Judge Campbell Barker set aside and vacated marriage parole in place
The Parole in Place (PIP) decision is here, and it’s a big one. On November 7th, 2024, Judge Campbell Barker made a significant ruling, setting aside and vacating the Marriage Parole in Place policy. If you’ve been following this case, you likely have questions about what this means for immigration law and for families hoping to stay together. My name is John Ting, and I specialize in immigration law, helping individuals secure their legal status to live and work in the United States. Let’s break down this decision and what’s next.
What Happened in the Parole in Place Ruling?
Today’s ruling came down from Judge Barker, and it’s shaking up the Parole in Place landscape. In short, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) action to keep families together through Marriage Parole in Place has been set aside and vacated.
But why did this happen? The ruling essentially hinges on a textual argument—an interpretation of the language of the law. The judge focused on the specific wording of the law and found that the Marriage Parole in Place program did not align with the legal requirements. Let’s dive into the details.
Why Was Marriage Parole in Place Denied?
The key argument in Judge Barker’s decision was based on the wording of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 245. Specifically, the judge pointed out that the term “paroled into the United States” was a critical part of the law. This wording, however, did not align with the Keeping Families Together program’s provisions.
In simpler terms:
- The Keeping Families Together program did not require individuals to physically leave the United States and re-enter (unlike people with DACA or TPS applying for advance parole).
- The program was designed to allow certain family members to remain in the U.S. under parole status without having to leave, much like the Military Parole in Place (PIP) program, which doesn’t require someone to leave the U.S.
However, Judge Barker concluded that the textual language of the law doesn’t support the Marriage Parole in Place policy. As a result, he ruled that the program could not be upheld in its current form. This decision underscores the importance of strict legal interpretation, focusing on the exact wording of the statute.
What is a “Textual Argument”?
In law, a textual argument focuses on the literal text of a statute or regulation. Judges often use this approach to interpret the law based on the actual words and their meanings, rather than considering the broader context or intent behind the law.
In this case, Judge Barker emphasized the specific language in the INA regarding parole. By focusing on whether the words in the law supported the Marriage Parole in Place program, he ultimately decided that the program did not meet the legal criteria set forth by Congress.
What Does This Mean for Families?
So, what does this ruling mean for families who were relying on Marriage Parole in Place to remain together in the U.S.? At this point, the program has been vacated—meaning it is no longer in effect as it was originally designed. Families may now face challenges, and the future of this policy could be in limbo.
Key questions moving forward:
- Will DHS appeal? The decision hasn’t necessarily ended the fight. DHS could potentially appeal the ruling to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
- What’s next for Parole in Place? This case could set a precedent, and any changes could impact how Parole in Place is applied to other situations, especially for military families and others who were using this pathway to stay together.
I’ll continue to monitor this situation and provide updates as more information becomes available. Let me know what you think in the comments below—do you believe DHS should appeal the decision?
At this moment, there are still many questions to be answered. As I mentioned earlier, this decision is just the first argument in a 75-page decision, and there could be other critical factors to consider in the future. While I’m attending a conference, I’ll do my best to respond to your questions and share more insights through upcoming videos. Keep an eye out for further updates as we follow this legal case closely.
The decision to vacate the Marriage Parole in Place program is a significant one, and it could have wide-reaching implications for U.S. immigration law. While the ruling doesn’t necessarily spell the end of the program, it’s a critical juncture. If you have questions about how this ruling may affect your case, don’t hesitate to reach out.
Stay tuned for more updates as this case continues to develop.
Discover the best way to connect with Green Card Guys Law Group based on your specific needs and goals. Choose from 3 tailored options to get started.
What to Do If You Find Yourself in This Situation?
Discover the best way to connect with Green Card Guys Law Group based on your specific needs and goals. Choose from 3 tailored options to get started.
English 
Español