Judge Blocks End of TPS Protections for Relatives of U.S. Citizens

(BOSTON, MA) — U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley on Friday temporarily blocked the Department of Homeland Security from ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for South Sudanese immigrants, a move that would have put hundreds of people at risk of imminent deportation.

Kelley, in an order issued in Boston, said the administration’s bid to terminate the protections demanded closer review because the consequences “not only deserve, but require, a full and careful consideration of the merits by the court.”

She warned that removing people who have established families and ties in the United States would have “significant and far-reaching consequences” and cause harm that could not be undone.

The case is African Communities Together (ACT) v. Noem, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

Government Response

The Department of homeland security criticized the ruling on January 9, 2026, and defended its push to end the protections.

“The Trump administration believes conditions in South Sudan have improved enough to justify ending protections. the tps program had been misused under the previous administration, claiming it allowed criminals and security threats to remain in the U.S.,” said Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary.

Why the Ruling Matters to Families

The legal fight has immediate implications for relatives of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents, because many people covered by TPS are part of family units in which a spouse, parent, or child holds U.S. citizenship or a green card.

Kelley’s order prevents the immediate removal of several hundred people who otherwise could have been deported within days, after TPS for South Sudanese immigrants was set to expire.

Many of those affected are in families that include U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents, tying the case to wider debates over how quickly protections can be withdrawn when people have built long-term lives in the country.

the ruling also keeps work authorization in place for those covered as the litigation proceeds, allowing them to retain their Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) while the court fight continues.

Even with the reprieve, the outcome remains uncertain for families relying on TPS as a bridge of stability while they seek other forms of lawful status, including permanent residence.

Related Federal Actions and Agency Guidance

Kelley’s order came as the administration faces a string of court actions against efforts to roll back Temporary Protected Status and other immigration programs that affect families with deep roots in the country.

• December 31, 2025: Judge Trina Thompson voided the administration’s suspension of TPS for approximately 60,000 people from Honduras, Nicaragua, and Nepal. USCIS updated its official guidance on January 6, 2026 to comply with that order, allowing those covered to maintain their work authorization.
• January 7, 2026: A federal judge in Seattle granted a preliminary injunction blocking a DHS/HHS directive that sought to exclude immigrant families from the Head Start program based on their immigration status.
• January 6, 2026: In Washington, D.C., Judge Ana C. Reyes questioned DHS lawyers on the safety of deporting 350,000 Haitians, many of whom have U.S. citizen children, to a country the State Department currently deems unsafe for all travel.

Friday’s ruling in Boston was also issued days after USCIS released a memo that touched on how applications connected to family immigration could be handled while the administration reviews programs it considers high-risk.

USCIS issued Policy Memorandum PM-602-0194 on January 1, 2026, directing a “hold and review” of all benefit applications, including family-based immigrant visa applications, for nationals from 39 “high-risk” countries.

The memo did not itself end TPS for any country, but it underscored how the administration’s approach can affect applicants tied to relatives who are U.S. citizens or green card holders.

How TPS Overlaps with Family-Based Immigration

Temporary Protected Status is a humanitarian designation that allows eligible nationals of certain countries to live and work in the United States during periods when their home countries cannot safely accept returns, such as because of armed conflict or natural disaster.

The designation does not itself confer permanent immigration status, but it can be intertwined with other pathways, including family-based green card applications.

That overlap is central to why the order matters to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents with relatives covered by TPS, because the loss of protection can accelerate deportation timelines and disrupt family-based immigration plans.

For families with mixed statuses, work authorization can be as consequential as protection from removal, because an EAD can underpin employment, housing stability, and the ability to keep supporting U.S. citizen children and other relatives.

Court Decisions’ Practical Effects

In the Honduras, Nicaragua, and Nepal TPS case, the December 31, 2025 ruling by Thompson and USCIS’s January 6, 2026 compliance update meant those groups could keep work authorization in place for the time being, reflecting how court decisions can quickly reshape what immigrants can do day to day.

The Head Start ruling in Seattle similarly targeted the practical consequences of policy shifts on families, blocking a directive aimed at excluding immigrant families from the program based on immigration status.

Reyes’s questioning in Washington over Haiti placed another spotlight on deportation safety and the family ties of those potentially affected, with the judge focusing on 350,000 Haitians and noting that many have U.S. citizen children.

The dispute over South Sudan TPS in Boston now joins that line of cases, with Kelley signaling that the court should carefully weigh the merits before allowing the protections to be terminated.

Legal and Political Stakes

Kelley’s language emphasized both urgency and the potential permanence of the harm, noting that the consequences of ending the protections “not only deserve, but require, a full and careful consideration of the merits by the court,” and warning of “significant and far-reaching consequences.”

DHS, through McLaughlin, framed the issue as one of program integrity and security, arguing TPS “had been misused under the previous administration, claiming it allowed criminals and security threats to remain in the U.S.”

The administration has indicated it is working with the Department of Justice to appeal decisions that have blocked its actions, including the latest order from Kelley.

For immigrants with TPS who are also in the green card pipeline, the court’s intervention can mean the difference between remaining lawfully present with permission to work and facing swift removal while their family-based cases remain unresolved.

The case name, African Communities Together (ACT) v. Noem, reflects the role of organized advocacy in challenging federal policy changes that affect immigrants’ legal footing and the stability of their families.

USCIS Updates and Public Information

USCIS has provided broader public-facing updates and resources on Temporary Protected Status through its online channels, including its newsroom and country-specific TPS pages, as the agency adjusts its guidance to reflect court orders.

USCIS updated guidance on January 6, 2026 following Thompson’s December 31, 2025 decision covering Honduras, Nicaragua, and Nepal, illustrating how quickly agency practice can change after a ruling.

Friday’s order by Kelley, issued in Boston on January 9, 2026, ensured that South Sudanese TPS holders would not immediately lose protections that were due to expire within days, at least while the court considers the case further.

The dispute also adds to the administration’s expanding legal docket over immigration policy, as it seeks to reverse or curtail protections while facing challenges in federal courts across the country.

Kelley’s order, with its emphasis on careful judicial review, placed the Massachusetts court among those pushing the government to defend its moves in full litigation rather than through rapid program termination.

For the families at the center of the case, the short-term result is a continuation of existing protections and work authorization while lawyers battle over whether DHS can end TPS for South Sudanese immigrants on the timetable it set.

“The Trump administration believes conditions in South Sudan have improved enough to justify ending protections. the TPS program had been misused under the previous administration, claiming it allowed criminals and security threats to remain in the U.S.,” McLaughlin said, setting up a legal and political clash that will now play out under Kelley’s order in Boston.