Appeals Court Opens Door to End TPS

U.S. immigration and naturalization documents with American flag — Photo: Pamela Au / Shutterstock

A federal appeals court has cleared the way for the Trump administration to end deportation protections for thousands of immigrants from South Sudan and Ethiopia, closing off yet another legal fight over Temporary Protected Status.

Quick Take

The First Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court order that had paused the end of Temporary Protected Status for South Sudan and Ethiopia.
The ruling leans on a June 2026 Supreme Court decision that bars courts from reviewing most TPS termination challenges.
The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling in Mullin v. Doe already let the administration end TPS for about 350,000 Haitians and 4,000 Syrians.
The case is part of a much bigger pattern touching TPS holders from Venezuela, Honduras, Nicaragua, Nepal, El Salvador, Sudan, and other countries.

Appeals Court Reverses Lower Court Block

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit granted the government’s request for summary reversal in the case, known as Svitlana Doe v. Noem. A district court had earlier paused the Department of Homeland Security’s move to strip TPS status from South Sudan and Ethiopia nationals. The appeals court’s decision removes that pause, opening the door for the terminations to move forward.

This marks the second such reversal from the First Circuit in the same stretch of litigation. One case tracker noted the court issued back-to-back summary reversals of postponement orders tied to TPS terminations, signaling judges are applying the Supreme Court’s guidance quickly and without extended review.

Supreme Court Ruling Set the Stage

The First Circuit’s action traces directly back to the Supreme Court’s June 25, 2026 opinion in Mullin v. Doe. The justices ruled 6-3 that the law governing TPS “plainly bars” judicial review of non-constitutional challenges to the Department of Homeland Security’s decisions ending humanitarian protections. The opinion states plainly that the Secretary’s TPS designation decisions “are not subject to judicial review”.

That ruling overturned lower court orders that had blocked the administration from ending TPS for roughly 350,000 Haitians and 4,000 Syrians. The White House called the decision a “major victory for American sovereignty,” arguing the prior administration had used TPS as a long-term amnesty tool rather than a short-term emergency measure. Immigration advocates counter that ending protections uproots families who have lived and worked legally in the country for years, some for decades.

Pattern Repeats Across Multiple Countries

This fight is not new, and it is not isolated. Federal courts have wrestled with TPS terminations for Venezuela, Haiti, Syria, Sudan, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, and Nepal over the past several years, with rulings splitting almost evenly between blocking and allowing the government’s actions. A Ninth Circuit panel, for example, upheld the termination of TPS for about 300,000 people in one case, while a separate panel found the administration acted unlawfully in ending protections for Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua.

𝐅𝐈𝐑𝐒𝐓 𝐂𝐈𝐑𝐂𝐔𝐈𝐓 𝐑𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐒𝐄𝐒 𝐑𝐎𝐆𝐔𝐄 𝐉𝐔𝐃𝐆𝐄, 𝐂𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐑𝐒 𝐓𝐑𝐔𝐌𝐏 𝐓𝐎 𝐄𝐍𝐃 𝐒𝐎𝐔𝐓𝐇 𝐒𝐔𝐃𝐀𝐍’𝐒 𝐓𝐏𝐒 𝐀𝐅𝐓𝐄𝐑 𝟏𝟓 𝐘𝐄𝐀𝐑𝐒

The First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that the Trump administration can move forward with ending… pic.twitter.com/6bYq5prNur

— M.A. Rothman (@MichaelARothman) July 30, 2026

The Supreme Court’s decision in Mullin v. Doe increasingly narrows what courts can even consider in these disputes. Rather than ruling on whether ending TPS was the right policy call, judges are now largely limited to constitutional questions alone. That shift explains why the First Circuit moved so fast this time, sidestepping the merits fight that consumed lower courts for months in similar cases involving Venezuela and Haiti.

For families holding TPS status, the legal mechanics matter less than the outcome. Work permits, legal residency, and protection from deportation hang in the balance for hundreds of thousands of people across multiple terminated designations. Whether Congress revisits the TPS statute itself remains an open question, one that could shape how future administrations, regardless of party, handle humanitarian status going forward.