The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the Trump administration has the authority to revoke Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for certain Haitian and Syrian nationals, a decision that prompted criticism from immigration advocates and praise from the White House, as reported by Fox News.

In a 6-3 decision in Mullin v. Doe, the Supreme Court determined that the Department of Homeland Security acted within its authority in ending TPS protections for designated countries, reversing lower court rulings that had blocked the administration's action.

The decision allows the administration to move forward with ending legal protections that have allowed many Haitian migrants to remain and work in the United States since Haiti's 2010 earthquake.

TPS protections for many Syrians have also been in place since the country's civil war led to the designation in 2012.

Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

MORE NEWS: Bob Iger Defends Disney Suspending Jimmy Kimmel Over Charlie Kirk Remarks [WATCH]

Immigration attorney Allen Orr, who represented Haitian nationals in the case, criticized the ruling during an appearance on "MS NOW Reports," arguing that ending TPS would have significant consequences for industries that rely on workers currently protected under the program.

"There are going to be a lot of jobs that are left open, and a lot of people in the home healthcare industry who are not going to receive any service, because their providers are going to be removed from the United States," Orr said. "There are a lot of people who are going to die and suffer because of this. So I wish this court was more of a court of equity rather than what they say they were a court of policy right now."

Orr also challenged arguments that TPS should end simply because it was created as a temporary designation.

"The concept that people keep repeating — that the problem is its 'temporary' status, and it’s been longer than temporary — well, change the word. Don’t put people’s lives in danger because you feel that label arbitrarily moves something," Orr said.

FREE Gun Law Map: Laws Don't Pause During Social Unrest

Following recent reports that Congress is considering a nationwide voter ID requirement for federal elections, do you support requiring voters to show identification before casting a ballot?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from Objectivist.co, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

He argued that individuals currently protected by TPS have legal authorization to work and have undergone government screening.

"As I said before, there are a million-plus TPS individuals who are here legally, working. They’re authorized, they’ve been vetted. There are none of the other concerns you might have with people who come in undocumented. They’re supporting our economy. And when you remove those individuals, you draw down all of those work areas. All those jobs they’re doing, all of these companies that were relying on these TPS workers to work tomorrow are going to have to make decisions about them leaving today."

The White House defended the Supreme Court's decision.

In a statement provided to Fox News Digital, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson described the ruling as a victory for the administration.

Close

MORE NEWS: Christian Pulisic Returns as U.S. Falls to Türkiye on Final Kick

"Today, the Supreme Court affirmed what President Trump has always maintained: temporary protected status is, by definition, temporary. It was never intended to be a pathway to permanent status or legal residency, and it is committed to the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security. The Trump Administration continues to lawfully end the egregious abuses to our immigration system that have hurt Americans for years," Jackson said.

President Donald Trump first sought to revoke TPS protections for Haitian nationals during his first term in 2017 after the protections had been established following Haiti's devastating earthquake in 2010.

Court challenges prevented that effort from taking effect during his first administration. In 2025, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem ended the designation.

The Supreme Court's opinion also addressed claims raised by challengers regarding the administration's motivations.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote that a racial explanation for the policy change was unlikely to succeed because, according to the opinion, the respondents themselves suggested that the administration may oppose TPS as a matter of policy rather than because of any particular national or ethnic group.

The ruling represents another significant development in the administration's immigration agenda and is expected to affect thousands of individuals currently protected under Temporary Protected Status while continuing the broader legal and political debate over the future of the program.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Objectivist. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.