Ohio Federal Judge Faults Trump, Vance’s Immigration Rhetoric in Blocking Benefits Freeze

A federal judge in Ohio dealt a setback to the Trump administration on Monday, pointing to a pattern of derogatory remarks by President Trump and Vice President JD Vance about immigrants as part of his reasoning.

U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley directed the administration to lift its freeze on immigration benefit applications, writing that…

both officials had shown persistent hostility toward immigrants both before and after the 2024 election. The affected applications, covering work permits and green cards, belong to people already living in the U.S. who came from countries such as Burma, Canada, Iran, Nigeria, Syria, Tanzania, and Venezuela.

Marbley, a Clinton appointee confirmed to the bench in 1997, wrote that the administration’s hostility seemed concentrated on immigrants from the Caribbean, South America, Africa, and Asia.

In his opinion, the judge referenced a string of past comments from Trump disparaging immigrants of color — including his description of certain nations as undesirable places of origin and his claim that immigration was corrupting the country’s makeup. The ruling also noted that during his second term, Trump targeted Somali Americans, dismissing their contributions to the country, while his administration carried out aggressive immigration enforcement operations in several states, notably Minnesota.

The opinion further cited the false claims Trump and Vance spread during the 2024 campaign that Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio were harming residents’ pets. Marbley quoted Vance’s own admission that he was willing to fabricate stories to draw media attention to grievances he wanted publicized.

By contrast, Marbley wrote, the administration’s stance toward immigration from predominantly white countries appeared far more welcoming.

The ruling represents a temporary but significant win for the affected immigrants, many of whom have lived and worked in the U.S. for years. For now, it halts a policy the judge suggested was rooted in bias rather than legitimate government interest.