The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on June 25, 2026, that the president holds expansive authority to wind down the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program, a decision that could clear the way for the removal of more than a million people who have lived and worked legally in the United States for years.
What the Court Decided
In Mullin v. Doe, the court's conservative majority held that the executive branch has wide discretion to terminate TPS designations, limiting the ability of lower courts to block such moves. TPS allows nationals of certain countries facing armed conflict or natural disasters to live and work in the United States temporarily, with designations subject to periodic review.
Key Points From the Decision
- The ruling came on a 6-3 vote, dividing the court along ideological lines.
- The majority concluded that decisions to end TPS are largely committed to executive discretion.
- The three dissenting justices warned of disruption to longtime residents and their families.
- The decision was issued alongside a second immigration ruling the same day.
Who Is Affected
TPS holders include people from several designated countries, many of whom have built lives in the United States over a decade or more. Supporters of the program argue that beneficiaries have established deep community and employment ties, while the administration has said the protections were always intended to be temporary.
Reactions Across the Spectrum
Officials who favor the ruling describe it as an affirmation of executive authority over immigration policy. Immigrant-advocacy organizations and some legal scholars expressed concern about the scale of potential removals and the speed at which protections could be unwound.
What Comes Next
The decision returns significant procedural questions to the executive branch and lower courts. Analysts say the practical effects will depend on how quickly the administration moves to formally end specific designations and what notice periods apply.
- Future TPS terminations may face fewer legal obstacles after the ruling.
- Congress retains the ability to create more durable protections through legislation.
- Affected individuals may seek other legal avenues to remain in the country.
The case is among the most consequential immigration decisions of the term and is expected to shape debate heading into the November 2026 midterm elections, where immigration remains a central issue for candidates of both parties.