Sun. Aug 9th, 2026

USAO-DC’s Civil Division Earns Supreme Court Victory in Miot v. Trump

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeanine Ferris Pirro, praised the efforts of the U.S. Attorney’s Office Civil Division after securing a significant victory in the Supreme Court case Miot v. Trump. This ruling allows for the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitian nationals, a decision that has implications for many residents within the District and beyond.

U.S. Attorney Pirro expressed her confidence in the team’s work, stating, “The well-founded and persuasive arguments developed by attorneys in my office were affirmed by the highest court in the land, the U.S. Supreme Court.” She highlighted the ruling as a testament to the caliber of attorneys within the office, who strive to keep the community safe while representing the interests of the United States.

In the case of Miot v. Trump, Haitian nationals challenged the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) decision to end TPS designation for Haiti. The U.S. Attorney’s Office argued that federal law prohibits judicial review of DHS’s determinations regarding TPS and maintained that the government’s decision was based on legitimate and race-neutral rationales. Despite an initial setback in which U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes issued a temporary stay against the termination, the case was expedited to the Supreme Court.

On June 25, 2026, the Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision, reversing the lower court’s decision and allowing the termination of TPS for Haiti to take effect. Justice Alito, writing for the majority, upheld the argument that DHS’s TPS determinations fall outside the scope of judicial review. The implications of this ruling will be felt throughout Washington, D.C., particularly among communities in neighborhoods with significant Haitian populations.

As of August 5, U.S. District Judge Reyes acknowledged that the stay was no longer in effect, thus clearing the path for the government’s decision to be implemented. This case underscores the ongoing legal battles surrounding immigration policy and its impact on local communities in the District of Columbia.


Read the original article at usao

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *