11
Judge Approves Trump Move to Strip South Sudan TPS
Federal Judge Allows End of Protections for South Sudanese Immigrants in the US
What Happened?
A federal judge in Massachusetts has ruled that the Trump administration can move forward with ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for South Sudanese nationals living in the United States. This decision affects hundreds of people who have been legally living and working in the US under this protection.
Important Point: This ruling follows a recent Supreme Court decision that allowed the administration to end TPS for Haitians and Syrians as well. It sets a pattern for how similar cases may be decided.
What Is Temporary Protected Status (TPS)?
Think of TPS like a temporary safety pass the US government gives to people from countries going through really bad times.
How TPS Works:
- Who gets it: People from countries facing crises like civil wars, natural disasters, or other dangerous conditions
- What it does:
- Lets them stay in the US temporarily
- Protects them from being deported (sent back to their home country)
- Allows them to work legally
- How long it lasts: It’s temporary and must be renewed by the government
The Court Case: Step by Step
1. Background
- South Sudan got TPS protection back in 2011 when it first became independent
- The country has faced years of civil war and violence since then
- Over 400,000 people have died in the conflict
2. Government Action
- In November 2024, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) decided to end TPS for South Sudan
- They claimed the country "no longer met the conditions" for protection
- This would affect 232 current TPS holders and 73 people with pending applications
3. First Court Challenge
- Immigrant rights groups (including African Communities Together) sued to stop the termination
- Judge Patti Saris initially blocked the government’s action
4. Supreme Court Ruling Changes Things
- In June 2025, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the administration could end TPS for Haitians and Syrians
- This ruling overturned lower courts that had blocked those terminations
- The decision affected 350,000+ Haitians and 6,100+ Syrians
5. New Arguments in South Sudan Case
After the Supreme Court ruling, lawyers for South Sudanese nationals tried new arguments that the Supreme Court hadn’t addressed:
Key Legal Argument: The 1990 law creating TPS only mentioned the Attorney General as having authority to extend/terminate protections. But DHS wasn’t created until 2002 (after 9/11). Lawyers argued DHS never got this authority.
6. Judge Saris’s Final Decision
- Judge Saris rejected this argument
- Her reasoning: If DHS lacked authority to end TPS, it also lacked authority to create it in the first place
- She wrote: "South Sudan’s original TPS designation would thus be invalid by the same token as its termination"
- She concluded Congress did transfer TPS authority to DHS when it was created in 2002
Why This Matters: Real-World Impact
For the People Affected:
- Loss of legal status — they become undocumented
- Vulnerable to arrest, detention, and deportation
- Even pending asylum or green card applications don’t fully protect them
- Could face immigration court proceedings with limited options
- If ordered removed: deported and barred from returning for years
For the US Economy:
| Contribution | Amount |
|---|---|
| Annual taxes paid by TPS holders | $7.8 billion |
| Total economic contribution since 2001 | $262 billion |
| Industries employing many TPS holders | Construction, hospitality, healthcare |
Important Point: Many TPS holders work in critical industries already facing worker shortages. Losing them hurts the US economy.
The Big Picture: Contradiction in Government Policy
The article highlights a stark contradiction:
The US government’s own travel warnings tell Americans NOT to travel to South Sudan, Haiti, and Syria because they’re too dangerous.
Yet the same government is saying these countries are safe enough to send immigrants back to.
South Sudan’s Current Situation:
- Ongoing civil war and political instability
- Millions displaced
- Ethnic violence continuing to claim civilian lives
- Level 4 "Do Not Travel" warning from US State Department (highest level)
Summary
- A federal judge ruled the Trump administration can end TPS for South Sudanese nationals
- This follows a Supreme Court decision allowing termination for Haitians and Syrians
- About 300 people will lose protection (232 current holders + 73 applicants)
- The judge’s logic: If DHS can’t end TPS, it couldn’t have created it either
- South Sudan remains dangerous — US government warns against travel there
- TPS holders contribute billions to the US economy and fill critical jobs
- Losing TPS means risk of arrest, detention, deportation, and long-term bars on return
FAQ
What is the difference between TPS and asylum?
TPS is a temporary protection for entire groups of people from a specific country facing crisis. Asylum is individual protection for someone who proves they personally face persecution. TPS is faster but temporary; asylum is permanent but harder to get.
Can South Sudanese TPS holders apply for other status?
Yes, some may have pending asylum or green card applications. However, the article notes that even with pending applications, losing TPS makes them "vulnerable to arrest, detention, and deportation."
Why did the judge say DHS has authority if the 1990 law only mentions the Attorney General?
Judge Saris ruled that when Congress created DHS in 2002, it transferred immigration authority (including TPS) to the new department. She said this transfer included TPS powers.
How many South Sudanese people are affected exactly?
232 current TPS holders and at least 73 people with pending applications — roughly 305 people total.
Is this the final decision, or can it be appealed?
The article doesn’t specify appeal plans, but typically federal district court decisions can be appealed to a Circuit Court of Appeals, and potentially to the Supreme Court. Immigrant rights groups may choose to appeal.
This article is based on reporting from The Guardian and Reuters.
