The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a decision by Secretary Kristi Noem to terminate Temporary Protected Status for immigrants from Nepal, Honduras, and Nicaragua, allowing the government to proceed with the policy change.
A federal appeals court in San Francisco has granted a stay that permits the government to move forward with its plan to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for immigrants from Nepal, Honduras, and Nicaragua. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, known for its liberal leanings, issued an order that freezes a lower court ruling which would have overturned the decision made by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem.
The court determined that the government is likely to succeed in defending Noem’s decision, asserting that the DHS’s actions were not “arbitrary or capricious.” This suggests that the process behind the decision was rational and well-founded. According to court documents, “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.”
Last year, Noem initiated the process to end TPS for these three countries, arguing that the government must reassess whether the original conditions that warranted their protections still exist. Nepal was designated for TPS in 2015 following a devastating earthquake, while Honduras and Nicaragua received similar protections in 1999 after Hurricane Mitch caused widespread destruction.
Tricia McLaughlin, Noem’s chief spokeswoman, highlighted last August that TPS protections were always intended to be temporary in nature. This perspective aligns with the administration’s broader immigration policy goals.
Attorney General Pam Bondi praised the appeals court’s decision, stating it allows the Trump administration to continue its immigration policies, including the deportation of certain immigrants. “This is a crucial legal win from @TheJusticeDept attorneys that helps clear the way for President Trump’s continued deportations,” Bondi remarked. She emphasized that the court’s findings support the administration’s argument that ending TPS for some immigrants is a sound and lawful policy.
Noem’s decision faced opposition from the National TPS Alliance, which argued that the termination of protections was “arbitrary and capricious” and violated the Administrative Procedure Act. In a prior ruling on December 31, 2025, a district court judge in San Francisco sided with the plaintiffs, canceling Secretary Noem’s termination order.
The panel of judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals included Judges Hawkins, Callahan, and Miller. Judge Hawkins was appointed by Bill Clinton, Judge Callahan by George W. Bush, and Judge Miller by President Donald Trump. While Judges Callahan and Miller appeared to have authored the main analysis of the case, Judge Hawkins wrote a separate concurring opinion. He agreed with the outcome based on recent Supreme Court guidance but refrained from ruling on the plaintiffs’ claims at this early stage of the proceedings.
This decision marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over immigration policy and the status of TPS for immigrants from these countries. As the legal battle continues, the implications of this ruling will likely resonate within the broader context of U.S. immigration law and policy.
According to Fox News, the outcome of this case may influence future decisions regarding TPS and the treatment of immigrants affected by similar circumstances.