Judge Halts End of CHNV Parole for Migrants

• Is the End of CHNV Parole on Hold?
• Was the Government’s Decision Unjustified?
• Thousands of Migrants at Risk of Losing Everything?

A federal judge has temporarily halted the revocation of the CHNV humanitarian parole program, a move pushed by President Donald Trump.

This decision offers relief to thousands of Cuban, Haitian, Nicaraguan, and Venezuelan migrants currently living in the United States under this benefit.

Judge Indira Talwani announced on Thursday that she will block the government’s attempt to end the program starting April 24, 2025.

During a hearing, Talwani criticized the arguments presented by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which claimed that the parole program no longer served its purpose.

Judge Blocks End of Parole for Immigrants

The judge questioned the legality of the process and stated that the beneficiaries now face a critical situation: “flee the country” or “risk losing everything.”

“DHS must make reasoned decisions,” Judge Indira Talwani said, noting that the government had misinterpreted the law in justifying the cancellation.

According to DHS, the Biden administration had abused the use of humanitarian parole, prompting a gradual phaseout of the program.

The CHNV program was launched in 2022 and allowed migrants from the four countries to arrive by plane in the U.S. with the support of legal sponsors.

These sponsors could be family members or individuals with no direct relation, according to Univision.

Migrants were granted two-year permits and, during that time, were expected to apply for another legal status, such as asylum or Temporary Protected Status (TPS).

Venezuelans were the first group to benefit. The CHNV program later expanded to include the other three nationalities.

At this point, it remains unclear how many migrants will be able to change their legal status before the cancellation takes effect.

Plaintiffs described the Trump administration’s move as “unprecedented” and claimed it violated the Administrative Procedure Act.

They also noted that ending the benefit would leave them without legal status or the ability to work.

Meanwhile, government attorneys argued that the lawsuit lacked merit and that DHS’s decision was lawful.

However, according to Judge Indira Talwani, the government’s explanation was insufficient to terminate a program of this magnitude without proper legal analysis.