Appellate Court Clears Way for Trump Administration to End TPS for Afghans and Cameroonians

Appellate Court Greenlights Trump Administration to End Temporary Deportation Protections for Thousands From Afghanistan and Cameroon

In a recent development that’s raising concerns among immigrant advocates and communities alike, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit has given the Trump administration the green light to move forward with ending the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program for over 10,000 people from Afghanistan and Cameroon. This decision comes amid ongoing legal battles that question the safety of returning to these countries and the legal process used to terminate the protections.

What Is TPS and Who Does It Affect?

Temporary Protected Status is a humanitarian program designed to shield individuals from deportation if their home countries are engulfed in war, natural disasters, or other extreme hardships. It also grants recipients the ability to work legally in the U.S. At this point, roughly 11,700 Afghans and 5,200 Cameroonians are enrolled under TPS. However, the government estimates that about 3,600 Afghans and 200 Cameroonians already hold green cards, meaning they won’t be affected by the change.

The stakes here are high. For those losing TPS, the door remains open to apply for asylum or seek other forms of legal status. But for many, losing TPS means risking deportation back to countries they—or their advocates—consider unsafe.

Court’s Take: No Halt to Ending TPS... For Now

Last week, the appellate court temporarily blocked the Trump administration from ending TPS for Afghans, pausing the plan for one week while it reviewed a lawsuit filed by the immigration advocacy group CASA. But this Monday, the court reversed course, saying there’s “insufficient evidence to warrant the extraordinary remedy” of stopping the government from phasing out TPS while the lawsuit proceeds.

Still, the court acknowledged CASA has a “plausible case” that challenges the administration’s decision, directing a lower court to “move expeditiously” in hearing the case.

The Human Impact: Alarm Bells Ringing

The decision hasn’t gone unnoticed. AfghanEvac, a group dedicated to assisting Afghans fleeing danger, expressed deep alarm over the ruling.

“Lives will be upended. Families will be separated. Allies will be detained, deported, or forced into hiding—while their legal rights remain unsettled,” AfghanEvac President Shawn VanDiver said in a statement Monday night.

The White House, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and CASA have yet to respond publicly, but this issue is heating up.

What’s Behind the Administration’s Push to End TPS?

For months, the Trump administration has aimed to roll back TPS protections across the board. The argument is that TPS was always meant to be a temporary fix — not a permanent refuge — and that conditions in Afghanistan and Cameroon have improved enough to allow returnees to go home safely.

Earlier this year, the administration pointed to improvements in Afghanistan’s security and economy, even though the Taliban has been in control since the U.S. military withdrew in 2021. Meanwhile, in Cameroon, the government says ongoing conflicts—including separatist violence and Boko Haram insurgency—are “contained in limited regions” and no longer pose widespread danger.

"This administration is returning TPS to its original temporary intent," said Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem back in May when announcing the plan to end TPS for Afghans.

But Is It Really Safe to Return?

Despite these official claims, there’s a disconnect. The State Department still advises against travel to Afghanistan due to serious threats like civil unrest, terrorism, and kidnapping. Cameroon, too, has travel advisories urging caution, warning of armed violence, crime, and terrorism in various areas.

CASA, the advocacy group behind the lawsuit, argues that these countries are far from safe. They point out that Cameroon is grappling with a humanitarian crisis caused by a separatist conflict between English-speaking regions and the largely French-speaking government, which has devastated the economy. Meanwhile, Afghanistan’s TPS designation was initially granted due to Taliban repression and ongoing violence involving ISIS-K insurgents.

Allegations of Racial Bias and Legal Missteps

CASA’s challenge isn’t just about safety. They also claim the administration bungled the legal process required to end TPS and that the decision was “preordained,” influenced by racial bias.

The group alleges that the Trump administration has systematically targeted immigrants from predominantly non-white countries for removal, while easing immigration rules for people from mostly white countries.

In their court filings, CASA argues:

“That animus is evidenced by the Trump Administration's efforts to eliminate lawful immigration status for noncitizens from countries the Administration believes are predominantly non-white, while simultaneously removing immigration barriers to noncitizens from countries the Administration believes are predominately white.”

Earlier this month, a lower court judge denied the Department of Homeland Security’s request to dismiss CASA’s lawsuit but also rejected the group’s plea to immediately halt the administration’s phaseout of TPS, leading CASA to appeal to the 4th Circuit.

A Broader Effort to Roll Back TPS

This isn’t an isolated move. The Trump administration has been working to wind down TPS protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants from other countries, including Honduras, Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Haiti. In May, the Supreme Court gave the green light for ending TPS for Venezuelan migrants, marking a significant victory for the administration’s efforts.

What Happens Next?

The 4th Circuit has instructed the lower court to handle CASA’s case swiftly. Depending on the outcome, the fate of thousands of TPS recipients hangs in the balance.

If the court ultimately sides with the government, many will lose their legal protections, potentially facing deportation back to unstable, dangerous situations. If CASA prevails, the status quo might be maintained, at least temporarily.

This ongoing tug-of-war highlights the complexity of immigration law and policy in America. TPS was created as a compassionate response to crises, but now, political, legal, and humanitarian factors collide in a tense showdown over the program’s future.

Key Takeaways:

• The 4th Circuit appellate court allowed the Trump administration to proceed with ending TPS for about 17,000 Afghans and Cameroonians, despite acknowledging a plausible legal challenge.

• TPS recipients losing protections can apply for asylum or other status but face deportation risk otherwise.

• AfghanEvac and CASA strongly oppose the decision, citing safety concerns and racial bias allegations.

• The administration argues that conditions in Afghanistan and Cameroon have improved enough to end TPS.

• The case will move quickly through lower courts as legal battles continue.