Lead

Two federal judges in the United States have cleared the way for the Trump administration to end temporary protections from deportation for nationals of South Sudan and Myanmar. The rulings, issued on Friday in Boston and Chicago, reject last-ditch efforts by immigrant-rights advocates to maintain Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designations for the two countries.

Coverage Comparison

Al Jazeera reported that the decisions allow the administration to terminate TPS for nationals of the two countries, affecting approximately 232 South Sudanese nationals and roughly 4,000 people from Myanmar, according to the Reuters news agency. The outlet also noted that the Supreme Court in June allowed the administration to end similar protections for thousands of people from Haiti and Syria.

The Guardian provided more detail on the Boston ruling, naming US District Judge Patti Saris as the judge who rejected the attempt by immigrant rights organizations, including the New York-based African Communities Together, to keep TPS for South Sudanese nationals. The Guardian also cited a 6-3 Supreme Court ruling in June that allowed the administration to strip hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Syrians of TPS.

Key Claims

  • US District Judge Patti Saris ruled that the Trump administration can move forward with ending TPS protections for South Sudanese nationals. The ruling allows the administration to end Temporary Protected Status for nationals of South Sudan.
  • The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in June, allowing the Trump administration to strip hundreds of thousands of Haitians and Syrians of TPS.
  • TPS shields people from deportation and grants work authorization when their home countries are affected by armed conflict, natural disasters, or other extraordinary conditions.
  • The Trump administration's effort to strip TPS protections from hundreds of thousands of immigrants comes despite the US government's own highest-level travel warnings for Americans to several affected countries.
  • South Sudan has been ravaged by years of civil war and political instability that have displaced millions.
  • Two federal judges cleared the way for the administration to end temporary protections from deportation for people from South Sudan and Myanmar.
  • The terminations would end protections for about 232 South Sudanese nationals and roughly 4,000 people from Myanmar.
  • Judges in Chicago, Illinois also rejected efforts by immigrant-rights advocates to maintain TPS designations for Myanmar.
The Guardian reported that in her 15-page ruling, Saris wrote that "as a logical matter, plaintiffs' arguments rest upon a self-contradictory, self-defeating foundation." According to Saris, the plaintiffs' argument undermined itself because if the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) lacked the authority to terminate South Sudan's TPS designation, it also would have lacked the authority to issue the designation initially. "South Sudan's original TPS designation would thus be invalid by the same token as its termination," Saris wrote.

In response to the ruling, James Percival, a DHS general counsel, said on X: "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 noted that the Supreme Court decision in June limited lower courts' ability to block DHS efforts to end TPS for people from roughly a dozen countries, arguing the executive branch maintained broad authority to make decisions on the programme. After that ruling, immigrant-rights lawyers made a new challenge, arguing that DHS lacked the authority to terminate TPS. Judge Matthew Kennelly in Chicago made a similar conclusion in the Myanmar case hours later.

Advocates have warned that the rulings could have significant human consequences, especially for South Sudan, which has been ravaged by years of civil war and political instability. The Guardian highlighted the contradiction between the administration's actions and the US government's own travel warnings for several affected countries. Al Jazeera also cited the humanitarian conditions in the affected countries as a backdrop to the court decisions.