The Trump administration has expressed strong disapproval of a federal judge’s decision to temporarily halt plans to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for South Sudan. This decision, made by U.S. District Judge Patti Saris, comes despite a recent Supreme Court ruling that limited lower courts’ ability to intervene in similar matters.
Judge Saris issued an administrative stay on Thursday in the case of African Communities Together v. Mullin to maintain TPS protections for South Sudanese nationals. This action allows the court to consider whether plaintiffs can amend their lawsuit and seek further relief based on constitutional grounds.
The administration’s decision to end South Sudan’s TPS designation on November 6, 2025, is currently placed on hold, making it “null, void, and of no legal effect” until the 1st Circuit regains jurisdiction. Saris emphasized that this measure is procedural and aims to preserve the current situation while evaluating the plaintiffs’ latest filings. It is not a judgment on the case’s substance.
James Percival, general counsel for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), criticized the decision on social media, stating that it was defiance against the Supreme Court’s authority. Similarly, Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at Advancing American Freedom, shared these sentiments. He argued that Judge Saris lacked the jurisdiction to maintain the status quo after the Supreme Court’s TPS ruling.
“No jurisdiction means no jurisdiction, and the law dictates that dismissing the lawsuits is the only action available to the judge,” von Spakovsky said.
In June, the Supreme Court ruled in Mullin v. Doe that federal law primarily prevents courts from questioning or blocking government decisions regarding TPS termination. While the case involved TPS for Syrian and Haitian nationals, von Spakovsky asserted that the interpretation of the TPS statute is applicable to South Sudan.
Eric Wessan, Iowa’s solicitor general, expressed confusion about the continued legal challenges despite the Supreme Court ruling that district courts lack the authority to review TPS terminations.
Following the Supreme Court’s decision, the Justice Department requested the 1st Circuit to overturn Saris’ February ruling. Plaintiffs, however, sought to amend their complaint to focus on constitutional claims that the Supreme Court did not block, requesting a temporary preservation of TPS for South Sudan through Saris, which she approved.
The lawsuit was initiated in December 2025 by African Communities Together and four South Sudanese nationals under TPS. They claim that DHS unlawfully revoked South Sudan’s TPS designation without adherence to required protocols, influenced by unconstitutional discrimination.
Judge Saris previously ruled in favor of the plaintiffs temporarily blocking the TPS termination in December 2025 and postponing it further in February, citing procedural failings by DHS. The case escalated to the 1st Circuit, but Saris did not stay her own order pending appeal, leading to a suspension of the case awaiting the Supreme Court’s decisions in related TPS cases.
As nominated by President Bill Clinton in 1993 to the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Saris has overseen numerous immigration disputes involving both Trump and Biden administrations.
The current order temporarily maintaining South Sudan’s TPS protections is subject to review by the 1st Circuit and possibly the Supreme Court, following recent TPS rulings.
Fox News Digital contacted the White House and plaintiffs African Communities Together for comments. Elaine Mallon writes on national politics for Fox News Digital and Fox Business.
Leave a Reply