Fighting for TPS:
Active Lawsuits & What They Mean for You

• South Sudan: January 6, 2026 (postponed by court order)

December 22, 2025: African Communities Together (ACT) and four South Sudanese TPS holders filed a federal class action lawsuit in D. Massachusetts, challenging the termination as unlawful — failing to follow required APA procedures and motivated by racial animus. Represented by Muslim Advocates, Haitian Bridge Alliance, and Covington & Burling LLP; coordinated by CUSP.

December 30, 2025: Court granted an emergency administrative stay, pausing the January 6 termination. Government ordered to produce the administrative record.

January 15, 2026: Oral arguments heard. Court extended the stay and ordered the government to produce the full administrative record by January 26.

February 12, 2026: Court granted a formal postponement of agency action — a significantly stronger protection than a temporary stay. The judge found plaintiffs have a likelihood of success on the merits, concluding the government failed to follow legally required procedures, made a preordained decision to terminate, and gave pretextual public justifications. South Sudan continues to face active armed conflict, mass displacement, food insecurity, and violence that make safe return impossible. DHS cannot move forward with the termination.

March 13, 2026: Defendants appealed the February 12 postponement to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals (No. 26-1254) and filed a Motion to Stay Postponement Pending Appeal, seeking to undo the court’s postponement order while the appeal proceeds.

April 9, 2026: Judge Saris denied the government’s motion for a stay pending appeal. The court rejected all of the government’s arguments and found evidence of pretext in the termination decision. The postponement remains firmly in effect.

April 23, 2026: Court granted joint motion to hold case in abeyance in light of pending Supreme Court oral arguments in Miot v. Trump (Haiti) and Dahlia Doe v. Noem (Syria). The case is paused pending SCOTUS decisions, but the February 12 postponement remains in full effect protecting South Sudanese TPS holders.

June 25, 2026: The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling (Mullin v. Doe) held that the TPS statute bars judicial review of Administrative Procedure Act (APA) claims, while leaving constitutional Equal Protection claims alive. Because the February 12 postponement rested on APA grounds, the ruling directly affected this case.

July 2026: Following the SCOTUS ruling, the government asked the 1st Circuit to summarily reverse the February 12 postponement. Plaintiffs did not oppose summary reversal but asked the court to remand on the standard schedule so the district court could consider an amended complaint and a renewed motion for postponement on the surviving constitutional grounds.

July 22, 2026: Plaintiffs filed an emergency motion for an administrative stay in the district court.

July 23, 2026: U.S. District Judge Patti B. Saris GRANTED the administrative stay. To preserve the status quo, the effective date of the November 6, 2025 termination decision (90 Fed. Reg. 50484) is stayed — null, void, and of no legal effect — pending resolution of plaintiffs’ motion to amend and renewed motion for postponement. The order takes effect immediately upon the 1st Circuit’s mandate returning jurisdiction to the district court (African Communities Together v. Mullin, No. 26-1254). The court noted an administrative stay is a docket-management tool to preserve the status quo, not a ruling on the merits.

July 29, 2026: The 1st Circuit granted the government’s Motion for Summary Reversal of the February 12 postponement. Under the district court’s July 23 order, the administrative stay went into effect, keeping the termination paused while the district court took up the renewed motions.

July 31, 2026: Plaintiffs filed an emergency motion to postpone agency action; the government filed its opposition to plaintiffs’ motion to amend the complaint.

August 7, 2026: Judge Saris issued an order denying both the renewed motion for postponement and the motion to amend the complaint. With those motions denied, TPS for South Sudan could be terminated. Plaintiffs noted their appeal to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals (No. 26-1898).

• Ethiopia: February 13, 2026 (stayed by court order)

December 12, 2025: DHS Secretary Noem announced termination of TPS for Ethiopia, claiming conditions “no longer pose a serious threat” — a determination the lawsuit directly challenges. A 60-day transition period was granted, setting the termination date at February 13, 2026.

January 14, 2026: TPS for Ethiopia terminated.

January 22, 2026: African Communities Together (ACT) and three Ethiopian TPS holders filed this class action lawsuit in D. Massachusetts — the same court handling the South Sudan case — challenging the termination as unlawful, procedurally deficient, and motivated by racial and political animus rather than an objective country conditions review. Represented by Muslim Advocates, Haitian Bridge Alliance, and Covington & Burling LLP; coordinated by CUSP.

January 26, 2026: Motion for Emergency Relief (postponement of agency action) filed.

January 30, 2026: Court granted an emergency administrative stay, pausing the termination and preserving TPS protections, work authorization, and deportation protections for Ethiopian TPS holders. Ethiopia continues to face active armed conflict, mass displacement, severe food insecurity, and infrastructure breakdown.

March 26, 2026: The federal court heard oral arguments on whether to order postponement of the termination while it adjudicates the underlying legal claims. Counsel for plaintiffs argued on three grounds: (1) the lack of clarity about what legal issues the Supreme Court will reach in the consolidated Haiti/Syria TPS cases; (2) the severity of harm to thousands of Ethiopian TPS beneficiaries if the termination were to take effect unlawfully; and (3) the strength of plaintiffs’ claims that the review of Ethiopia’s TPS designation was procedurally defective and tainted by pretext, political influence, and discrimination. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court extended the administrative stay against the effective date of the termination.

April 8, 2026: U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy granted a postponement of agency action — a significantly stronger protection than a temporary stay. The postponement will be in effect during the pendency of the litigation, unless and until a contrary court order overrides it. Ethiopia’s TPS designation remains legally intact, and all related benefits including work authorization and driver’s licenses continue to be available to TPS holders.

April 20, 2026: Court granted joint motion to hold case in abeyance pending Supreme Court decisions in Miot v. Trump (Haiti) and Dahlia Doe v. Noem (Syria). The case is paused pending SCOTUS oral arguments, but the April 8 postponement remains in full effect protecting Ethiopian TPS holders.

June 25, 2026: The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling (Mullin v. Doe) held that the TPS statute bars judicial review of APA claims, while leaving constitutional Equal Protection claims alive. Because the April 8 postponement rested on APA grounds, the ruling directly affected this case.

June 29, 2026: The government filed a Motion to Lift Abeyance and a Motion for Indicative Ruling.

July 13, 2026: Plaintiffs filed an opposition to lifting the abeyance, an amended complaint (refocused on the surviving constitutional claims), and a renewed motion to postpone agency action.

July 15–21, 2026: The government moved in the 1st Circuit to lift the abeyance, issue an administrative stay, and reverse the district court’s postponement; plaintiffs replied on July 21.

July 22, 2026: Plaintiffs filed an Emergency Motion for Administrative Stay and Motion to Postpone Agency Action (the government opposed).

July 24, 2026: Judge Brian Murphy issued an emergency administrative stay to preserve the status quo.

July 27, 2026: The government filed a Motion to Dismiss.

July 29, 2026: The 1st Circuit granted the government’s Motion for Summary Reversal of the April 8 postponement; the district court’s administrative stay went into effect, keeping the termination paused.

August 3, 2026: Plaintiffs filed a reply to the Motion to Dismiss and a renewed motion for an administrative stay and postponement of agency action.

August 14, 2026: The court held a hearing on the government’s Motion to Dismiss and plaintiffs’ renewed motions for an administrative stay and postponement.

August 18, 2026: The court issued a negative ruling. It lifted the administrative stay, denied the motion to postpone the termination, and dismissed all claims except the racial-discrimination claim, which survives. As a result, the government may now move forward with terminating TPS for Ethiopia — potentially the same day the ruling issued, as it did for South Sudan and Somalia. Plaintiffs are represented by Muslim Advocates and co-counsel and continue to litigate the surviving constitutional claim.

• Somalia: March 17, 2026 (termination announced Jan 14, 2026)

Somalia was first designated for TPS in 1991 and has been continuously redesignated ever since — making it one of the longest-running TPS programs (35 years). The country continues to face clan-based violence, armed conflict, and the rise of terrorist organizations.

January 14, 2026: DHS Secretary Noem announced termination of TPS for Somalia, setting expiration for March 17, 2026.

March 9, 2026: African Communities Together (ACT) and the Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans (PANA) filed this class action lawsuit in D. Massachusetts — the same court that granted relief for Ethiopia and South Sudan — challenging the termination as unlawful, procedurally deficient, and motivated by racial discrimination. Case filed just 8 days before TPS expiration.

Unlike other cases, Trump has made specific, documented discriminatory statements targeting the Somali community, especially in Minnesota, since November 2025. Example quotes include: “Somalians have caused a lot of trouble…we’re not taking their people anymore…they’re nothing but trouble” and “I don’t want them in our country, I’ll be honest with you, OK?”

March 13, 2026: Just 4 days before the scheduled termination, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted a temporary emergency stay of the Somalia TPS termination. The termination was set to take effect at 11:59pm on March 17, 2026, but has been temporarily paused by court order. The order states that Somali TPS holders “shall retain all rights and protections afforded by TPS status, including eligibility for work authorization and protection against deportation and detention.”

April 2026: A hearing on the Motion for Postponement of Agency Action was scheduled for May 4, 2026. However, the court stayed the case in light of the Supreme Court’s decision to take up Miot v. Trump (Haiti) and Dahlia Doe v. Noem (Syria). The case is paused pending SCOTUS decisions, but the March 13 emergency stay remains in effect protecting Somali TPS holders.

June 25, 2026: The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling (Mullin v. Doe) held that the TPS statute bars judicial review of APA claims, while leaving constitutional Equal Protection claims alive.

July 9, 2026: A joint status report was filed and supplemental briefing was requested. The court declined to lift the administrative stay for Somali TPS holders.

July 20, 2026: The government filed a Motion for Summary Reversal (and Mandamus in the alternative) in the 1st Circuit, asking it to lift the district court’s administrative stay.

July 30, 2026: The 1st Circuit dismissed the appeal, treating the district court’s July 21 order — which flagged that it would dissolve the administrative stay once jurisdiction returned — as an indicative ruling. Plaintiffs filed an emergency motion to stay and a motion for a preliminary injunction.

July 31, 2026: The district court issued a new administrative stay to preserve the status quo.

August 3–5, 2026: The government moved to lift the administrative stay; plaintiffs filed their reply on August 5.

August 14, 2026: The court issued its opinion. The government’s motions to lift the administrative stay were granted, and plaintiffs’ emergency motion for postponement and motion for a preliminary injunction were both denied. As a result, the termination of TPS for Somalia may now proceed. Plaintiffs noted their appeal to the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals.

• Venezuela (2023): October 3, 2025
• Venezuela (2021): November 7, 2025
• Haiti: February 3, 2026

This is the first time in history that an administration has attempted to “vacate” a previous administration’s TPS extensions — a legal move with no basis in the TPS statute. The case documents discriminatory statements by administration officials, including Secretary Noem calling Venezuelan TPS holders “dirtbags.”

October 3, 2025: Supreme Court granted defendants’ stay, allowing DHS to move forward with terminations for Venezuela while the underlying case continues. Venezuelan TPS terminations took effect.

December 10, 2025: District Court granted declaratory relief, declaring (1) the vacatur of the January 17, 2025 TPS extension for Venezuela was unlawful, and (2) the termination of Venezuela’s 2023 designation on February 5, 2025 was unlawful. A brief stay of the declaratory relief was issued pending the January 14 appeal hearing.

January 28, 2026: 9th Circuit upheld the District Court’s grant of summary judgment. However, the ruling has no impact on current termination dates for Venezuela or Haiti due to the Supreme Court’s stay remaining in effect.

March 29, 2026: DHS filed Motion to Stay the District Court proceedings.

April 24, 2026: District Court denied DHS’s Motion to Stay following hearing on April 23. Case continues in District Court despite Supreme Court stay on termination dates.

• Haiti: February 3, 2026 (postponement granted)

This case was brought separately from the California-based NTPSA v. Noem case — both challenge Haiti’s TPS termination, but in different courts. Filed July 31, 2025 as a class action by five Haitian TPS holders directly impacted by Secretary Noem’s July 1, 2025 termination decision.

November 28, 2025: DHS published Federal Register notice terminating Haiti TPS designation, setting termination for February 3, 2026. Notice affects ~352,959 Haitian TPS holders.

December 5, 2025: Amended complaint filed to add claims related to the November 28 termination.

February 2, 2026: District Court issues detailed opinion finding the termination “arbitrary and capricious” in violation of the APA, that DHS failed to fully consider the dangerous conditions in Haiti, and that the decision was likely motivated by “hostility to nonwhite immigrants.”

February 6, 2026: District Court grants Motion to Postpone Effective Date of Termination. The ruling notes that Noem does not have unlimited discretion to end the program. Haitian TPS holders retain status, work authorization, and protection from deportation. EADs extended per court order. Government immediately appeals to D.C. Circuit.

February 23, 2026: District Court denies government’s motion to stay its own postponement order, finding the government “failed to name a single concrete harm from maintaining the status quo.”

March 6, 2026: D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals DENIES the government’s emergency motion for a stay pending appeal in a major victory for Haitian TPS holders. The three-judge panel (Judges Walker [dissenting], Pan, and Garcia) ruled that the government failed to demonstrate irreparable harm and that the balance of equities “tilts decisively toward the plaintiffs.” The court distinguished this case from the NTPSA Venezuela cases, noting (1) no imminent diplomatic negotiations with Haiti, and (2) the government previously treated Haiti TPS extension as non-urgent. The court emphasized that plaintiffs face “devastating consequences” including detention, deportation, family separation, and removal to Haiti where they would be vulnerable to violence amid a “collapsing rule of law.” The district court’s February 6 postponement remains firmly in effect.

March 16, 2026: Supreme Court agreed to hear the government’s stay application.

April 29, 2026: Supreme Court oral arguments held on the government’s stay application in consolidated cases Miot v. Trump (Haiti) and Dahlia Doe v. Noem (Syria).

June 25, 2026: In a 6-3 decision (Mullin v. Doe, consolidated with the Syria case), the Supreme Court allowed the TPS termination for Haiti to proceed. The Court held that the TPS statute bars judicial review of the Plaintiffs’ Administrative Procedure Act (APA) claims — meaning courts cannot second-guess the Secretary’s decision to terminate. The Court ruled that the Haitian (and Syrian) Plaintiffs’ constitutional Equal Protection claim survived but was unlikely to succeed on the merits. The cases were remanded to the lower courts for further proceedings on the surviving constitutional claim. As a practical matter, the district court’s February 6 postponement no longer shields Haitian TPS holders, and the termination may now move forward.

• Afghanistan: July 15, 2025 (in effect)
• Cameroon: August 4, 2025 (in effect)

This case challenges the earliest TPS terminations of the Trump administration. The government announced the terminations through a New York Times article on April 11, 2025 — before publishing the required Federal Register notice — raising serious due process concerns. No court stayed these terminations before they took effect.

July 10, 2025: Court denied CASA’s motion for summary judgment and stay of agency action, and denied DHS’s motion for summary judgment. The court ruled DHS is only required to make its determination 60 days before expiration, not publish it — rejecting arguments about a “secret determination.” However, the court confirmed it maintains jurisdiction to review the agency’s “policy, practice and procedure.”

July 21, 2025: Fourth Circuit denied plaintiffs’ motion to stay terminations pending appeal. Terminations of TPS for Afghanistan and Cameroon went into effect.

July 30, 2025: DHS filed Motion to Dismiss.

September 3, 2025: Plaintiffs filed their reply to Motion to Dismiss.

December 8, 2025: Judge denied DHS’s Motion to Dismiss. The case continues on the merits — the underlying APA and constitutional challenges to the lawfulness of the terminations move forward.

April 2026: Case stayed in light of the Supreme Court’s decision to take up Miot v. Trump (Haiti) and Dahlia Doe v. Noem (Syria). The case is paused pending SCOTUS decisions.

• Nepal: August 20, 2025 (termination proceeding)
• Honduras: September 8, 2025 (termination proceeding)
• Nicaragua: September 8, 2025 (termination proceeding)

July 31, 2025: District Judge Trina Thompson issued a preliminary injunction pausing terminations for Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua. The judge found the administration failed to consider country conditions and that decisions were motivated by racial animus.

December 31, 2025: Judge Thompson issued a summary judgment on the merits, finding all three terminations unlawful. The court ruled Noem’s decisions were “preordained and pretextual rather than based on an objective review of country conditions” and that she had influenced the review process before taking office. The vacatur order restored TPS protections for all three countries.

January 16, 2026: Defendants noted their appeal to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

February 9, 2026: A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit stayed the district court’s vacatur order pending appeal, finding the administration is likely to succeed on appeal. The district court’s protection is paused and the 2025 DHS termination dates again govern. TPS for Honduras, Nicaragua, and Nepal is currently terminated while the appeal continues.

• Syria: November 21, 2025 (postponed by court order)

Syria has been designated for TPS since 2012. DHS gave just 60 days’ notice before termination — a sharp departure from historical practice. The complaint argues the termination was made without required agency consultation, without regard to actual country conditions, and that the 60-day notice itself was an unexplained APA violation. Note: The Assad regime fell in December 2024, but armed conflict continues and conditions remain unsafe for return.

October 21, 2025: Case filed by IRAP, Muslim Advocates, and Van Der Hout LLP on behalf of seven Syrian nationals with TPS or pending applications.

November 19, 2025: Two days before the termination deadline, the court granted the postponement of agency action, preserving Syrian TPS. EADs with original expiration dates of September 30, 2025; March 31, 2024; September 30, 2022; or March 31, 2021 are extended per court order. Government immediately announced it would appeal.

November 25, 2025: Government appealed to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals.

February 18, 2026: The 2nd Circuit denied the government’s motion to stay the district court’s postponement. The appellate panel held the federal government is not likely to win on appeal — DHS is prohibited from terminating TPS for Syria.

February 26, 2026: The government filed an application to stay the district court’s ruling at the Supreme Court. The district court’s postponement remains in effect while that application is pending.

March 16, 2026: Supreme Court agreed to hear the stay application.

April 29, 2026: Supreme Court oral arguments held on the government’s stay application in consolidated cases Miot v. Trump (Haiti) and Dahlia Doe v. Noem (Syria).

June 25, 2026: In a 6-3 decision (Mullin v. Doe, consolidated with the Haiti case), the Supreme Court allowed the TPS termination for Syria to proceed. The Court held that the TPS statute bars judicial review of the Plaintiffs’ Administrative Procedure Act (APA) claims — meaning courts cannot second-guess the Secretary’s decision to terminate. The Court ruled that the Syrian (and Haitian) Plaintiffs’ constitutional Equal Protection claim survived but was unlikely to succeed on the merits. The cases were remanded to the lower courts for further proceedings on the surviving constitutional claim. As a practical matter, the district court’s postponement no longer shields Syrian TPS holders, and the termination may now move forward.

• Venezuela: October 2, 2026 (original Biden extension date — vacated by Noem)
• Haiti: February 3, 2026 (original Biden extension date — vacated by Noem)

March 3, 2025: Complaint filed by Haitian Americans United, Inc., Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts, UndocuBlack Network (UBN), and four anonymous individual plaintiffs — challenging both the vacatur of Biden-era TPS extensions and the underlying terminations as unlawful and racially motivated. This is the first time in 35 years of TPS history that an administration has attempted to vacate a prior TPS determination.

March 6, 2025: Motion to Postpone Agency Action filed.

March 20–27, 2025: Government filed opposition; plaintiffs replied.

Motion to Postpone deemed moot after the NTPSA v. Noem case (N.D. Cal.) granted nationwide relief covering Venezuela and Haiti.

May 6, 2025: DHS filed Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiffs opposed June 10, 2025.

July 30, 2025: Amended Complaint filed; Motion to Dismiss deemed moot by the court.

August 15, 2025: Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed.

September 5, 2025: DHS filed Motion to Dismiss and opposition to Partial Summary Judgment.

Partial Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss denied due to activity in the N.D. California case before Judge Chen. Case stayed pending developments in the N.D. Cal. proceedings.

• Burma: January 26, 2026 (postponed by court order)

Burma has been ruled by a military junta since the February 2021 coup, which plunged the country into full-scale civil war. The military has carried out indiscriminate attacks on civilians using jet fighters, attack helicopters, and heavy artillery. Notably, this is the first TPS termination case to cite the Travel Ban as a justification for termination. TPS for Burma was terminated November 25, 2025.

December 19, 2025: Case filed by IRAP and AALDEF in N.D. Illinois as a class action on behalf of Burmese TPS holders.

December 22, 2025: Motion for Emergency Relief (Preliminary Injunction) filed.

January 23, 2026: Court granted postponement of the termination on APA grounds, three days before the deadline. The court found plaintiffs demonstrated a likelihood of success on APA claims, irreparable harm, and that the balance of equities favored postponement. Order explicitly preserves TPS protections, work authorization, and protection from deportation and detention — including for individuals with pending applications. EADs with an original expiration date of November 24, 2024 are extended per court order.

February 11, 2026: DHS filed a motion to stay the court’s ruling, seeking to undo the postponement while the case continues. Court ruling on that motion is pending.

March 10, 2026: The court denied DHS’s motion to stay the postponement pending appeal.

April–June 2026: The case was held in abeyance pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Miot v. Trump and Dahlia Doe v. Noem. On June 25, 2026, the Court ruled (Mullin v. Doe) that the TPS statute bars judicial review of APA claims, while leaving constitutional Equal Protection claims alive.

July 14–17, 2026: The government moved for summary reversal in the Court of Appeals in light of the SCOTUS ruling; plaintiffs opposed and filed an administrative stay motion, which the district court granted (effective until August 7). The Court of Appeals then granted the government’s summary reversal, and the administrative stay went into effect.

July 20–30, 2026: Plaintiffs filed a motion to postpone agency action; the government opposed and filed a motion to stay discovery and a motion to dismiss; plaintiffs replied.

August 7, 2026: The court issued its order. The motion to dismiss was granted for all claims except the constitutional (unlawful discrimination) claim, which survives. As a result, the termination of TPS for Burma may proceed while that remaining claim is litigated.

• Yemen: May 4, 2026 (announced Feb 13, 2026; Federal Register published March 3, 2026)

Yemen was first designated for TPS in September 2015 because of armed conflict within the country. The country has been continuously redesignated ever since. The most recent redesignation occurred in July 2024, which also noted the ongoing armed conflict. Yemen remains in a profound humanitarian crisis: roughly 19.5 million people (approximately 70% of the population) require humanitarian assistance, and over 4.5 million people remain internally displaced after a decade of armed conflict.

February 13, 2026: DHS announced termination of Yemen TPS designation.

March 3, 2026: DHS published termination notice in Federal Register (91 Fed. Reg. 10,402), setting May 4, 2026 termination date with only 60-day notice period.

March 14, 2026: Nine Yemeni nationals filed this class action lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case No. 1:26-cv-2103) challenging the termination as unlawful. The complaint alleges this is “the latest in a series of premeditated terminations directed at TPS designations for non-white, non-European countries, made without reasoned engagement with country conditions, and motivated at least in part by racial, ethnic, and national-origin-based animus.” The case alleges the termination was made without consulting appropriate agencies and without reasoned engagement with Yemen’s country conditions. Recent bombing by the US/Saudi-led Coalition in both south and north of Yemen has escalated the humanitarian crisis. Plaintiffs are proceeding under pseudonyms (Noor Doe, et al.) for safety reasons.

March 2026: This case was consolidated with Abdo Doe, et al. v. Noem, a parallel Yemen TPS case also filed in S.D.N.Y.

April 16, 2026: Court heard oral arguments on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Postpone Agency Action.

May 1, 2026: Motion to Postpone Agency Action GRANTED. The court ordered postponement of the Yemen TPS termination. Yemeni TPS holders are now court-protected.

June 25, 2026: The Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling (Mullin v. Doe) held that the TPS statute bars judicial review of Administrative Procedure Act (APA) claims, while leaving constitutional Equal Protection claims alive.

July 9, 2026: Defendants filed a Motion for Indicative Ruling seeking to defeat plaintiffs’ claims in light of the SCOTUS ruling; plaintiffs filed their opposition.

July 20, 2026: The district court (Judge Ho) stayed its own May 1 postponement order, pending DHS’s appeal to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. As a result, DHS may move forward with terminating TPS for Yemen beginning July 24, 2026. Plaintiffs have moved for a renewed administrative stay and filed a renewed motion to postpone agency action; those motions are pending.

• Yemen: May 4, 2026 (announced March 3, 2026)

Yemen was first designated for TPS in September 2015 because of armed conflict within the country and has been continuously redesignated ever since. The most recent redesignation occurred in July 2024, also citing armed conflict. There are approximately 1,082 Yemeni nationals living in the United States with TPS.

March 3, 2026: DHS announced termination of TPS for Yemen.

March 19, 2026: Seven Yemeni nationals — six with TPS and one with a pending TPS application — filed this class action lawsuit in the Southern District of New York, brought by the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) and the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), challenging the termination as unlawful. Like the parallel Noor Doe case filed five days earlier, the complaint frames this termination as part of the Trump administration’s broader effort to completely dismantle TPS as a humanitarian relief program, following the pattern of preordained terminations targeting non-white, non-European countries. This case includes a distinct APA claim that the 60-day termination notice is an unjustified departure from prior practice.

March 2026: This case was consolidated with Noor Doe, et al. v. Noem. The consolidated cases proceeded together with oral arguments on April 16, 2026, and the Motion to Postpone Agency Action was granted on May 1, 2026. Following the June 25 SCOTUS ruling, the district court stayed that postponement on July 20, 2026 pending DHS’s appeal to the 2nd Circuit, and DHS may move forward with the termination beginning July 24, 2026; plaintiffs’ renewed motions for an administrative stay and postponement are pending. See Noor Doe, et al. v. Noem above for full timeline and current status.