On September 21, 2025, the Trump administration took its battle over Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Venezuelan immigrants to the highest court in the land, asking the United States Supreme Court to pause a federal judge’s order that had ruled it illegal to end those protections. The move marked the latest escalation in a legal and political tug-of-war that has left more than 300,000 Venezuelan nationals in the United States facing an uncertain future.
At the heart of the dispute is a September 5 ruling by Judge Edward Chen of the Northern District of California. Judge Chen found that Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem did not follow the law when she revoked TPS for Venezuelans, calling her decision “arbitrary and capricious.” According to The Washington Post, Judge Chen’s order compelled the administration to reinstate TPS for Venezuelans, a program originally put in place by former DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas under the Biden administration in 2023.
TPS is, by design, a humanitarian program. It allows nationals from countries experiencing armed conflict, environmental disasters, or other extraordinary conditions to remain in the United States temporarily, protected from deportation and authorized to work. The Secretary of Homeland Security has the authority to designate countries for TPS when their nationals cannot safely return home or when their governments cannot adequately handle their return.
After joining the Trump administration in January 2025, Kristi Noem moved swiftly to terminate TPS protections for both Venezuelans and Haitians. In April, she declared that the extension of the program was “contrary to the national interest,” asserting that the conditions in Venezuela no longer warranted special protection. The Department of Justice, supporting Noem’s move, argued that the Secretary had broad discretion in these matters and that keeping TPS for Venezuelans was not in the country’s best interests.
But the decision sparked immediate backlash. The National TPS Alliance, along with 11 individual plaintiffs, sued the federal government, claiming that the removal of protections was not only unlawful but also racially biased. Judge Chen’s September ruling sided with the plaintiffs, stating that Noem’s actions violated the Administrative Procedure Act and may have been motivated by discriminatory intent. In his decision, Chen wrote, “Noem’s generalization of the alleged acts of a few (for which there is little or no evidence) to the entire population of Venezuelan TPS holders who have lower rates of criminality and higher rates of college education and workforce participation than the general population is a classic form of racism.”
Notably, Chen also referenced a May 2025 Supreme Court order that had temporarily allowed federal officials to eliminate TPS protections for Venezuelans. However, he clarified that this earlier order only pertained to preliminary relief and did not prevent him from ruling on the merits of the case. As a result, in September, he ordered the Trump administration to comply with his decision and reinstate the program.
The administration, however, was not ready to accept defeat. On September 19, the Department of Justice filed an emergency application with the Supreme Court, seeking to stay Judge Chen’s order while the case is appealed. The DOJ’s petition argued that Chen’s actions exemplified “the increasingly familiar and untenable phenomenon of lower courts disregarding this Court’s orders on the emergency docket.” The government contended that, as long as Chen’s order remained in effect, “the Secretary must permit over 300,000 Venezuelan nationals to remain in the country, notwithstanding her reasoned determination that doing so even temporarily is ‘contrary to the national interest.’”
Interestingly, while the case also involves TPS for Haitians, the Department of Justice did not request a stay on that part of Chen’s order. That’s because, as officials pointed out, Haiti’s TPS designation is set to expire within months, making further legal wrangling on that front less urgent.
The stakes, however, remain high for Venezuelan TPS holders. If the Supreme Court sides with the administration, more than 300,000 people could lose their right to work and face possible deportation. Many have built lives, families, and careers in the United States during the years that Venezuela has been deemed unsafe for return. According to filings cited by The Washington Post, opponents of the revocation—including TPS beneficiaries themselves—argue that ending the program now would cause “serious harm,” such as loss of employment, risk of deportation, family separations, and profound uncertainty for those who have resided lawfully under TPS.
Supporters of Noem’s decision, on the other hand, insist that the Secretary of Homeland Security must retain the discretion to determine when TPS is warranted and when it is not. They argue that extending protected status indefinitely undermines the temporary nature of the program and may incentivize further unauthorized migration. The administration maintains that it has acted within its legal authority, and that the courts should defer to the executive branch’s judgment on matters of national interest and immigration policy.
The legal saga has already seen several twists. After Judge Chen’s initial ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the government’s request to pause the order blocking the removal of protections. When the government turned to the Supreme Court for emergency relief in May, the justices allowed a temporary pause, letting federal officials proceed with eliminating TPS for Venezuelans. But Chen’s September ruling reignited the fight, forcing the administration to seek another emergency intervention from the high court.
For many TPS recipients, the uncertainty is nothing new. Since its inception, TPS has been a lifeline for people fleeing crisis but has also left them in limbo, never fully secure in their status. The current legal battle highlights the program’s vulnerability to shifting political winds and the profound impact such decisions have on families and communities across the country.
As the Supreme Court weighs the Trump administration’s request, the future of hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan immigrants hangs in the balance. The outcome could set a precedent not just for Venezuelans, but for all TPS holders—past, present, and future. For now, the only certainty is that the debate over who gets to call America home, and under what conditions, is far from settled.
