Late Minute Reprieve: Court Halts Haiti TPS Termination

A federal District Judge in Washington, D.C. has issued a ruling affecting hundreds of thousands of Haitian Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders and the employers who rely on them. On February 2, 2026, the court granted a stay blocking the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) attempt to terminate Haiti's TPS designation. The decision in Lesly Miot et al. v. Trump et al. preserves the status quo and allows Haitian TPS holders whose status was due to expire today, February 3, to continue living and working lawfully in the United States while litigation proceeds.

Litigation History

In July 2024, DHS announced that then Secretary Mayorkas would extend and newly designate Haiti for TPS through February 3, 2026, but later Federal Register notices (Feb 2025 and July 2025) shortened it to August 3, 2025 and then announced a termination effective September 2, 2025.

However a July 15, 2025 judgment from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York (in Haitian Evangelical Clergy Ass'n v. Trump) pushed any termination date to no earlier than February 3, 2026. As a result of the litigation in November of 2025, DHS announced that Haiti's TPS designation would end on February 3, 2026.

Then What Happened?

Five Haitian TPS holders challenged the decision, arguing that DHS failed to follow statutory requirements and acted for impermissible reasons. After an extensive review of the administrative record, the DC District court agreed that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits in the order issued February 2, 2026.

In the detailed 83‑page opinion, the court issued a stay under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) § 705, effectively pausing DHS's termination decision and ensuring that Haitian TPS holders maintain their status for the time being.

The court explains that under U.S. administrative law, an agency decision can be struck down as "arbitrary and capricious" if it does not reflect reasoned decision-making, e.g., the agency ignored key facts, relies on irrelevant factors, gives an explanation that clashes with the record evidence, or offers a rationale that just does not make sense. Even though judges are not supposed to substitute their own judgment for the agency's, they still must make sure the agency stayed within the bounds of rational, evidence-based decision-making and connected the facts to the outcome.

The plaintiffs argue that Secretary Noem's explanation for ending Haiti's TPS designation was implausible and contradicted the evidence in the record. The government mostly does not directly refute that; instead, it argues the court should not "second-guess" the Secretary or reweigh competing evidence. Judge Reyes agrees with that general principle, but says the court's job is still to check whether the decision was reasoned, principled, and grounded in the record. Here, the court concludes it was not.

Finally, the court notes the Secretary provided two reasons for terminating Haiti's TPS designation: (1) Haiti no longer has "extraordinary and temporary conditions" preventing people from returning safely, and (2) allowing Haitian TPS holders to remain in the U.S. is "contrary to the national interest."

The court says neither justification holds up under the APA's arbitrary-and-capricious review.

More on Why the Court Hit the "Pause" Button

1.DHS failed to consult with required agencies. The TPS statute mandates consultation with "appropriate agencies" before a decision to extend or terminate a TPS designation. The court found that DHS relied on a single brief email exchange with a State Department staffer, far from the meaningful consultation Congress intended.

2.Evidence suggested a predetermined outcome. The court noted that DHS has terminated all twelve TPS designations that have come up for review since 2025, with little indication of individualized analysis. That pattern supported the plaintiffs' claim that decisions were preordained rather than the product of a good‑faith review.

3.The record did not support DHS's conclusions about conditions in Haiti. The administrative record described Haiti as facing widespread violence, mass displacement, collapsed institutions, and severe humanitarian conditions, including a State Department "Do Not Travel" advisory. DHS nevertheless concluded that Haitians could safely return, without identifying a single safe region. The court found this conclusion inconsistent with the evidence before the agency.

4.Plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their Equal Protection claim. The court found substantial indicators that racial and national‑origin animus influenced the decision‑making process, including statements by senior government officials about Haitian and other non‑white immigrants and inconsistencies between DHS's stated rationale and the record.

Impact on Employers

Because the court issued a § 705 stay, Haitian TPS holders retain their TPS status and remain employment‑authorized; essentially, their Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) remain valid. We expect U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to update its TPS Haiti webpage, and consistent with its approach for TPS Honduras, Nicaragua, Nepal, Syria and other countries during ongoing litigation–to omit a specific work‑authorization expiration date while the case remains pending.

What Employers Should Do

• Work with your immigration compliance counsel to determine what date to record in Section 2 or Supplement B for the expiration date and keep it consistent so that these employees can be identified, especially if DHS wins on appeal or if USCIS issues guidance, also consider any notes or documents to attach;
• Monitor Updates: Stay informed on USCIS guidance for Form I-9 completion and any DOJ/IER advisories regarding hiring practices;
• Consider operational plans for compliance adjustments if TPS status changes again;
• Internal Communication: Ensure HR and compliance teams understand the current protections and pending guidance to avoid errors in onboarding or reverification; and,
• Ensure that any electronic Form I-9 system you may be using does not block hiring or reverification of employees with TPS EADs extended by litigation.

Sharing Judge Reyes' Conclusion

Looking Ahead

The ruling averts the immediate loss of work authorization for countless individuals employed in sectors already experiencing workforce shortages. DHS has indicated it will appeal with DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin posting on X:

"Temporary means temporary and the final word will not be from an activist judge legislating from the bench."

For now, the message for employers is clear: no immediate change to Haitian TPS or work authorization, and TPS Haiti recipients may continue to work.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.