RIGHT SPEAK: 9th Circuit Rules DHS Can Ax Temporary Protected Status For 60K Foreign Nationals; Appeals Court Rules Trump Can Terminate Deportation Protections for Migrants from Nepal, Honduras and Nicaragua

9th Circuit Rules DHS Can Ax Temporary Protected Status For 60K Foreign Nationals:

‘We conclude that the government is likely to succeed on the merits of its appeal either by showing that the district court lacked jurisdiction or by prevailing on plaintiffs’ arbitrary-and-capricious APA challenge.’

The Trump Department of Homeland Security may move forward with ending temporary protected status (TPS) for nearly 60,000 foreign nationals residing in the United States, a federal appellate court ruled Monday.

In its unanimous decision, a three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a request by the Trump administration to stay (“pause”) a December 2025 ruling by Biden-appointed District Judge Trina Thompson. That order vacated DHS Secretary Kristi Noem’s revocation of TPS for approximately 50,000 Hondurans, 3,000 Nicaraguans, and 7,000 Nepalis residing in America.

According to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the DHS secretary may designate certain foreign countries for TPS “due to conditions in the country that temporarily prevent the country’s nationals from returning safely, or in certain circumstances, where the country is unable to handle the return of its nationals adequately.” These conditions include natural disasters and violent conflicts, as well as “other extraordinary and temporary conditions.”

As described by the 9th Circuit, plaintiffs “asserted statutory and constitutional challenges to [DHS’s] termination decisions” in their class action lawsuit against the administration. Thompson agreed with such claims and ruled that the government violated the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), which governs “how federal administrative agencies make rules and how they adjudicate administrative litigation,” according to Cornell Law School.

The 9th Circuit’s three-judge panel weighed several factors when considering the Trump administration’s request to pause Thompson’s order, including whether it showed that it is “likely to succeed on the merits” and whether it will suffer irreparable harm if a stay is not granted. The judges determined that the administration satisfied such criteria and granted its request for stay, thus permitting Noem’s cancellation of TPS for the aforementioned groups to move forward.

“We conclude that the government is likely to succeed on the merits of its appeal either by showing that the district court lacked jurisdiction or by prevailing on plaintiffs’ arbitrary-and-capricious APA challenge,” the court ruled.

The 9th Circuit judges went on to note that Noem’s termination of temporary protected status is “an action expressly authorized by statute.” They further observed that a “preliminary analysis of plaintiffs’ APA claims is that the government is likely to prevail in its argument that the Secretary’s decision-making process in terminating TPS for Honduras, Nicaragua, and Nepal was not arbitrary and capricious.” --->READ MORE HERE

Appeals court rules Trump can terminate deportation protections for migrants from Nepal, Honduras and Nicaragua:

In a major legal victory for the Trump administration, a federal appeals court ruled Monday that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can terminate deportation protections for nearly 90,000 migrants from Nepal, Honduras and Nicaragua in the US.

The three-judge panel on the 9th US Court of Appeals unanimously agreed that a lower court erred in blocking the Trump administration from ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for migrants from the three nations, overturning a December order from District Judge Trina Thompson in San Francisco.

“The government is likely to prevail in its argument that the Secretary’s decision-making process in terminating TPS for Honduras, Nicaragua, and Nepal was not arbitrary and capricious,” the appellate court determined.

“Specifically, the government can likely show that the administrative record adequately supports the Secretary’s action, that the TPS statute does not require the Secretary to consider intervening country conditions arising after the events that led to the initial TPS designation, and that the Secretary’s decision not to consider intervening conditions does not amount to an unexplained change in policy,” the ruling continued.