(WASHINGTON DC) – A United States federal judge has temporarily blocked a move by President Donald Trump to end temporary protected status for South Sudanese immigrants, a decision with potential economic and social implications for South Sudan and its citizens living abroad.
The ruling allows hundreds of South Sudanese nationals to continue living and working legally in the United States while the court considers whether the decision to revoke the protection was lawful. The protection was due to end on 6 January 2026, a change that would have exposed about 300 South Sudanese citizens in the United States to possible deportation, including those with pending applications.
Temporary protected status allows foreign nationals from countries affected by war or major disruption to remain and work legally in the United States. Applicants must already be in the country and pass security and background checks carried out by the Department of Homeland Security.
Civil rights organisations filed a lawsuit in late December against the Department of Homeland Security, arguing that the decision breached administrative procedures and violated the constitution. The groups said the policy aimed to reduce the number of non white and non European immigrants in the United States.
In a written order, United States District Judge Angel Kelley said the government is temporarily barred from starting deportation proceedings against South Sudanese nationals while the case is under review. The judge said the decision could have serious and wide ranging consequences and required careful examination by the court. She added that the policy change could cause harm that cannot be reversed for the affected migrants.
The Department of Homeland Security criticised the ruling, describing it as an attempt by the judiciary to interfere with presidential authority. A department spokesperson said that under previous administrations, temporary protected status had been misused and claimed it allowed criminals and security threats to remain in the country, without providing evidence.
The department also stated that conditions in South Sudan had improved, citing what it described as renewed peace efforts, better diplomatic relations and steps towards the reintegration of returning citizens. It argued that the protection was always meant to be temporary and that the time had come to bring it to an end.
However, international observers have presented a different picture. United Nations experts have warned that years of weak governance have left both government and opposition forces fragmented, resulting in armed groups operating across the country. They noted that South Sudan continues to struggle with insecurity and limited state capacity.
South Sudanese nationals were first granted temporary protected status in 2011, shortly after independence. Since then, the country has faced repeated conflict, economic hardship and humanitarian crises. Many basic services remain limited, and the country relies heavily on foreign aid. Aid flows have been reduced following cuts to international assistance under the Trump administration, increasing pressure on households and public services.
Food insecurity remains widespread. Monitoring agencies have warned that parts of South Sudan affected by conflict are at risk of severe hunger, with some areas close to famine conditions. These challenges continue to affect economic stability and livelihoods across the country.
One of the groups involved in the lawsuit questioned how the United States government could describe South Sudan as safe when its own travel advisories warn against travel to the country. Advocates also criticised what they see as inconsistent refugee and migration policies.
Some analysts and officials in South Sudan have suggested the decision to end protections was politically motivated. They linked it to South Sudan’s refusal earlier in the year to accept certain deportees from the United States as part of a broader migration arrangement. At least eight men were deported to South Sudan from the United States during that period.
The Trump administration has sought to roll back several immigration protections that allow foreign nationals to live and work legally in the United States. Temporary protected status has already been withdrawn or reviewed for large groups from countries including Venezuela and Haiti, and protections for migrants from Ethiopia, Cameroon, Afghanistan, Nepal, Burma, Syria, Nicaragua and Honduras also face uncertainty.
For South Sudan, the outcome of the court case matters beyond immigration policy. Remittances from citizens abroad are an important source of household income and support local economies. Any sudden loss of legal status for migrants could affect families, reduce financial inflows and add pressure to an already fragile economy.
