Federal Court Allows South Sudan TPS Termination to Move Forward Following Supreme Court Decision
A federal judge in Massachusetts has denied efforts to continue blocking the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for South Sudan, clearing the way for the Department of Homeland Security’s termination decision to remain in effect following the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Mullin v. Doe.
The decision represents another significant development in the growing body of TPS litigation following the Supreme Court’s June 2026 decision limiting judicial review of TPS termination determinations.
Background
South Sudan’s TPS designation was originally terminated by DHS in November 2025, with the designation scheduled to end on January 5, 2026. In February 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts postponed implementation of the termination, finding that plaintiffs were likely to succeed on claims that DHS had violated the Administrative Procedure Act.
That postponement remained in place until the Supreme Court’s June 2026 decision in Mullin v. Doe, which involved TPS terminations for other countries. Following the Supreme Court ruling, the First Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s postponement order and returned the case to the lower court for additional proceedings.
Court Rejects New Challenges
After the case returned to district court, plaintiffs attempted to advance two new legal theories:
- That former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem lacked authority to terminate South Sudan’s TPS designation because that authority belonged exclusively to the Attorney General; and
- That DHS violated procedural due process requirements when terminating the designation.
Judge Patti B. Saris rejected both arguments.
Motion to Amend and Renewed Request for Relief Denied
Because the court concluded that both new claims were unlikely to succeed, Judge Saris denied:
- Plaintiffs’ request to amend their complaint; and
- Plaintiffs’ renewed request to postpone implementation of the TPS termination.
The court held that the proposed new claims would be futile and therefore did not justify further relief.
Erickson Insights and Analysis
The South Sudan ruling is another indication that federal courts are applying the Supreme Court’s Mullin v. Doe precedent broadly when reviewing challenges to TPS terminations. Similar litigation involving other TPS-designated countries remains ongoing, but the August 7 decision suggests that courts may be increasingly reluctant to block DHS termination determinations.
Erickson Immigration Group will continue monitoring developments and sharing updates as more news is available. Please contact your employer or EIG attorney if you have questions about anything we’re reporting above or if you have case-specific questions.