Appeals Court Reverses Rogue Judges, Hands Trump Major Immigration Win

By John Damon | Just The News Iowa

A liberal-leaning federal appeals court on Wednesday reversed two district court orders that had blocked President Donald Trump's termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for migrants from Ethiopia and South Sudan. The rulings mark a significant victory for the Trump administration's immigration enforcement agenda and a rebuke to what officials called rogue lower-court judges.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals, in nearly identical decisions, found that U.S. District Judges Brian Murphy and Patti Saris had overstepped their authority by issuing temporary restraining orders last week. Those orders had halted the Trump administration's termination of TPS designations for the two African nations, drawing sharp criticism from legal experts and administration officials who accused the judges of defying the U.S. Supreme Court.

What the First Circuit Ruled

The three-judge panel, which included two Biden appointees and one Trump appointee, ruled unanimously that the lower courts' orders conflicted with the Supreme Court's June decision in Mullin v. Doe. That landmark ruling held that federal courts cannot block TPS terminations based on non-constitutional claims.

Mullin held that the TPS statute's judicial-review bar applies to all non-constitutional claims challenging the Secretary of Homeland Security's determination with respect to the termination of a TPS designation, the judges wrote.

Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan praised the decision, telling Fox News Digital that the First Circuit correctly applied Supreme Court precedent.

These are clear wins for President Trump following his big win at the U.S. Supreme Court, explaining that district courts are not supposed to second guess TPS terminations, Wessan said. Even as this plays out, we are moving towards the end of this litigation because district courts should not be hearing these disputes, and that is what the Supreme Court said.

DHS Welcomes Rulings as a Win for the Rule of Law

A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson welcomed the rulings, calling them a win for the rule of law and common sense.

Temporary Protected Status is exactly that, temporary, the spokesperson said. For too long, TPS has been allowed to function as a de facto amnesty program despite Congress never intending it to be permanent.

The Trump administration has made ending the abuse of TPS a key priority, arguing that the program was designed to provide short-term relief for migrants fleeing natural disasters or armed conflict, not to serve as a permanent immigration pathway.

How the Lawsuits Started

The lawsuits were brought by African Communities Together, a New York-based immigrant advocacy organization, alongside individual TPS recipients from Ethiopia and South Sudan. The plaintiffs argued that DHS unlawfully ended the protections in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and the Constitution, alleging the agency failed to properly assess conditions in the two countries and that the decisions were motivated by racial discrimination.

Murphy and Saris temporarily blocked the Trump administration from terminating TPS last week, issuing procedural orders to preserve the status quo while they considered whether the plaintiffs should be permitted to amend their complaints to pursue renewed constitutional claims.

District Judges Accused of Mutiny

The Trump administration accused both judges of effectively sidestepping the Supreme Court's June ruling. After Murphy's order, DHS General Counsel James Percival wrote on X that the district judge was engaged in mutiny against the Supreme Court, while he described Saris' ruling as open defiance of the justices' decision.

While the Supreme Court's decision in Mullin v. Doe left open the possibility that courts could consider claims alleging constitutional violations, Wessan said the district judges were operating outside the legal bounds by blocking the TPS terminations before any constitutional claims had been established.

If they want to let the plaintiffs amend their complaint, they are allowed to do that, but in the meantime, TPS is over, Wessan said.

What This Means for Iowans

For Iowa, the ruling reinforces the Trump administration's broader immigration enforcement agenda, which has included increased border security and stricter limits on temporary immigration programs. Iowa has seen a growing immigrant population in recent years, particularly in communities like Storm Lake and Postville, where meatpacking plants have drawn workers from around the world.

The decision also underscores the ongoing legal battles over executive authority and immigration policy, issues that resonate strongly with Iowa voters who prioritize border security and the rule of law.

Looking Ahead

The First Circuit's decisions mark the latest setback for Murphy and Saris, who have been at the center of controversy over their handling of TPS cases. The Trump administration has vowed to continue its efforts to end what it views as the abuse of temporary immigration programs, and the Supreme Court's ruling in Mullin v. Doe provides a clear legal framework for doing so.

As Wessan put it, we are moving towards the end of this litigation because district courts should not be hearing these disputes.