— A three‑judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Monday permitted the Trump administration to proceed with ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for some 60,000 migrants from Honduras, Nepal and Nicaragua. The order stayed a lower court decision that had blocked the terminations after a district judge found the Homeland Security secretary’s actions were tainted by improper motives. The appeals court pointed to recent Supreme Court stays involving Venezuelan migrants as authority supporting the administration’s path forward.
Key Takeaways
- The Ninth Circuit stayed a Northern District of California ruling and allowed termination of TPS affecting about 50,000 Hondurans, 7,000 Nepalis and 3,000 Nicaraguans (Congressional Research Service figures).
- The decision was issued Feb. 9, 2026, by a three‑judge Ninth Circuit panel in an unsigned order prompting immediate procedural effect.
- The panel said “the government can likely show that the administrative record adequately supports the secretary’s action,” signaling deference to agency findings.
- A prior district judge, Trina L. Thompson, had faulted the secretary for language and conduct she said reflected bias; that ruling was put on hold by the appeals court.
- The administration has moved to eliminate TPS protections for more than one million people from eight countries, arguing TPS was intended as temporary relief.
- The appeals court referenced recent Supreme Court stays involving Venezuelan TPS recipients as persuasive precedent, even though the Supreme Court’s orders were unsigned and provided no reasoning.
Background
Temporary Protected Status is a decades‑old program that permits nationals of designated countries experiencing armed conflict, environmental disaster or other extraordinary conditions to remain and work in the United States for a defined period. Historically, designations and renewals have been handled by the Department of Homeland Security when conditions in a country are judged unsafe, and many recipients have lived under TPS for years as turmoil continued in their home countries.
The Trump administration began a broad effort to narrow or end TPS designations, arguing the program had grown beyond its original, short‑term intent. In response, many affected migrants, advocacy groups and some district court judges have challenged terminations, and several trial judges have blocked DHS moves on procedural and motive‑related grounds. The legal fight has become a flashpoint in broader debates over immigration policy and administrative authority.
Main Event
On Feb. 9, 2026, a Ninth Circuit panel granted the administration’s request to stay a ruling by Judge Trina L. Thompson of the Northern District of California that had enjoined the termination of TPS for nationals of Honduras, Nepal and Nicaragua. Judge Thompson’s earlier opinion criticized statements and materials the court found indicative of discriminatory intent by the secretary of homeland security; the appeal placed that finding on hold while higher courts consider the legal questions.
The Ninth Circuit’s unsigned order emphasized the panel’s view that the administrative record may satisfy statutory and procedural requirements and observed that the Supreme Court recently allowed the expiration of protections for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan TPS recipients. The appellate panel wrote that it was not deciding the full merits but that a stay was warranted given the circumstances and existing high‑court actions.
The practical effect is that, for now, DHS can proceed with ending the TPS designations or with implementing steps that would lead toward termination for the roughly 60,000 people identified. The administration has argued the changes reflect a proper reexamination of long‑running designations; opponents say the terminations risk deporting people to unstable conditions and breaking up families.
Analysis & Implications
Legally, the Ninth Circuit order highlights how unsigned Supreme Court stays in related cases can shape appellate reasoning even without detailed high‑court opinions. Courts often weigh such stays as signals about the balance of equities or the likelihood of success on appeal; here, the appellate panel treated the prior Supreme Court action as persuasive when evaluating whether to hold Judge Thompson’s injunction in place.
The decision shifts the dispute from emergency injunctions to the longer path of merits briefing and possible Supreme Court review. If the Ninth Circuit ultimately upholds the administration’s actions, the ruling could embolden further terminations of TPS for additional nationalities and narrow judicial intervention in agency designation decisions. Conversely, a reversal would reinforce judicial scrutiny when motive or procedure is in question.
For migrants, the economic and human‑security stakes are immediate: TPS beneficiaries tend to be long‑resident workers, and losing status would expose many to removal proceedings and work‑authorization loss. Employers, local governments and schools in communities with concentrated TPS populations may face disruption if large groups lose lawful status within a short period.
Comparison & Data
| Country | Estimated TPS Recipients |
|---|---|
| Honduras | ~50,000 |
| Nepal | ~7,000 |
| Nicaragua | ~3,000 |
The table above summarizes Congressional Research Service estimates cited in court filings and reporting. The administration has proposed ending TPS for people from eight countries in aggregate, a change that would affect over one million individuals if fully implemented. Those figures help explain why the issue has drawn sustained litigation and political attention.
Reactions & Quotes
Appellate judges framed their stay in legal terms, stressing the potential sufficiency of the administrative record while pausing the lower court’s factual and credibility findings.
“the government can likely show that the administrative record adequately supports the secretary’s action.”
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (unsigned panel order)
Before the stay, Judge Thompson sharply criticized the secretary’s conduct in the underlying case, a finding that provoked both legal and public debate about motive and bias in agency decision‑making.
“perpetuated xenophobic stereotypes and racist conspiracy theories”
Judge Trina L. Thompson (district court opinion)
The Ninth Circuit also noted the context of recent Supreme Court activity in similar TPS disputes, saying the high court’s temporary orders influenced but did not fully decide the legal questions here.
“We are not writing on a blank slate.”
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (unsigned panel order)
Unconfirmed
- Whether DHS will immediately begin removals of affected TPS holders is not settled; implementation timing remains subject to agency decisions and further court orders.
- It is not yet certain whether the Ninth Circuit’s stay will be upheld on the merits if the case proceeds through full appellate briefing or reaches the Supreme Court.
- Claims about the administration’s internal intent or discussions beyond what appears in the public administrative record remain subject to further factual development.
Bottom Line
The Ninth Circuit’s Feb. 9, 2026, stay halts a lower‑court injunction and clears a procedural path for the Trump administration to end TPS protections for roughly 60,000 people from Honduras, Nepal and Nicaragua. The move relies in part on recent Supreme Court activity in similar cases and does not resolve the underlying, contested legal questions about agency motive and reviewability.
Expect continued litigation and likely appeals: the case could return to the Ninth Circuit for full merits review and may reach the Supreme Court if the legal stakes remain high. Meanwhile, affected migrants, employers and local jurisdictions face immediate uncertainty about legal status, work authorization and community stability.
Sources
- The New York Times — news reporting on the Feb. 9, 2026, appeals court order and case background (journalism).
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit — appellate court institutional site, for docket and orders (official court resource).
- Congressional Research Service — federal policy research service providing TPS recipient estimates and program background (government research).