A federal judge has cleared the Trump administration to end Temporary Protected Status for South Sudanese nationals living in the United States, removing a legal barrier that had temporarily protected hundreds of people from losing their immigration status.
U.S. District Judge Patti Saris in Massachusetts rejected a renewed effort by immigrant-rights groups to block the Department of Homeland Security from terminating South Sudan’s TPS designation. Federal immigration authorities now list the designation as terminated effective August 7, 2026.
The ruling comes less than two months after the Supreme Court significantly limited the ability of lower courts to stop the administration from ending TPS designations.
In a June 25 decision involving immigrants from Haiti and Syria, the Supreme Court held that federal law bars judicial review of most nonconstitutional challenges to DHS decisions terminating TPS. The court concluded that plaintiffs in those cases were not entitled to orders postponing the terminations while litigation continued.
TRENDING TODAY
That decision changed the legal landscape for several pending TPS cases, including South Sudan.
After the Supreme Court ruling, attorneys representing South Sudanese nationals and African Communities Together tried a different argument. They contended that DHS itself lacked legal authority to terminate TPS because the original 1990 law gave that authority to the U.S. attorney general, while the Department of Homeland Security was not created until 2002.
Saris rejected that interpretation.
Her reasoning was that the same transfer of immigration responsibilities that allowed DHS to extend and administer TPS also gave the department authority to terminate a designation. Accepting the plaintiffs’ argument, she concluded, could undermine DHS’s authority not only to end TPS but also to grant or extend it.
The decision affects roughly 232 South Sudanese nationals who had been protected under the designation, according to court reporting on the case. South Sudan first received TPS after becoming independent in 2011 amid armed conflict and severe political instability.
TPS is designed for people already in the United States whose home countries face conditions such as armed conflict, natural disasters or other extraordinary circumstances that make safe return difficult. The status generally protects eligible recipients from deportation and allows them to work legally while the designation remains active.
The Trump administration announced in November 2025 that South Sudan no longer met the conditions necessary for TPS and moved to terminate the designation. Legal challenges delayed implementation for several months before the latest ruling cleared the way for the termination.
The decision has drawn criticism because conditions inside South Sudan remain extremely unstable.
The U.S. State Department currently maintains its highest-level “Do Not Travel” advisory for the country, warning Americans about unrest, crime, kidnapping, health threats and landmines.
Humanitarian conditions are also severe. United Nations humanitarian officials estimate that more than 10 million people — roughly two-thirds of South Sudan’s population — will require some form of humanitarian assistance in 2026. Escalating violence and displacement have continued to affect large parts of the country.
That creates an unusual policy contrast.
DHS has determined that the country no longer meets the legal requirements for continued TPS designation, while another part of the U.S. government continues to advise American citizens not to travel there because of serious security risks.
Those two policies use different legal standards, so the travel warning does not automatically require TPS to continue. Still, immigrant advocates argue that the conditions cited in the State Department warning demonstrate why returning vulnerable people to South Sudan remains dangerous.
The administration argues that TPS was created as a temporary humanitarian program rather than a permanent immigration status and that designations should end when DHS determines statutory conditions are no longer satisfied.
The consequences for individual South Sudanese nationals will vary.
For people whose ability to remain and work in the United States depended entirely on TPS, termination removes those TPS-based protections. Some individuals may have asylum claims, pending immigration cases or another lawful status that could independently allow them to remain in the country, meaning loss of TPS does not necessarily produce the same immediate outcome for every recipient.
The South Sudan case is also important because it is part of a much broader restructuring of TPS under the Trump administration.
On the same day as Saris’s ruling, another federal judge cleared the administration to end TPS for thousands of people from Myanmar. Court challenges involving several other country designations are also continuing.
The Supreme Court’s June ruling makes those challenges considerably more difficult when they rely on arguments that federal courts lack authority to review under the TPS statute.
Several issues remain unresolved. Additional appeals could still be attempted, and individual TPS holders may have separate immigration claims. The larger humanitarian question — whether conditions in South Sudan are sufficiently safe for return — is also likely to remain politically contested even after the legal dispute over DHS authority.
Why It Matters
The South Sudan ruling affects only several hundred people directly, but its legal significance is much broader.
It shows how the Supreme Court’s June TPS decision is already giving the Trump administration more room to terminate humanitarian protections for additional nationalities.
For affected families, losing TPS can mean losing work authorization and protection from removal unless another immigration status or legal claim applies.
The case also highlights a difficult policy question: how the United States should decide when temporary protection ends when a country remains dangerous enough for the State Department to advise Americans not to travel there.
What Comes Next
USCIS now lists South Sudan’s TPS designation as terminated effective August 7, meaning affected recipients must determine whether they have another legal basis to remain in the United States.
Immigration advocates could continue pursuing other legal arguments or appeals, but the Supreme Court’s June ruling has narrowed the options available for challenging TPS terminations.
The administration is also expected to continue reviewing and ending additional TPS designations, making the South Sudan decision an important indicator of how similar cases may proceed.
