Baby Steps Toward Immigration Reform: The TPS Edition
The expansion of TPS designations combined with the 2022 policy reversal on previous unlawful entry has increased the number of individuals eligible for TPS and has widened the availability for those to apply for an adjustment of status.
April 12, 2024 at 12:05 PM
6 minute read
While President Joe Biden hasn't found success with any sweeping immigration reform, his administration has been taking seemingly small actions that do not require support from Congress. One significant action in his first three years in office has been his commitment to expanding eligibility for temporary protected status (TPS). TPS is a designation determined by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), where citizens of specified countries are granted nonimmigrant status and protected from removal proceedings when U.S. officials have determined that conditions in their home country are exceptionally dangerous due to factors such as natural disasters, civil unrest, or war. Under the current administration, TPS eligibility has been expanded for citizens of Somalia, Syria, South Sudan and Yemen, and new TPS designations have been added for citizens of Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Myanmar, Cameroon, Sudan, Ukraine and Venezuela. In total, there are now 16 TPS-designated countries and recent data indicates there are approximately 1.2 million noncitizen immigrants currently residing in the United States who are either already the recipient of, or are eligible for, TPS. Considering the rapid increase in TPS eligibility, practitioners should be familiar with the mechanisms and limitations of TPS to best support their clients who are recipients of or eligible for this designation.
The TPS designation provides for more broad coverage than the similar asylum designation, as it provides blanket eligibility for any citizen of the designated countries rather than requiring the applicant to present evidence of a personal threat to their safety should they return to their home country. However, unlike asylum, TPS only provides for nonimmigrant status and temporary work authorization as long as DHS continues to designate the country and does not provide its own path to permanent residence (a green card) in the United States. While the TPS designation does not provide a direct path to a green card on its own, TPS holders may pursue permanent residence through other means, such as sponsorship by their employer or a U.S. citizen relative. However, in order to adjust status to permanent residence from inside the United States, a TPS beneficiary must still be able to show their underlying eligibility for an adjustment of status. What that means is they must be able to show both that they were inspected and admitted into the United States and that they are maintaining valid nonimmigrant status at the time of their adjustment application. For this reason, an individual who entered the United States without inspection and was later approved for TPS may find themselves ineligible to apply for permanent residence through an adjustment of status, even if they are otherwise eligible for a green card in one category or another.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNavigating the Business Immigration in a Second Trump Administration
'Close Our Borders?' Senate Judiciary Committee Examines Economics, Legal Predicate for Mass Deportation Proposal
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Am Law 200 Firms Announce Wave of D.C. Hires in White-Collar, Antitrust, Litigation Practices
- 2K&L Gates Files String of Suits Against Electronics Manufacturer's Competitors, Brightness Misrepresentations
- 3'Better of the Split': District Judge Weighs Circuit Divide in Considering Who Pays Decades-Old Medical Bill
- 4Which Georgia Courts Are Closed Today?—Here's a List
- 5After DEI Rollbacks, Employment Lawyers See Potential For Targeting Corporate Commitment to Equality
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.