Mullin v. Doe · ¶89
But whatever one may think of the cited statements, they are insufficient to show that the termination of Haiti’s TPS designation was based on the race of the Haitian people. Ironically, both Doe and Miot respondents identify a strong, race-neutral explanation of these officials’ statements: the present administration’s general stance on immigration and its obvious antipathy toward past administrations’ TPS policies. Respondents argue that the Secretary made a “preordained decision” to end TPS for all countries, Brief for Respondents in No. 25–1083, p. 49, and they stress that she terminated the TPS designations for every country that came up for review, 13 in all. Id., at 9–10; Brief for Respondents in No. 25–1084, p. 10. Included are nations in East Asia (Nepal and Burma), Central Asia (Afghanistan), the Middle East (Syria and Yemen), Africa (Somalia, Ethiopia, South Sudan, and…Read in context ›
slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.