On July 21, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued an administrative stay temporarily preventing USCIS from implementing certain agency policies under H.R. 1 (the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”) that would have retroactively affected employment authorization of TPS beneficiaries and asylum applicants beginning July 22, 2026. The stay is temporary and applies only while the court considers a broader motion for relief.
What changed
The order immediately affects TPS beneficiaries whose employment authorization was subject to USCIS’s July 22 implementation guidance, including beneficiaries from several TPS-designated countries. Employment authorization for TPS beneficiaries from El Salvador, Sudan and Ukraine was scheduled to end on July 22, 2026, unless individuals had received newly issued EADs.
Judge Nathaniel Gorton concluded that an administrative stay was warranted because many TPS beneficiaries faced the imminent loss of work authorization beginning July 22, 2026, while asylum applicants faced rejection of applications and other potentially severe consequences before the court could fully consider the legality of the challenged policies.
The administrative stay will remain in effect until the court rules on the plaintiffs’ motion for a stay under the Administrative Procedure Act, which the court indicated will occur no later than August 5, 2026.
The blocked policies affected:
- Retroactive application of Employment Authorization Document (EAD) expiration deadlines for previously extended TPS-related EADs
- The imposition of penalties for failure to pay the Annual Asylum Fee (AAF)
Why it matters
For TPS practitioners: Individuals who filed TPS-based EAD renewal applications before July 4, 2025, are not currently subject to the July 22, 2026, termination while the court order remains in effect. The administrative stay buys time for your clients from El Salvador, Sudan, Ukraine, and other TPS-designated countries whose work authorization would otherwise have expired.
For asylum practitioners: The stay prevents USCIS from rejecting asylum applications solely for non-payment of the new annual asylum application fee. This provides critical breathing room while the court evaluates whether the fee structure itself is lawful under the Administrative Procedure Act and applicable statutes.
The decision also preserves the status quo on related USCIS practices: USCIS can continue to collect the new annual asylum application fee and process initial asylum-based employment authorization applications without the prior 30-day adjudication timeline — meaning the fee collection and timeline changes remain in effect, but the rejection and penalty provisions are blocked.
Critical deadline: The August 5, 2026 ruling date will determine whether the stay becomes a full preliminary injunction, a partial one, or is lifted. Practitioners must monitor this decision closely.
Way forward
-
TPS clients: Do not assume your EAD termination notices are cancelled. Confirm with your attorney whether your July 22 expiration is still affected by the stay, as the court’s relief may be narrower than a blanket halt.
-
Asylum applicants: If your application was rejected for non-payment of the annual fee before July 21, or if USCIS notified you of an imminent rejection on or after July 21, immediately contact your attorney or an accredited representative to discuss whether you can reopen or refile under the stay.
-
Employers sponsoring TPS holders: Verify EAD validity dates in real time. Do not assume all TPS work authorizations are restored; the stay applies to retroactive shortening, not necessarily to applications filed after specific dates.
-
Monitor First Circuit: If the government appeals to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, an emergency stay motion could be filed there. Track https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/ and consult case No. 1:26-cv-13038 (D. Mass.) for updates.
Disclaimer
This article is general information only, not legal advice. Fola Form is not a law firm and does not provide legal counsel. The immigration consequences of this court order are fact-specific and may vary by individual. Immigration policy can change without notice; federal courts may modify or vacate orders on appeal. You must consult a licensed immigration attorney to determine how this stay affects your specific situation, and verify all information against the primary source linked above and the full court order as it may be amended or appealed.