California Judge Vacates TPS Termination for 60,000 Immigrants

(CALIFORNIA) — Temporary Protected Status (TPS) remains one of the most practical defenses against removal for nationals of designated countries, especially after a federal judge this week voided Secretary Kristi Noem’s TPS termination for tens of thousands of people.

On December 31, 2025, U.S. District Judge Trina Thompson (N.D. Cal.) issued a 52‑page summary judgment vacating Noem’s termination of TPS for nationals of Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua—restoring TPS‑based protection from deportation and related benefits, including work authorization. The ruling held that the agency unlawfully narrowed its country‑conditions review and failed to follow key TPS procedures, including what the court described as a long‑standing DHS practice of providing at least a six‑month wind‑down period.

As of Friday, January 2, 2026, DHS had not publicly responded, and an appeal remains possible.

For TPS holders—and for people who may qualify—this moment underscores a core defense strategy: treat TPS as both (1) an affirmative benefit with strict filing rules and (2) a removal defense that must be protected aggressively in court and with USCIS. Below are the legal standards, evidence practices, and case‑strength factors that tend to matter most when TPS is threatened by termination or when documentation lapses.

1) The relief option: TPS as a removal defense and status stabilizer

TPS is authorized by INA § 244 (8 U.S.C. § 1254a) and implemented at 8 C.F.R. Part 244. TPS does not create permanent residence. But it typically provides:

• Protection from removal while TPS is in effect (INA § 244(a)(1)(A))
• Employment authorization (INA § 244(a)(1)(B); 8 C.F.R. § 244.5)
• Permission to travel with authorization (advance permission under TPS travel rules)

In removal proceedings, TPS can function as a powerful stabilizer. It may pause enforcement pressure and keep work authorization available. It can also buy time to pursue other relief, such as:

• Asylum (INA § 208)
• Withholding (INA § 241(b)(3))
• Cancellation of removal (INA § 240A), if eligible

The immediate practical takeaway from the Noem termination litigation is that TPS termination decisions can be challenged, and courts can order restoration of TPS benefits. Still, litigation relief can be temporary, and deadlines continue to matter.

Warning (Litigation Uncertainty)
Even after a district court win, the government may appeal. Court orders can change quickly, especially in the Ninth Circuit. Do not assume your TPS is “safe” without verifying your current status and documents.

2) Statutory and regulatory eligibility requirements (what must be shown)

TPS eligibility has both country‑based and individual‑based requirements.

A. Country designation and timing requirements

A person must be a national of a TPS‑designated country (or a person without nationality who last habitually resided there). They must also meet the designation’s residence and presence cutoffs:

• Continuous residence in the United States since the date specified in the Federal Register notice for that country (INA § 244(c)(1)(A)(ii); 8 C.F.R. § 244.2)
• Continuous physical presence since the date specified (INA § 244(c)(1)(A)(i); 8 C.F.R. § 244.2)

Short, casual, and innocent departures may be excused in limited circumstances under the regulations. The details are fact‑specific.

B. Filing requirement: initial registration or re‑registration

Applicants generally must file Form I‑821. Many must also file Form I‑765 for work authorization. Late filing rules exist, but they are narrow and technical. See 8 C.F.R. § 244.2(f) for late initial registration conditions.

C. Individual admissibility and criminal‑related limits

TPS requires that applicants not be barred by certain criminal convictions and other statutory bars:

• A felony conviction or two or more misdemeanor convictions in the U.S. generally bars TPS (INA § 244(c)(2)(B); 8 C.F.R. § 244.4)
• Certain inadmissibility grounds apply, with limited waiver authority for some grounds (INA § 244(c)(2)(A); INA § 244(c)(2)(B); 8 C.F.R. § 244.3)

Criminal dispositions that seem minor can still trigger immigration consequences. The statute’s “misdemeanor” concept is not always intuitive and may differ from state labels.

Warning (Criminal Records)
Do not rely on “it was expunged” or “it was only a misdemeanor” as a safe answer. TPS bars can apply despite state terminology. Get an attorney to review certified dispositions.

3) Evidence typically needed to support TPS (and to protect it during termination fights)

TPS filings and re‑registrations are document‑driven. Strong cases usually include clear proof in three buckets.

A. Identity and nationality

• Passport (current or expired)
• Birth certificate with photo ID
• National ID card
• Any prior immigration documents listing nationality

B. Continuous residence and physical presence

USCIS often accepts a range of records. The best practice is to submit many documents across the entire period, not just one or two.

Common examples:
– Lease agreements, rent receipts, mortgage statements
– Utility bills
– School records for children or applicant
– Pay stubs, W‑2s, tax transcripts
– Medical records, vaccination records
– Bank statements showing routine activity
– Dated letters from churches or community organizations (stronger when corroborated)

C. Clean criminal and immigration history record

• FBI identity history summary (sometimes useful)
• Certified court dispositions for every arrest or charge, even dismissed cases
• Prior I‑94s, prior EADs, USCIS notices

If TPS is being restored due to a court order after a termination, documentation becomes even more important. Employers, DMVs, and agencies may not update their systems immediately.

Deadline Callout (Work Authorization Gaps)
If your EAD expired during the termination period, speak with counsel about re‑registration, replacement EAD options, and employer I‑9 compliance. Do not present false documents to an employer.

4) Factors that strengthen or weaken TPS‑based defense strategies

Stronger TPS postures often include:

• Timely re‑registration during each designated window
• A clean criminal record, with certified proof
• Organized residence documentation spanning the full required period
• Consistent addresses and names across filings
• Immediate action when Federal Register notices change rules

Weaker postures often include:

• Missing re‑registration cycles or filing after deadlines without a clear late‑filing basis
• Multiple low‑level convictions or unresolved criminal matters
• Unexplained travel or lengthy trips abroad
• Prior fraud findings, misrepresentation allegations, or inconsistent identity documents

Because Noem’s termination decisions are being litigated, TPS holders should also expect heightened scrutiny on compliance basics. When an agency loses on procedure, it often refocuses on individual eligibility issues.

5) Disqualifying factors and common bars

TPS can be denied or withdrawn for reasons beyond criminal convictions. Examples include:

• Failure to meet continuous residence or physical presence requirements
• Failure to re‑register without a valid late filing justification (8 C.F.R. § 244.2(f))
• Certain inadmissibility grounds that are not waivable in the TPS context (INA § 244(c)(2))
• Prior removal orders can complicate the pathway, even if TPS is granted — court strategy matters

A separate risk is travel. TPS travel rules have changed over the years, and travel without proper authorization can create serious consequences.

Warning (Travel and Reentry)
Do not leave the U.S. on TPS without confirming the correct travel authorization and risks with an attorney. Reentry is discretionary at the port of entry, and documents must be correct.

6) Realistic expectations after the California summary judgment and related cases

Judge Thompson’s summary judgment is stronger than a preliminary injunction because it resolves key legal issues on the merits at the district court level. Still, TPS termination litigation often proceeds on parallel tracks:

• District court orders can restore protections, sometimes nationwide and sometimes limited.
• Appeals can narrow relief, pause orders, or change timelines.
• Agency implementation can lag, creating practical problems with EADs and benefits.

A separate federal judge in Boston, U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley (D. Mass.), issued an administrative stay on December 30, 2025, blocking Noem’s TPS termination for South Sudan that was set to take effect January 6, 2026. That case posture shows how quickly deadlines can drive emergency filings.

Because outcomes vary by circuit and procedural posture, TPS holders should plan for contingencies: renew documents early when possible, keep proof of eligibility current, and avoid avoidable enforcement triggers.

7) Why attorney representation is critical right now

TPS cases look “form‑based,” but termination litigation and individual eligibility disputes can become technical quickly. Representation matters in at least four settings:

1. USCIS filings: Correct deadlines, late filing theories, and evidence packaging.
2. Criminal‑immigration screening: Determining whether convictions are TPS bars and whether post‑conviction relief is realistic.
3. Removal proceedings: Coordinating TPS with other defenses and protecting the record for appeal to the BIA and circuit courts.
4. Employment and compliance: Handling EAD lapses and employer I‑9 questions without triggering fraud allegations.

When a high‑profile termination by Noem is enjoined or vacated, people often assume they can “wait and see.” That can be a costly mistake. In TPS practice, missed windows and missing records create problems that are hard to fix later.

Where to check official TPS updates

For country designations, re‑registration windows, and forms, consult:
– EOIR (Immigration Court): https://www.justice.gov/eoir
– USCIS TPS page and announcements: https://www.uscis.gov

⚖️ Legal Disclaimer: This article provides general information about immigration law and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified immigration attorney for advice about your specific situation.

Resources:
– AILA Lawyer Referral