The courts are out to get Republicans. And they’re just getting started.
Now a federal judge handed Trump a devastating ruling he never expected.
A Bold Vision Meets Judicial Pushback
President Trump’s immigration stance, deeply rooted in his signature “America First” philosophy, took a hit this week when a federal judge stepped in to challenge it. Judge Edward Chen put a halt to the Department of Homeland Security’s plan to end a deportation amnesty for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan migrants.
The decision, driven by Secretary Kristi Noem’s nod to Trump’s guiding principle, was labeled by Chen as showing illegal and racist “animus” toward immigrants—a claim that’s stirring debate about the balance between national priorities and judicial overreach.
Defending the Heart of “America First”
The White House didn’t hesitate to fire back. Spokesman Kush Desai told The Washington Times, “President Trump’s commitment to putting Americans and America First has only to do with his love for our country and our citizens, not animus against anyone else.”
It’s a sentiment that resonates with those who see Trump’s policies as a refreshing focus on the homeland.
Meanwhile, Mike Davis, a key figure from Trump’s first term and founder of the Article III Project, took aim at Chen, asking, “After San Francisco Obama Judge Chen ruled it’s illegal for the president to put America first, which country is Judge Chen putting first?”
Davis didn’t stop there, calling Chen part of a “Democrat enclave” bent on “sabotaging the duly elected president’s constitutional duty to protect our homeland from foreign invasion.”
A Policy Battle with Deep Roots
At the core of the clash is Noem’s attempt to roll back a Biden-era extension of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for roughly 600,000 Venezuelans—a move that could’ve seen 350,000 face deportation this month without Chen’s intervention.
The judge, an Obama appointee in Northern California, argued Noem didn’t justify the shift adequately and pointed to “unconstitutional animus,” tying it to Trump’s colorful rhetoric.
From his first campaign in 2016, Trump’s “America First” mantra has been a rallying cry—later fueling groups like the America First Policy Institute and Stephen Miller’s America First Legal. This term, it’s the backbone of an agenda tackling immigration, trade, and global commitments with a no-nonsense edge.
Chen’s ruling leans heavily on Trump’s past words—like his alleged “s—-hole” comment from his first term, or campaign trail zingers about Haitian migrants eating dogs and Venezuelan “criminals” flooding the border. The judge even cited an Axios tally showing Trump mentioned Venezuelan “criminals” 70 times in 13 months before the election.
Critics like Ahilan Arulanantham of the National TPS Alliance cheered the decision, saying, “The government had every opportunity to defend any of those statements using evidence, but it failed to do so.”
He added, “If an employer made any one of these statements about people from some country and then fired its workers from that country, that would make for a very straightforward employment discrimination case.”
Yet for Trump’s supporters, this is less about prejudice and more about a leader unafraid to call it like he sees it.
Judge Chen, who’s tangled with “America First” before in a 2018 TPS case, once pressed government lawyers to define it—only to get no clear answer. To Trump, it’s simple: “I like the sound of the phrase.” And for a base tired of endless foreign entanglements, that’s more than enough.
