On August 29, 2025, a federal appeals court delivered a decisive blow to the Trump administration’s efforts to end deportation protections for roughly 600,000 Venezuelans living and working in the United States. The unanimous decision by a three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Venezuelans, a move that, for now, halts months of legal wrangling and uncertainty for thousands of families.
The ruling comes after a turbulent period in which the fate of Venezuelan TPS holders seesawed between courts and presidential administrations. According to Nexstar Media Inc., the controversy began when former Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, just before leaving office, extended TPS for Venezuela, citing the country’s “complex, serious and multidimensional humanitarian crisis.” This crisis, described by the appeals court as the worst in the Western Hemisphere in recent memory, has driven millions to flee Venezuela amid political instability, food shortages, and economic collapse.
Days after taking office, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem attempted to vacate Mayorkas’s decision, insisting she would not allow the Biden administration “to tie our hands.” However, the appeals court determined Noem did not have the authority to undo a prior extension of TPS. “We hold that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that the vacatur of a prior extension of TPS is not permitted by the governing statutory framework. In enacting the TPS statute, Congress designed a system of temporary status that was predictable, dependable, and insulated from electoral politics,” the panel wrote, as reported by Nexstar Media Inc.
The 9th Circuit’s decision echoed the findings of California-based U.S. District Judge Edward Chen, who had previously blocked Noem’s vacatur from taking effect. Judge Chen’s April 2025 ruling was particularly scathing, stating that the administration’s attempt to strip TPS “smacks of racism” and was “motivated at least in part by animus.” He found that the government’s rationale lacked evidentiary support, writing, “For example, there is no evidence that Venezuelan TPS holders are members of the [Tren de Aragua] gang, have connections to the gang, and/or commit crimes.” Judge Chen further noted that “Venezuelan TPS holders have lower rates of criminality than the general population and have higher education rates than the broader U.S. population. Generalization of criminality to the Venezuelan TPS population as a whole is baseless and smacks of racism predicated on generalized false stereotypes.”
The legal foundation for TPS dates back to the Immigration Act of 1990, which allows the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary to grant legal status to people fleeing countries experiencing civil strife, environmental disaster, or other “extraordinary and temporary conditions” that make safe return impossible. Under the law, TPS is awarded in increments of six, twelve, or eighteen months. The appellate judges emphasized that these guaranteed time limitations are critical, enabling recipients to gain employment, find long-term housing, and build stability without the fear of abrupt policy changes driven by political winds.
But the Trump administration, through Secretary Noem, argued that conditions in Venezuela had improved and that it was no longer in the national interest to allow migrants from the country to remain under what is designed to be a temporary program. This move was part of a broader effort to reduce the number of immigrants in the U.S., whether present without legal documentation or through temporary programs like TPS.
In its ruling, the appeals court dismissed a Trump administration argument that Mayorkas’s extension had not yet taken effect, calling it “factually incorrect.” They reiterated that the process for terminating TPS is not a simple matter of executive discretion; rather, it requires a documented, transparent process in which the DHS must show that conditions in the home country have genuinely improved to a degree that makes deportations safe.
While the ruling is a clear victory for TPS holders, its immediate practical effects remain uncertain for many. As reported by The Guardian, an estimated 350,000 Venezuelans in the group of 600,000 had their protections expire in April 2025, and another 250,000 were facing expiration on September 10, 2025. Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that some Venezuelans have already lost jobs, been detained in immigration jails, separated from their U.S. citizen children, or even deported during the legal limbo. Emi MacLean, a senior staff attorney with the ACLU Foundation of Northern California representing plaintiffs, told The Guardian, “What is really significant now is that the second court unanimously recognized that the trial court got it right.” She added that, while the decision might not immediately benefit those who have already lost their status or are about to, “Friday’s ruling should provide a path for the administration’s illegal actions related to Venezuela and TPS to finally be undone.”
The Department of Homeland Security, for its part, condemned the court’s decision as more obstruction from “unelected activist” judges. In a statement quoted by The Guardian, a DHS spokesperson said, “For decades the TPS program has been abused, exploited, and politicized as a de facto amnesty program. While this injunction delays justice and undermines the integrity of our immigration system, Secretary Noem will use every legal option at the department’s disposal to end this chaos and prioritize the safety of Americans.”
On the other side, the appellate judges—who were all nominated by Democratic presidents—stressed the importance of keeping TPS insulated from electoral politics, underscoring that Congress intended the program to be predictable and dependable. Judge Kim Wardlaw, writing for the panel, stated, “In enacting the TPS statute, Congress designed a system of temporary status that was predictable, dependable, and insulated from electoral politics.”
The Supreme Court’s earlier intervention, reversing Judge Chen’s postponement of the terminations without explanation, added another layer of uncertainty and frustration for affected families. Emergency appeals to the Supreme Court often result in terse, unexplained decisions, leaving lower court rulings in flux until further litigation is resolved.
The broader context of this legal battle highlights the tension between executive authority and congressional intent in U.S. immigration law. TPS was never meant to be a permanent solution, but for many Venezuelan families, it has become the only barrier between stability and upheaval. The humanitarian crisis in Venezuela—marked by political repression, economic collapse, and widespread shortages—continues to drive migration northward, making the stakes of this case deeply personal for hundreds of thousands.
For now, the appeals court’s ruling offers a measure of relief and hope to Venezuelan TPS holders, reaffirming that the process for ending such protections must be rooted in law, evidence, and respect for congressional intent—not in the shifting sands of politics or prejudice. As legal battles continue, the lives of thousands hang in the balance, waiting for the next chapter in this high-stakes immigration saga.