She wrote in the Federal Register that “there are no extraordinary and temporary conditions in Haiti” that prevent Haitians from safely returning.

But even if there were, she continued, “termination of Temporary Protected Status of Haiti is still required because it is contrary to the national interest of the United States.”

The Homeland Security spokesperson said TPS for Haiti “was never intended to be a de facto amnesty program, yet that’s how previous administrations have used it for decades.”

Syria, meanwhile, “has been a hotbed of terrorism and extremism for nearly two decades,” the spokesperson wrote, “and it is contrary to our national interest to allow Syrians to remain in our country.”

In the Federal Register notice for Syria, Noem added that maintaining its TPS designation would “complicate the administration’s broader diplomatic engagement with Syria’s transitional government” by undermining peace-building efforts.

The Supreme Court will take up the question of whether the Homeland Security secretary can use national interest as a reason to revoke TPS. Attorneys for the TPS holders believe any decision to revoke TPS must come down to the country conditions alone.

Syria and Haiti are among the countries for which the Trump administration has also paused processing all immigration benefits. If their TPS protections expire, those immigrants would become vulnerable to detention and deportation even if they are eligible for other forms of relief.

U.S. Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer argued that Congress gave the Homeland Security secretary the power to grant or end the temporary protected status for troubled countries and barred judges from intervening.

(Aaron Schwartz / Getty Images)

Attorneys for the TPS holders say the terminations were also driven by racial animus. They point to various statements by Trump over the years, including his false claim that Haitians were eating the pets of people in Springfield, Ohio, that they “probably have AIDS” and that Haiti is among the “shithole countries” from which he would permanently pause migration.

Among those affected is a 35-year-old Haitian woman who has lived in the U.S. since 2000 and is raising her four U.S. citizen children in a Southern state. The woman requested to be identified by her middle and last initials, B.B., out of concern for her immigration case.

After graduating high school, B.B. got into nursing school but couldn’t attend because she didn’t qualify for financial aid. She said later getting TPS allowed her to become a certified nursing assistant, and she now works as a medical coordinator while owning a nail salon and three real estate properties.

Though B.B.’s TPS remains active because of the court proceedings, her driver’s license expired Feb. 3 and she has since had to rely on friends and rideshares to get around while repeatedly requesting a renewal.

She said she worries most about her children. If she were deported back to Haiti, she said, she would leave them in the U.S. for their own safety.

“It’s like planning your death,” she said. “I’m 35 and I already have a will — not because I’m going to die but because of the situation.”

On a call with reporters, attorneys and advocates, a Syrian man said he earned his master’s degree in the U.S. and now works in the healthcare industry. The man, who was identified by a pseudonym, said he and his wife are afraid of what their future will look like.

“TPS gave us something we had not had in years: a place to settle and a moment to grieve,” he said, later adding that “telling Syrians to go back right now is not a policy — it’s abandonment.”

Among the public, there is broad support for TPS and other humanitarian programs. According to a poll conducted last month by the firm Equis Research, 68% of Latino and 65% of non-Latino voters support fighting to give back legal protection to those who have lost their temporary protected status or asylum protections as a result of the current administration’s actions.

Earlier this month, the House voted in favor of a bill that would require new Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin to redesignate Haiti for TPS. Among those who crossed the political aisle to support it were 10 Republicans and Rep. Kevin Kiley, an independent from Rocklin, Calif., who caucuses with Republicans. The measure faces an uphill battle in the Senate.

In an interview with The Times, Kiley said his vote was about common sense and being humane.

“It’s particularly dangerous for people that would be returning where the gangs that are ravaging the country are just lying in wait outside the airport in Port-au-Prince,” he said, referring to the Haitian capital.

And because most won’t return willingly, Kiley added, “really all you’d be doing is removing work authorization from 350,000-some people who are going to mostly remain in the country, who will not be able to work anymore and may end up being more reliant on public assistance in states where they’re eligible.”

At the same time, Kiley said, the TPS system hasn’t worked as intended because most so-called temporary designations drag on.

“The system needs to be reformed,” he said. “But that’s all separate and apart from what we do with the folks who were already given this designation.”

Times staff writer David G. Savage in Washington contributed to this report.

April 7 (UPI) — Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has signed legislation authorizing state officials to designate certain groups as domestic or foreign terrorist organizations, creating a mechanism to punish those blacklisted in the Sunshine State.

The legislation, House Bill 1471, was signed by the Republican governor on Monday during a press conference in Tampa.

The legislation creates a mechanism for Florida to sever funding, contracting and other ties to blacklisted groups. If a corporation is named, the state may pursue proceedings to dissolve it.

“We must defend our institutions from those who would harm us — especially terrorist organizations that seek to infiltrate and subvert our education system,” DeSantis said in a statement.

The bill specifically authorizes Florida’s chief of domestic security to designate groups as domestic or foreign terrorist organizations, subject to approval from the governor and Cabinet, if certain conditions are met.

Once designated, state agencies, political subdivisions and public school districts are barred from working with, supporting or taking money from them.

If the designated entity is a corporation, then the state may begin proceedings to dissolve it. It also creates criminal consequences for actions involving designated domestic terrorist organizations, including receiving military-type training from them, providing them with material support or resources and willfully becoming a member.

It also imposes consequences for schools, including secondary education, for promoting designated organizations and requires the immediate expulsion of students determined to have promoted them.

The bill also prohibits Florida courts or other adjudicatory bodies from enforcing any provision of what it calls “religious or foreign law” if it is inconsistent with federal or state law. The legislation specifically states Sharia law, the religious legal system of Islam.

“This legislation reinforces that the U.S. Constitution and Florida law remain the supreme authority in our court systems, preventing any foreign or religious legal code from overriding fundamental rights,” State Rep. Hillary Cassel, the bill’s sponsor, said in a statement after her legislation was signed into law.

The Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations issued a statement of concern on Monday over the potential misuse of the designation power, highlighting DeSantis’ previous attempt to designate it as a terrorist organization via executive order. before a judge blocked the blacklisting.

“This is not just about CAIR. This expanded and deeply flawed framework can attack any organization that dares to dissent,” CAIR-Florida Executive Director Hiba Rahim said in a statement.

“As Floridians, together, we’ll watch how this unprecedented law is enforced, and whether it is used or abused.”

A slightly shorter and lighter-weight carbine version of the U.S. Army’s new 6.8x51mm M7 service rifle has now gotten its own designation: XM8. This choice of moniker is somewhat interesting, given that the service previously applied this designation to an abortive modular family of firearms designed to ape the looks of the guns in the 1997 movie Starship Troopers. The M7 had faced some significant criticisms of its own previously over its weight, ergonomics, and other aspects of the design, which the Army and manufacturer Sig pushed back strenuously against. At the same time, the design has continued to evolve and has been fielded more widely, as evidenced by the carbine version.

The Soldier Systems blog was the first to report on the new XM8 designation for the carbine variant of the M7 earlier this month. The Army subsequently confirmed this to Task & Purpose.

The Army chose what is now designated the M7 as its standard service rifle back in 2022. That year, the service chose Sig as the winner of its Next Generation Squad Weapons (NGSW) competition. The NGSW also includes a new 6.8x51mm light machine gun from Sig, designated the M250, as well as a suite of accompanying ammunition types for both guns. The NGSW ‘system’ also includes computerized XM157 optics, which the Army is procuring separately from Vortex Optics.

What Is the New Army XM-7 Rifle Like? | GOARMY

“The XM8 is just over 32 inches long overall, compared to 37 inches for the M7, with a barrel length dropped from 13 to 11 inches and its suppressor from 7 to 6 inches,” according to Task & Purpose, citing Sig Sauer’s product manager for rifles and suppressors Joshua Shoemaker. “Without the suppressor, the XM8 weighs 7.33 pounds while the M7 weighs 8.36 pounds. The carbine’s suppressor shaves down to 1.31 pounds from the M7’s 1.46 pounds.”

“The carbine also comes with a fixed stock after soldiers said they preferred it to the M7’s folding stock,” Task & Purpose‘s piece adds. “The carbine also has a softer butt pad and a more rigid handguard for optics and other mounted equipment.”

The XM8 builds on what the Army had originally referred to as the product-improved or PIE version of the M7. This is one of two lighter-weight versions of the rifle that Sig had on display at the Association of the U.S. Army’s (AUSA) main annual symposium last September, both of which are seen in the picture at the top of this story.

“There’s basically two combined efforts going on within the M7,” Jason St. John, senior director of strategic products for the Defense Strategies Group at Sig Sauer, told TWZ at that time. “We have a carbine version, and then we have a lightened, improved version of the M7. And so when you look at the standard M7 that’s been issued to the troops, the overall weight of the firearm was 8.3 pounds. Now, the improved M7 is 7.6 pounds, and the carbine version weighs 7.3 pounds. So we’re getting closer and closer to [a] rifle weight system similar to the M4.”

The carbine variation Sig had previously presented then had a 10-inch barrel. Past reports have said that the PIE M7 had a 10.5-inch barrel. The baseline M7 has a 13.5-inch barrel. The 5.56x45mm M4A1 has a 14.5-inch barrel and weighs 8.63 pounds (including a sling and loaded magazine), according to the Army. It should be noted that optics and other accessories add appreciable weight to any firearm. The XM157 is heavier, as well as physically larger, than the types the Army has historically issued with M4A1s.

In terms of how the PIE M7 was lightened, “there’s the upper receiver, we’ve redesigned and taken some weight out of it. We’ve lessened the barrel profile slightly to get some weight out of it,” Sig’s St. John had also told us. “We’ve done some lightening efforts within the operating system, as well as remove the folding stock hinge. By removing that hinge, we save some weight.”

The XM8’s configuration could well evolve further as early testing by operational Army units gets underway, which Task & Purpose says could happen as soon as October.

Regardless, as noted, this is not the first XM8 ‘carbine’ the Army has tried to adopt. For a time in the early 2000s, the service looked set to replace all of its existing M16 rifles and M4 carbines with a new family of 5.56x45mm rifles and carbines known collectively as the XM8, developed by famed German gunmaker Heckler & Koch.

The previous XM8 had evolved from an earlier and more ambitious Army small arms program that envisioned future soldiers carrying a single weapon that combined a compact 5.56mm gun with a highly computerized 20mm grenade launcher firing programmable ammunition. That gun, called the XM29 Objective Infantry Combat Weapon, was beset by technical and other issues. In 2004, the Army decided to pursue the rifle and grenade launcher components as separate programs. The grenade launcher evolved into a 25mm design designated the XM25 and eventually nicknamed “the Punisher.”

XM29 OICW (Objective Individual Combat Weapon) Prototype

The standalone XM8 family was based on Heckler & Koch’s G36, which the German armed forces had adopted as its standard infantry rifle in the late 1990s. However, U.S. Army officials specifically asked if the gun could be made to look “more Starship Troopers,” in reference to the 1997 film, which is a very loose adaptation of the 1959 Robert Heinlein science fiction novel of the same name, according to firearms researcher Ian McCollum, who runs the website ForgottenWeapons.com. As a result, the XM8 evolved to have a much sleeker and futuristic-looking appearance externally.

STARSHIP TROOPERS [1997]– Official Trailer (HD) | Get the 25th Anniversary 4K Ultra HD SteelBook Now

Testing of the XM8 proceeded relatively well by all accounts. Versions of guns also gained a foothold in popular culture, appearing in several video games in the 2000s. Replicas were also featured in the movies Children of Men and District 13: Ultimatum.

In the end, though, a future Army with soldiers carrying “Starship Troopers” rifles was not to be. The program was cancelled in 2005. Continually evolving requirements and domestic U.S. political factors, together with broad questions about whether the cost, not to mention the time and effort, of adopting a new standard infantry weapon was justified by the reliability and improvements the XM8 was expected to offer over the existing M16/M4 family, were key factors.

Work on the XM25 grenade launcher continued for more than another decade before that program was axed, as well. The Army is now pursuing a new futuristic grenade launcher through a program called the Precision Grenadier System (PGS).

In the late 2000s, elements of the Malaysian Armed Forces (MAF) and the Royal Malaysia Police (RMP) evaluated the XM8. The Royal Malaysian Navy’s Pasukan Khas Laut naval special warfare unit, or PAKSAL, subsequently adopted multiple variants of the gun, but on a very limited level. The extent to which those guns remain in sevice today is unclear. There are no other known users anywhere else globally. You can read more about the full story of Heckler & Koch’s XM8 here.

Rare Unicorn Gun – H&K XM8 Compact PDW

The Army’s selection and fielding of the M7 have not been entirely smooth, either. As mentioned, the rifle has been the subject of criticism in the past. Army Capt. Braden Trent drew particular attention with a presentation that slammed the rifle at the annual Modern Day Marine conference last year. That assessment was based on the findings of a report written while he was a student at the Expeditionary Warfare School, which is part of the Marine Corps University in Quantico, Virginia. Both the Army and Sig had vehemently disputed his claims, as you can read more about here.

It still remains to be seen how widespread the adoption of any variation on the M7, including the XM8 carbine, might be across the rest of the U.S. military. In February, the U.S. Marine Corps notably told Task & Purpose that the service had no intention currently of adopting a version of the Army’s new 6.8mm rifle, and would instead stick with its 5.56x45mm M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle (IAR).

“We will continue to monitor development of the M7 [Next Generation Squad Weapon rifle] to inform future requirements,” a Marine Corps spokesperson told that outlet.

In the meantime, at least some Army soldiers now look to be in line to finally carry XM8 carbines, but not the “Starship Trooper” rifles they were once promised.

Contact the author: joe@twz.com