In a last-minute intervention that spared tens of thousands of immigrants from losing their livelihoods overnight, a federal judge in Boston granted emergency relief on July 21, 2026, temporarily blocking U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) from implementing key provisions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that targeted work authorization for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders and asylum seekers.
The Ruling
U.S. District Judge Nathaniel Gorton issued a five-page order in Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts et al. v. USCIS et al.
,
a lawsuit challenging USCIS policies implementing portions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, President Donald Trump's tax and spending law passed by Congress in July 2025.
In the order, Judge Gorton wrote that "the consequences faced by plaintiffs are potentially severe."
He noted that the pause reflects the potentially severe consequences faced by plaintiffs, rather than a consideration of the merits.
The order will remain in place until Judge Gorton decides whether to issue a longer-term pause of the administration's policy, with a ruling expected by August 5.
The timing was critical.
Immigrants in the country under Temporary Protected Status would have lost their work permission on July 22 if the injunction had not been entered.
What the Court Blocked
According to USCIS's own announcement confirming compliance, the court's order stays several key provisions:
TPS Employment Authorization:
The court temporarily halted the application of H.R. 1 provisions related to TPS-based Employment Authorization Document (EAD) expiration deadlines. As a result, TPS-based EADs that had previously received extensions will maintain their prior expiration dates while the litigation remains pending.
Annual Asylum Fee Consequences:
The court also stayed USCIS policies that would terminate employment authorization solely due to a failure to pay the Annual Asylum Fee, and blocked the initiation of removal proceedings based solely on nonpayment of that fee.
However,
the order specifically allows USCIS to continue collecting the Annual Asylum Fee, and individuals who have received a USCIS notice regarding the fee must continue following the instructions in that notice and pay the fee as directed.
The Legal Challenge
The lawsuit was filed by Democracy Forward on behalf of the Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts, the National TPS Alliance, the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP), the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and 32BJ SEIU.
The plaintiffs argued the new USCIS policies were invalid because the public never received notice and a chance to comment on them before they were adopted, as required by the Administrative Procedure Act, and that the 2025 law's TPS work authorization provisions were applied retroactively without statutory authorization.
At issue are three separate USCIS policy actions:
a July 2025 Federal Register notice, a March 2026 USCIS website update, and an April 2026 Interim Final Rule.
USCIS had announced it would only provide employment authorization to TPS holders for up to one year, or the duration of the temporary status, whichever was shorter — and retroactively applied the rule to people who filed for work permit renewals before the enactment of the bill.
Who Is Affected
The ruling provides immediate relief to several populations:
The challenged policies eliminated the automatic 540-day extension for work permits and limited their validity to one year, leaving more than 200,000 people from El Salvador, Sudan, and Ukraine at risk of losing their work authorization.
El Salvador's current TPS designation is set to expire on September 9, 2026, and the Department of Homeland Security is expected to announce in the coming weeks whether it will extend or terminate protections for more than 170,000 Salvadoran TPS holders and the more than 150,000 U.S. citizen children who have a parent with Salvadoran TPS.
USCIS had planned to terminate the validity of the work permits even though TPS for El Salvador remains in effect through September 9, 2026, and for Sudan and Ukraine, TPS remains in effect through October 19, 2026.
For Venezuelans, the relief is limited, benefiting only between 5,000 and 10,000 individuals who renewed their TPS before February 5, 2025, according to the Venezuelan American Caucus.
For asylum seekers, the order prevents USCIS from rejecting applications or terminating work permits for nonpayment of the Annual Asylum Fee —
a $100 fee (inflation-adjusted to $102 for FY 2026) imposed for the first time on all asylum applicants for each calendar year an application remains pending.
The fee is non-waivable, with no poverty-based or other exemption available.
Reactions
Democracy Forward president Skye Perryman stated: "This decision protects thousands of asylum seekers and TPS holders from immediate and irreparable harm while this case moves forward."
José Palma, Coordinator of the National TPS Alliance, said the decision "provides much-needed relief for thousands of families who woke up today fearing they could lose their livelihoods overnight."
USCIS confirmed it will comply with the court's order pending further judicial proceedings.
The agency emphasized that all other fees and requirements established under H.R. 1 remain in effect unless otherwise modified by future court action.
Broader Context
This ruling is the latest in a series of federal court challenges to the Trump administration's efforts to curtail TPS protections. The U.S. Supreme Court in June allowed the administration to end TPS for Haitian and Syrian nationals in a 6-3 decision.
Notably, Judge Gorton — appointed by President George H.W. Bush — is one of the few district judges in the Massachusetts district not appointed by a Democratic president.
What TPS Holders and Asylum Seekers Should Do Now
For those directly affected, several practical steps remain important:
- TPS holders from El Salvador, Sudan, and Ukraine should understand that their EADs will maintain their prior expiration dates for now. However,
- Asylum seekers who have received a notice regarding the Annual Asylum Fee should still pay the fee as directed by USCIS. The court only blocked the consequences of nonpayment — not the collection of the fee itself.
- All affected individuals should consult with an experienced immigration attorney to understand how this ruling applies to their specific circumstances and to prepare for the possibility that the stay may or may not be extended after August 5.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have questions about how this ruling may affect your immigration case, contact an immigration attorney.