Immigrant Advocates Sue DHS Over Axing Temporary Protections (2)

The US Department of Homeland Security unlawfully terminated temporary protections for immigrants from Honduras, Nicaragua, and Nepal based on predetermined decisions, an immigration rights group argues in a new lawsuit.

The agency violated the Administrative Procedure Act by canceling Temporary Protected Status designations without an objective review of conditions in those countries, the National TPS Alliance and several TPS recipients said in a complaint filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California.

Removing those protections exposes tens of thousands of immigrants to deportation with other legal options for TPS recipients scarce. The terminations were also unlawful because the 60-day notice provided before they take effect is a sharp departure from past practices and because they were driven by unconstitutional racial animus, the plaintiffs argued.

The TPS program allows immigrants from designated countries to remain in the US for up to 18 months at a time when conditions like armed conflict or natural disaster make their return unsafe. DHS is required by law to make an objective assessment of conditions again at least 60 days before a designation expires, before deciding whether protections should be renewed or terminated.

Many TPS recipients have lived in the US for decades as protections have been extended multiple times. But the Trump administration has made curtailing TPS, along with other temporary humanitarian relief like Biden-era parole programs, a major piece of its immigration crackdown.

DHS announced TPS terminations for Honduras and Nicaragua Monday after axing protections for Nepal in June.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has also terminated TPS for immigrants from Haiti, Cameroon, and Afghanistan, along with several hundred thousand Venezuelans in the US, prompting challenges in multiple federal courts.

Although the US Supreme Court has handed President Donald Trump key wins in immigration cases involving birthright citizenship and TPS protections, they won’t affect the strategy of the newest legal challenge centered on immigrants from Honduras, Nicaragua, and Nepal, attorneys for plaintiffs said.

Justices in Trump v CASA, without ruling on the merits of an executive order restricting birthright citizenship, issued a decision June 27 limiting the ability of courts to issue nationwide injunctions. The ruling left the door open to universal relief in cases involving APA claims.

“If an administrative decision is unlawful, then a court sets that decision aside and that applies universally,” said Ahilan Arulanantham, a professor at University of California, Los Angeles School of Law and counsel for plaintiffs. “I don’t think as a result that the birthright decision will alter our approach here.”

The Supreme Court also allowed the Trump administration to go ahead with terminating TPS relief for nearly 350,000 Venezuelans covered by a 2023 designation, despite a district court order blocking the move.

The decision was issued as part of the court’s shadow docket, so no reason was offered for reversing the lower court and no precedent was established.

The US District Court for the Eastern District of New York court this month issued an order preserving TPS for several hundred thousand Haitians in the US, finding that Noem had violated her authority by wiping out existing protections early.

Plaintiff Jhony Silva, a TPS recipient from Honduras, has lived in the US since she was three years old and now works as a nursing assistant in a hospital cardiology unit.

“I’ve been doing it the ‘right way’ the whole time. Now, I am facing losing my job, the ability to care for my family, and the only home I’ve ever known,” she said in a statement.

Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement that TPS has improperly been used as “a de facto asylum program.”

“The Trump administration is restoring integrity to our immigration system to keep our homeland and its people safe,” she said. “We have the law, the facts, and common sense on our side.”

The case is National TPS Alliance et al v. Noem et al, N.D. Cal., N.D. Cal. No. 3:25-cv-05687, 7/7/25