WASHINGTON — In a pivotal ruling Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to proceed with canceling protections for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan migrants.
The decision lifts a previous lower-court block, granting a temporary legal victory to former President Donald Trump's immigration efforts affecting nearly 350,000 individuals, the Washington Examiner reported.
The order pauses decisions by both a district court and a federal appeals court that had halted the revocation of Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, for Venezuelan nationals. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the sole dissenter in the high court’s unsigned order, saying she would have rejected the administration’s emergency request entirely.
The action from the Trump administration stems from a move by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who canceled an 18-month TPS extension issued during President Joe Biden’s final days in office. The extension had provided deportation relief and work permits for Venezuelans living in the United States.
Noem justified the revocation by raising concerns about domestic resource limits and public safety. She referenced security risks, including alleged ties between some Venezuelan nationals in the U.S. and the Venezuela-based Tren de Aragua criminal group.
TPS protections for Venezuelans were initially granted by President Biden in 2021 and renewed twice due to prolonged political and humanitarian instability in Venezuela under President Nicolás Maduro’s rule.
Opponents challenged the repeal in court, arguing that Secretary Noem’s decision was motivated by anti-immigrant animosity and violated federal law governing TPS. In February, she referred to certain Venezuelans as “dirtbags” during a national television appearance, sparking widespread condemnation from advocacy groups.
U.S. District Judge Edward Chen, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, cited Noem’s remarks in a March ruling blocking the TPS rollback. According to him, her language was indicative of unconstitutional prejudice in the decision-making process.
Judge Edward Chen wrote that Noem’s public comment referring to Venezuelans as “dirtbags,” particularly in the context of law enforcement and immigration, “provides evidence of unlawful animus” that undermines the legal basis for revoking TPS from such a large population.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld Judge Chen’s injunction, continuing to shield beneficiaries of the TPS extension from potential removal. That decision was short-lived, as the Trump legal team appealed directly to the Supreme Court for emergency intervention to keep the revocation on track during a broader legal review.
With Monday’s Supreme Court order, the Trump administration has been given temporary clearance to dismantle the protections granted to Venezuelan migrants while broader legal arguments await potential formal review by the high court. Justice Jackson, who was appointed by President Biden, broke with the majority, stating she would have blocked the administration’s application from moving forward at this stage.
The policy shift could lead to deportation proceedings for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans, with many facing the expiry of their protections as early as April or by September. Officials have not yet released updated guidance on enforcement timelines following the court’s order.
Immigrant advocates argue that ending TPS will disrupt families, remove legally employed workers from the economy, and destabilize areas with large Venezuelan populations. The Trump team counters that this change reasserts proper limits on executive authority and prioritizes public safety and sovereignty.
“This is not only about immigration—it's about restoring law and order,” Noem said in a statement released after the ruling.
The Supreme Court on Monday allowed the Trump administration to proceed with revoking Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for about 350,000 Venezuelans, lifting a lower court block that cited alleged bias in the decision by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who pointed to security risks and strained resources. This move could lead to deportation proceedings even as legal challenges continue, with Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting.
