Ninth Circuit Issues Decision On Protected Status Immigration Case
It took the Ninth Circuit—yes, that Ninth Circuit, the one so often associated with progressive judicial activism—to do what should have been obvious all along: affirm the Executive Branch’s authority to manage immigration policy.
In a quiet but forceful move, a three-judge panel dismantled the judicial overreach of a lower court and put the brakes on a dangerous precedent that threatened to turn Temporary Protected Status (TPS) into a permanent immigration loophole.
The panel—composed of Judges Callahan, Miller, and Hawkins, appointed by Presidents Bush, Trump, and Clinton respectively—acted without fanfare. But the implications of their decision reverberate loudly.
By lifting the stay on the Trump Administration’s termination of TPS for Nicaraguans, Hondurans, and Nepalis, the Ninth Circuit reminded the nation that policy decisions of this magnitude do not belong to activist judges with ideological axes to grind. They belong to the Executive.
TPS was never designed to be a gateway to permanent residency. It was a humanitarian measure—temporary by definition—meant to provide short-term refuge for individuals from countries undergoing armed conflict or environmental disaster. The keyword, of course, is “temporary.” Yet, in practice, some recipients have remained in the U.S. under TPS for decades, long after the original justifications for their stay had expired.
Enter Judge Trina Thompson, a Biden appointee whose ruling against the Trump-era revocation of TPS read more like a manifesto than a judicial opinion. Invoking accusations of racial animus and drawing comparisons to the transatlantic slave trade, Thompson claimed that the administration’s decision to wind down a decades-old temporary program was not only discriminatory but reflective of a belief in “replacement theory.” The logic here was not just strained—it was borderline incendiary.
More troubling, Thompson dismissed precedent from the Supreme Court, claiming it didn’t apply because it was decided on the “shadow docket.” It’s a peculiar argument for a district court judge to reject the nation’s highest court based on the manner in which it ruled rather than the authority it carries.
In contrast, the Ninth Circuit’s terse, nonpartisan reversal did not need dramatic language to make its point. It simply removed the block, restoring the Executive Branch’s ability to make policy decisions as the Constitution intended. As Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin noted, this decision is not only a win for the Trump Administration but for the rule of law itself.
Unless the Supreme Court intervenes, TPS for the groups in question will end in 60 days—a move consistent with its earlier refusal to block the termination of TPS for 350,000 Venezuelans. The numbers may vary, but the principle remains the same: Temporary means temporary.