A federal appeals court ruled Wednesday that immigrants with Temporary Protected Status (TPS) cannot sue in federal court to challenge a denied asylum application, effectively telling beneficiaries they must wait until they face deportation to appeal the decision.
The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit closes a potential legal avenue for migrants who hold TPS protections but are seeking the more permanent security of asylum.
The case centered on two Venezuelan sisters, Maribel Sayegh de Kewayfati and Marlen Sayegh Agam de Maari. Both women currently live in the U.S. under TPS, a designation that shields nationals from certain crisis-stricken countries from deportation and allows them to work legally.
READ: Somali TPS Revoked: Thousands Face March Deadline To Exit U.S. Amid Escalating Minnesota Standoff
Seeking a permanent path to residency, the sisters filed “affirmative” asylum applications. When U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) denied their claims, the sisters found themselves in a unique procedural bind.
Typically, when an asylum request is rejected, the applicant is referred to immigration court for removal proceedings, where they can renew their asylum claim before an immigration judge. However, because the sisters hold TPS, they cannot be removed. Consequently, the government did not send their cases to immigration court, leaving the denial in place without a traditional avenue for appeal.
The sisters sued officials, including Attorney General Pam Bondi and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, arguing the limbo violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). They contended that because TPS blocked the next phase of the immigration process, the USCIS denial should count as a “final” decision subject to immediate federal court review.
The Fifth Circuit disagreed, affirming the dismissal of their lawsuits.
Writing for the panel, Circuit Judge Don R. Willett stated that federal courts are not “overseers of unfinished agency business.” The court held that a denial from a USCIS asylum officer is merely an initial step, not a final determination of legal rights.
“The review the sisters seek is deferred—not denied,” Willett wrote.
READ: Fox News’ Hannity And California Rep. Khanna Trade Barbs Over ICE Rhetoric And Crime Victims
The court reasoned that TPS “freezes” an immigrant’s status. While the sisters cannot currently access the benefits of asylum—such as a path to a green card—they also do not face the concrete injury of deportation. The judges noted that the sisters can still apply for “defensive” asylum if the government ever initiates removal proceedings against them in the future.
The opinion acknowledged that this creates a waiting game for TPS holders, but the panel maintained that the judiciary cannot bypass the system Congress created, even if that system results in long delays.
“Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction,” the opinion concluded. “We cannot intervene prematurely.”
The court modified the lower court’s judgment to be a dismissal without prejudice, technically leaving the door open for the issue to be raised again only if the administrative process is ever fully exhausted.
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox
