The short version
- Judge Patti Saris ruled that the Department of Homeland Security has the authority to terminate Temporary Protected Status for South Sudanese nationals, rejecting arguments from immigrant rights groups.
- The decision follows a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling in June that allowed the administration to strip TPS from Haitian and Syrian nationals, establishing a precedent for these terminations.
- Despite U.S. government travel warnings citing civil war and instability in South Sudan, the administration argues the country no longer meets the conditions for the designation first issued in 2011.
A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration may proceed with ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for hundreds of South Sudanese nationals living in the United States. On Friday, U.S. District Judge Patti Saris of the District of Massachusetts rejected a legal challenge brought by immigrant rights organizations, including New York-based African Communities Together, which sought to maintain the protections for this population.
The ruling effectively removes a judicial barrier that had previously blocked the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from terminating the status. In her 15-page decision, Judge Saris characterized the plaintiffs' arguments as resting on a "self-contradictory, self-defeating foundation." She reasoned that if the DHS lacked the authority to terminate the designation, it would logically follow that the agency also lacked the authority to issue the original designation in 2011. Consequently, she concluded that the initial TPS grant for South Sudan would be invalid by the same logic used to challenge its termination.
This decision mirrors a broader legal shift following a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling in June. The high court’s conservative majority overturned lower court blocks in New York and Washington, D.C., allowing the administration to strip TPS protections from more than 350,000 Haitians and approximately 6,100 Syrians. Those designations had granted individuals permission to live and work legally in the U.S. while their home countries faced crises such as civil war or environmental disasters.
The DHS initially moved to terminate South Sudan’s TPS in November, asserting that the nation no longer met the eligibility criteria for the program. The designation was originally issued in 2011 after South Sudan gained independence. The termination would affect more than 232 South Sudanese nationals currently holding TPS and at least 73 others with pending applications. An earlier order from Judge Saris had temporarily halted this process, but her latest ruling clears the way for the administration to move forward.
The administration’s actions have drawn sharp criticism given the ongoing humanitarian situation in South Sudan. The country has been ravaged by years of civil war and political instability since its independence, displacing millions of people. According to reporting, more than 400,000 people have been killed in the conflict since 2011, with ethnic violence and fighting continuing to claim civilian lives. These conditions are precisely the types of crises that typically qualify a nation for TPS designation.
Complicating the administration’s stance is the fact that the U.S. government itself has issued its highest-level travel warnings for Americans regarding South Sudan, Haiti, and Syria. These warnings acknowledge the severe dangers present in these regions, creating a contradiction between the State Department’s safety assessments and the DHS’s determination that these countries no longer warrant protected status for their nationals already residing in the United States.
In response to Judge Saris’s ruling, James Percival, a general counsel for the DHS, posted on social media platform X, urging other judges handling similar cases to follow suit. He stated, "Every other TPS judge must do the same! Every day these ‘administrative stays’ are in effect is a day the American people are denied what they voted for." The Guardian has contacted African Communities Together for comment regarding the decision.
The legal battle highlights a growing tension between executive immigration enforcement and judicial oversight. While the Supreme Court’s recent decisions have empowered the administration to pursue these terminations, the underlying humanitarian realities in countries like South Sudan remain unchanged. For the affected South Sudanese community in the U.S., the loss of TPS means the potential end of work authorization and protection from deportation, forcing them to navigate an uncertain legal future.
As the administration moves forward with terminating protections for South Sudanese nationals, similar cases involving other countries may face expedited processing. The precedent set by Judge Saris and the Supreme Court suggests that future challenges to TPS terminations will face significant legal hurdles. Immigrant advocates argue that these actions undermine the humanitarian purpose of the TPS program, while the administration maintains that it is enforcing immigration laws as intended by Congress.
The immediate next steps involve the DHS implementing the termination order. Affected individuals may need to seek alternative legal statuses or face removal proceedings. The broader implications for U.S. immigration policy remain a focal point of debate, with critics arguing that stripping protections from refugees fleeing active conflict zones contradicts American values and international humanitarian norms.
Sources behind this briefing
Go to the original reporting
- The Guardian US↗Judge approves Trump effort to end South Sudan TPS protections
