A liberal‑led federal appeals court reversed two district court orders that had delayed the termination of Temporary Protected Status for migrants from South Sudan and Ethiopia.
The First Circuit Court of Appeals issued the rulings after district judges temporarily blocked the administration’s termination of TPS for those countries.
The three‑judge panel comprised Judges Julie Rikelman, Seth Aframe, and Joshua Dunlap.
In nearly identical opinions, the majority held that the lower courts’ orders conflicted with Supreme Court precedent in Mullin v. Doe, which bars courts from blocking TPS terminations on non‑constitutional grounds.
The court noted that the statutory judicial‑review bar applies to all non‑constitutional challenges to a Secretary of Homeland Security’s TPS determination.
Administration officials welcomed the decisions, describing them as affirmations of the rule of law and the temporary nature of TPS.
The lawsuits were filed by an immigrant advocacy organization representing TPS recipients from Ethiopia and South Sudan, alleging violations of the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution.
Plaintiffs argued that the Department of Homeland Security failed to properly assess conditions in the two countries and that the terminations were motivated by racial discrimination.
The district judges had issued procedural orders to preserve the status quo while considering whether the plaintiffs could amend their complaints to assert constitutional claims.
The Supreme Court’s Mullin decision limited statutory challenges but left open the possibility of constitutional claims, a point the appeals court emphasized.
Critics of the district judges argued that blocking the terminations before any constitutional claim was established exceeded legal authority.
Administration counsel labeled the district judges’ actions as defiance of the Supreme Court’s ruling.
The appellate rulings represent a significant setback for the district judges and move the termination of TPS for the two countries forward.
