The Nepal TPS lawyer urged the court, “Let’s speed this up. We need to pause the rule so the August 5 effective date is put on hold and people can keep working.” Catherine Ross, the DHS attorney from the Venezuela case, jumped in, “Not so fast—there’s no way. The court should take its time, like in other cases. I’ll be representing this case from now on.” Judge Thompson looked at both lawyers and said, “Government, file your opposition motion by July 14. Nepal TPS counsel, you have until July 18 to respond. In any case, the hearing will be on July 29, and I will decide then.” Disclaimer: This is an embellished story based on factual filings of court documents in the public record July 11, 2025 Last edited: 12-Jul-25 02:37 PM
Sexy In Sari · Jul 12, 2025 1:53 PM · 9,439 views
Another 18 months extension
Jindagi yestai chha · Jul 12, 2025 4:41 PM
@Jindagi yestai chha: The lawsuit does NOT ask for any 6-, 12-, or 18-month TPS extensions for Nepal or any other country. In the 57 pages of complaint, the word "extension" is used only 8 times. The lawyer asks the judge to do eight things to TPS holders. And you won't find the word "extensions" on those requests. So now the question is, what is this case really about? If you see the first cover page of the lawsuit, on the bottom right side under "Complaint," you'll see "APA Case." This is an APA case. (google what is APA.) This lawsuit is asking the court to check whether govt. agency followed the required legal steps, and paperwork when making decisions. That's it.
Sexy In Sari · Jul 12, 2025 11:06 PM
Thankyou for clarifying . My question is When termination attempt was challenged in court and blocked by litigation from immigration advocates, didnt it lead to extension for another 18 months during trump administration? What is the difference between now ? Please correct me if i am wrong .
Jindagi yestai chha · Jul 12, 2025 11:50 PM
This conversation is preserved exactly as it was on the original Sajha.com and can't accept new replies.
Start a New Discussion