There is relief for thousands of Somalis with federal protection, allowing them to live in the United States, many in Minnesota, after a U.S. court ruling last week temporarily paused the looming termination of Temporary Protected Status for immigrants from Somalia.
U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs’ ruling said there would be “weighty” consequences if Somalia’s TPS designation is allowed to expire on Tuesday.
“Over one thousand people will face ‘a myriad of grave risks,’ including detention and deportation, physical violence if removed to Somalia, and forced separation from family members,” the ruling said.
Burroughs said implementing an administrative stay and deferring ruling on the postponement gives both sides time to file briefs on the emergency motion.
“While the stay is in effect, the termination shall be null, void, and of no legal effect,” the ruling said, noting that those with TPS status or pending applications will retain rights, including eligibility for work authorization and protection against deportation and detention.
In a statement, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security said the ruling by a judge appointed by former President Barack Obama is the latest example of efforts to prevent Trump from “restoring integrity” to the U.S. immigration system.
“Temporary means temporary,” the statement said. “Country conditions in Somalia have improved to the point that it no longer meets the law’s requirement for Temporary Protected Status. Allowing Somali nationals to remain temporarily in the United States is contrary to our national interests. The Trump administration is putting Americans first.”
Representatives of the plaintiffs fighting the termination said in a statement that even though the order is temporary and “many battles lie ahead,” they are “heartened by the interim protection today’s order affords all Somali people in the U.S. who have TPS or pending TPS applications.”
Attorneys sound alarm on “Somali Rocket Docket.”
Immigration attorneys say something else is happening that is concerning and overwhelming. They’re sounding the alarm about something they’re calling “Somali Rocket Docket.” They say Somali asylum cases are suddenly being fast-tracked with hearings scheduled with out-of-state judges.
Evangeline Dhawan-Maloney is an immigration attorney who represents 150 Somali asylum seekers and says she’s dealing with a wave of those cases being fast-tracked through immigration court.
“I absolutely believe Somali immigrants are being targeted,” she said. “There is some type of effort by the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) and DHS to fast-track specifically Somali asylum cases.”
Dhawan-Maloney says she now has 40 hearings scheduled in the next six months. All Somali asylum cases.
She says these cases are very complex. Often requiring months if not years to gather evidence, secure documentation, and prepare clients.
Now, she says they are being pushed through the system at a pace that is concerning and unprecedented.
“The bigger concern is that what’s happening is unlawful, that there is some kind of concerted effort to deny Somali asylum seekers due process they are entitled to,” Dhawan-Maloney said.
The Executive Office for Immigration Review says they’re required to decide asylum applications within 180 days.
“All cases are adjudicated in accordance with the applicable law. Moreover, EOIR is required by federal law to adjudicate asylum applications within 180 days. The suggestion that EOIR should delay adjudicating certain groups of cases is contrary to both EOIR’s mission and the law,” a spokesperson for the Executive Office for Immigration Review said.
Immigration attorneys say almost all these cases are being heard by out-of-state judges online.
Dhawan-Maloney said the judges hearing these cases have a high denial rate. She believes there is a deliberate effort to funnel Somali cases into a specific docket and ultimately deny them.
Court observers also say they are being shut out of these hearings, which are being held online and heard by out-of-state judges.
Madeline Lohman is the Advocacy and Outreach Director at The Advocates for Human Rights and says that court observers log in to these virtual hearings but are never let in.
“It is unusual for a single nationality to be pulled out and examined like this,” she said. “We’ve never seen this before.”
The Advocates for Human Rights filed a federal lawsuit last week challenging the Department of Justice’s restrictions on court observers. Lohman says court observers being shut out of these virtual hearings is just another example of restrictive limitations on public access to immigration court proceedings at the Fort Snelling Immigration Court in Minnesota.
