♪♪ >> CATHY: THURSDAY NIGHT, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION NOTIFIED 20 MINNESOTA COUNTIES, THE CITIES OF MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL, AND THE STATE ITSELF THAT THEY ARE IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL IMMIGRATION LAW.

QUESTIONS LINGER FOR IMMIGRANTS FROM VENEZUELA AND AFGHANISTAN AFTER THE SUPREME COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF REVOKING TEMPORARY PROTECTED STATUS.

AND PRESIDENT TRUMP HA TODAY THE SUPREME COURT ALLOWED THE ADMINISTRATION TO TEMPORARILY PAUSE THE HUMAN TAR EVERYONE PROGRAM FOR NEARLY HALF A MILLION PEOPLE.

JOINING US TO TALK ABOUT CURRENT IMMIGRATION QUESTIONS IN MINNESOTA, IMMIGRATION LAWYER ANA POTTRATZ ACOSTA.

SHE ALSO TEACHES AT THE MITCHELL HAMLINE SCHOOL OF LAW.

WELCOME BACK.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> Cathy: THERE'S A LOT TO TALK ABOUT HERE.

THERE WAS EARLIER AND NOW YOU'RE BACK.

OKAY, SO I WONDER WHAT YOU THOUGHT OF TODAY'S RULING, THE TEMPORARY BLOCK TO A BIDEN-ERA HUMANITARIAN PROGRAM.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

>> WELL, SO JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND AS TO WHAT THIS PROGRAM WAS.

SO THERE WAS A PROGRAM THAT WAS USED BY THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

IT WAS ONE OF SEVERAL PROGRAMS THAT WERE USED BY THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION TO CREATE WAFFLE PATHWAYS FOR PEOPLE TO COME IN WITH HUMANITARIAN STATUS AND IT WAS SPECIFIC FOR NATIONALS OF CERTAIN COUNTRIES.

SO IN THIS CASE, OR IN THIS PARTICULAR DECISION, IT WAS RELATED TO NATIONALS OF CUBA, HAITI, NICARAGUA, AND VEIN EXPWIL YA.

SO IT WAS KNOWN AS THE C.H.N.V.

PATROL PROGRAM.

AND THE PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM REALLY WAS TO EASE UNLAWFUL ENTRIES OR PRESSURE AT THE SOUTHERN BORDER AND CREATE LAWFUL PATHWAYS TO COME IN.

ONCE PEOPLE CAME IN, THEY ERE GRANTED PAROLEE STATUS FOR TWO YEARS AND WORK AUTHORIZATION AND THE GOAL WAS THAT THEY WOULD COME IN LAWFULLY THROUGH THIS PATHWAY, AND THEN PURSUE AN ASYLUM CLAIM.

AND WHAT HAPPENED WAS THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION MADE A DECISION TO TERMINATE HUMANITARIAN PAROLE BEFORE THE TWO-YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED.

AND THAT AS CHALLENGED IN COURT.

AND THEN NOW WITH TODAY'S DECISION, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS ALLOWED TO TERMINATE STATUS, WHICH MEANS THAT YOU HAVE APPROXIMATELY 500,000 PEOPLE WHO NO LONGER HAVE LAWFUL STATUS IN THE COUNTRY.

>> Eric: DO FEDERAL PROSECUTORS HAVE ANY DISCRETION AS THEY CHARGE THESE CASES OUT?

>> YES.

AND THAT WAS ACTUALLY ANOTHER POLICY UNDER THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

WAS THAT THEY USED PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION IN TERMS OF WHO THEY DECIDED TO PLACE IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS AND A LOT OF CASES WERE ACTUALLY TERMINATED OR DISMISSED USING PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION.

ONE OF THE CHANGES UNDER THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WAS TO DO AWAY WITH A LOT OF THE PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION MEASURES THAT WERE USED DURING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

AND THE PROBLEM IS THAT RIGHT NOW, HOSE DECISIONS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT TO EXERCISE PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION, A LOT OF THAT DISCRETION IS BEING TAKEN AWAY AT THE LOCAL LEVEL AND THOSE DECISIONS ARE BEING MADE AT H.Q., BY THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, SO IN THIS CASE, IT WOULD BE WITH SECRETARY NOEN.

>> Cathy: WHEN YOU WERE HERE THE FIRST TIME, T WAS CHAOTIC.

THE ADMINISTRATION SAID SOMEONE IT DEPORTED SOMEONE 28 MINUTES AFTER THE HALT OF THE COURT ORDER.

AND THE ADMINISTRATION SAYS IT'S JUST AN ERROR.

YOU HEAR THAT AND YOU THINK WHAT?

>> I MEAN, I -- [ SIGHS ] I'M NERVOUS AS A LAWYER TO SORT OF BE A CHICKEN LITTLE, BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A SITUATION WHERE A COURT HAS ISSUED AN ORDER IN JOINING THE ADMINISTRATION FROM TAKING CERTAIN ACTION AND THE ADMINISTRATION IS NOT FOLLOWING THAT ORDER, THAT IS A VERY DANGEROUS PLACE FOR OUR COUNTRY AND OUR DEMOCRACY.

WHERE YOU HAD THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH NOT RESPECTING THE JUDICIARY AS A COEQUAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.

>> Eric: WHAT ABOUT THIS WATCH LIST?

I THINK IT'S 20 MINNESOTA COUNTIES, MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL, WHAT'S THAT ALL ABOUT?

>> SO ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT HAS BEEN HIGHLIGHTED BY THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS THIS IDEA OF SO-CALLED SAIVELGTRY JURISDICTIONS -- SANCTUARY JURISDICTIONS.

I PERSONALLY BRISTLE A BIT AT THE TERM BECAUSE IT'S NOT ENTIRELY ACCURATE.

WHAT THEY MEAN BY A SANCTUARY JURISDICTION IS THAT THE LOCAL JURISDICTION, BE IT AT THE STATE, COUNTY, OR MUNICIPAL LEVEL, THEY MAYBE HAVE SOME SORT OF A POLICY TO LIMIT THE EFFORTS OR THE ACTIONS THAT THEY WOULD TAKE TO COOPERATE WITH IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT.

SO REALLY MORE THAN ANYTHING, IT'S -- IT HAS TO DO WITH OPERSEPARATION OF POWERS BETWEEN STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND SORT OF THE POSITION IS THAT IT'S NOT REALLY THE JOB OF STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO DEVOTE THEIR OWN ESOURCES WHEN THEY HAVE PLENTY TO DO AT THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL TOWARD IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT SORT OF LIKE LET THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WORRY ABOUT IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT.

WE'LL WORRY ABOUT COMMUNITY POLICING AND THAT SORT OF THING.

WHAT'S INTERESTING ABOUT THE LIST IN MINNESOTA IS THAT YOU DO HAVE SORT OF THE USUAL SUSPECTS, MEANING, YOU HAVE THE TWIN CITIES OF MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL, HENNEPIN AND RAMSEY COUNTY WHERE THE TWIN CITIES ARE LOCATED, BUT THEN YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF COUNTIES IN GREATER MINNESOTA THAT I'M SURE WERE VERY SURPRISED TO FIND THEMSELVES ON THIS LIST.

AND WHAT'S INTERESTING IS THAT THEY USED A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT METRICS TO PLACE COUNTIES ON THESE LISTS.

SO IT'S NOT ENTIRELY CLEAR HOW CERTAIN COUNTIES, PARTICULARLY COUNTIES IN GREATER MINNESOTA, WOUND UP ON THIS LIST.

>> Eric: WE'RE COUNTING ON YOU TO KEEP US POSTED.