President Donald Trump recently secured a significant victory at the Supreme Court, with even several justices who are traditionally viewed as liberal siding with the administration. In an 8–1 decision, the court lifted a lower court injunction that had been blocking the president from removing the protected legal status of hundreds of thousands of migrants currently living in the United States. The only justice who dissented was Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, who had been appointed by former President Joe Biden.
The ruling clears the way for the Trump administration to proceed with its plan to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) protections that were granted during the Biden administration. These protections currently apply to roughly 300,000 Venezuelan migrants living in the United States. With the injunction removed, the administration can move forward with its plans to revoke those protections and potentially begin the process of removing those migrants from the country. Lawyers representing the administration argued before the court that the federal government should have the authority to carry out these actions without interference from lower courts.
During arguments before the Supreme Court earlier this month, U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer criticized the reasoning used by the lower court that had originally blocked the policy. He argued that the district court exceeded its authority and interfered with decisions that fall within the executive branch’s responsibilities. According to Sauer, the issues surrounding TPS involve complex and sensitive judgments related to immigration policy, national interests, and foreign policy, which are traditionally handled by the executive branch rather than the judiciary.
The policy change was initiated by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who issued a memorandum in February announcing the revocation of the TPS designation for Venezuela, with the termination scheduled to take effect in April. In the memo, the Department of Homeland Security explained that Venezuela had originally been newly designated for Temporary Protected Status on October 3, 2023. At that time, the designation was based on what officials described as “extraordinary and temporary conditions” in Venezuela that made it unsafe for Venezuelan nationals to return to their home country.
However, after reviewing updated conditions in Venezuela and consulting with various U.S. government agencies, Secretary Noem determined that the circumstances no longer justified continuing the 2023 TPS designation. The memo stated that allowing Venezuelan nationals covered by that designation to remain in the United States temporarily was no longer considered to be in the national interest. As a result, the administration decided to terminate the 2023 TPS designation for Venezuela.
The memo also outlined the earlier decisions that created and extended TPS protections for Venezuelans. On March 9, 2021, then–Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas designated Venezuela for Temporary Protected Status. He concluded at that time that extraordinary and temporary conditions in the country prevented Venezuelan nationals from returning safely, and that allowing them to remain in the United States temporarily did not conflict with U.S. national interests.
Later, on September 8, 2022, Secretary Mayorkas extended the 2021 TPS designation for Venezuela for an additional 18 months. Then, on October 3, 2023, he issued another extension for the 2021 designation, pushing its expiration date to September 10, 2025. At the same time, he introduced what was described as a new designation for Venezuela under TPS, often referred to as the 2023 designation. That new designation was set to last for 18 months as well, with an expiration date of April 2, 2025. As a result, two separate but overlapping TPS designations for Venezuela were in effect at the same time.
On January 17, 2025, Mayorkas issued a notice extending the 2023 TPS designation for another 18 months. That extension was based on his determination, made on January 10, 2025, that the conditions in Venezuela continued to meet the legal requirements for TPS. However, the notice did not explicitly state whether the earlier 2021 designation was being extended or terminated. Instead, it allowed both the 2021 and 2023 groups of Venezuelan TPS beneficiaries to apply through a consolidated process, giving them a unified extension date of October 2, 2026.
Shortly after the change in administration, on January 28, 2025, Secretary Kristi Noem reversed Mayorkas’s January 10 decision. By vacating that determination, she effectively restored the situation to what it had been before the extension was issued.
The effort to terminate the TPS designation was initially blocked by U.S. District Judge Edward Chen of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. In March, Chen halted the administration’s plan, arguing that the government’s portrayal of Venezuelan migrants as potential criminals lacked evidence and appeared to rely on stereotypes. In his ruling, he described the claims as “baseless” and suggested that they carried elements of racial bias.
In a separate immigration-related matter, the Supreme Court also declined on Wednesday to reinstate a Florida law that would have allowed state officials to prosecute migrants who entered the state after crossing into the United States illegally. The justices did not provide an explanation for their decision, and the order did not include any recorded dissents.
The case involved Florida’s immigration law known as SB 4-C. The law would make it a criminal offense for migrants to enter the state after entering the United States unlawfully and avoiding federal immigration authorities. Supporters of the measure argued that it would help the state address illegal immigration more aggressively.
However, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, issued an indefinite injunction blocking the law from taking effect. She ruled that the law likely conflicts with federal immigration authority and therefore may be unconstitutional, since immigration enforcement is primarily the responsibility of the federal government.
Florida officials appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court after a three-judge panel from the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the injunction. The state filed an emergency application asking the justices to allow the law to take effect while the legal challenge continues. Despite the earlier decision last year allowing a similar law in Texas to move forward, the Supreme Court declined to intervene in Florida’s case at this stage.
