\u201cThis rogue judge lacks the subject matter jurisdiction to issue this order,\u201d Sen. Eric Schmitt said. \u201cThe assault on the rule of law continues.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Legal analyst Jonathan Turley piled on, warning that \u201cthis system cannot function with such rogue operators at the trial level.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan pointed to what he sees as a fundamental problem: the law itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\u201cOne big problem for Murphy is the statute: It explains TPS determinations aren\u2019t reviewable. Another is the Supreme Court, which has stopped similar orders twice,\u201d Wessan said. \u201cHe finds neither statute nor SCOTUS stops him. I\u2019m unconvinced.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
Murphy, for his part, insists he\u2019s not defying the high court. He noted that the Supreme Court hasn\u2019t fully explained its recent TPS-related rulings\u2014and hasn\u2019t stepped in on every similar case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\u201cThere is no reason to assume\u201d the justices have settled the issue, he wrote.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n
The lawsuit behind the ruling claims the administration\u2019s TPS rollback isn\u2019t just procedural\u2014it\u2019s discriminatory. Lawyers for the plaintiffs argue the policy is aimed at reducing non-white immigration, writing that the effort targets \u201cthe nationals of majority Black countries\u201d in particular.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Justice Department is expected to appeal, setting up yet another round in a growing legal fight between the Trump administration and a judge who keeps standing in its way.<\/p>\n\n\n\n