A federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for South Sudan while litigation over the policy continues, prompting criticism from Department of Homeland Security officials following a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision involving TPS authority.
U.S. District Judge Patti Saris on Thursday issued an administrative stay in African Communities Together v. Mullin, temporarily preserving TPS protections for South Sudanese nationals while the court considers whether plaintiffs may amend their lawsuit to pursue constitutional claims.
The order pauses the administration’s Nov. 6, 2025, decision terminating South Sudan’s TPS designation, leaving the action without effect until jurisdiction returns to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Saris described the order as a procedural measure intended to preserve the status quo while the court reviews the plaintiffs’ latest filings and emphasized it was not a ruling on the merits of the case.
The decision drew immediate criticism from the Department of Homeland Security.
“Another rogue district judge just postponed the termination of TPS for South Sudan,” DHS General Counsel James Percival wrote on X. “This is open defiance of the Supreme Court, plain and simple.”
The dispute follows the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 25 decision in Mullin v. Doe, in which a 6-3 majority ruled that federal courts generally lack jurisdiction to review Administrative Procedure Act challenges to decisions designating or terminating Temporary Protected Status. The ruling allowed constitutional Equal Protection claims to proceed but barred APA claims challenging TPS decisions.
Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at Advancing American Freedom, argued the Supreme Court’s ruling applies equally to South Sudan’s TPS designation.
“She has no right to ‘maintain the status quo,'” von Spakovsky told Fox News Digital. “No jurisdiction means no jurisdiction.”
Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan also questioned the district court’s authority following the Supreme Court’s decision.
“The Supreme Court ruled that district courts lack jurisdiction to review terminations of temporary protected status,” Wessan told Fox News Digital. “I’m confused why some district courts have not yet removed any remaining road blocks.”
The lawsuit was filed in December 2025 by African Communities Together and four South Sudanese immigrants who received TPS protections. The plaintiffs allege DHS unlawfully ended South Sudan’s designation without following required procedures and claim the decision was motivated by unconstitutional discrimination, per Fox News.
Before the Supreme Court’s ruling, Saris twice ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. She first temporarily blocked the TPS termination in December 2025 before issuing a broader postponement in February, concluding the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on claims that DHS failed to follow required procedures.
After the Supreme Court issued its decision, the Justice Department asked the 1st Circuit to reverse Saris’ February ruling. Rather than oppose that request, the plaintiffs sought permission to amend their complaint to pursue only constitutional claims that remain available following the Supreme Court’s decision. They also requested that TPS protections remain in place while those claims are considered.
