What changed
For more than a decade, Temporary Protected Status holders have been told that international travel is theoretically possible if they secure advance parole. The legal architecture under INA §244(f)(3), 8 U.S.C. §1254a(f)(3) and the USCIS Policy Manual appears straightforward: a TPS beneficiary applies for travel authorization on Form I-131, and on approval may depart and re-enter the United States in the same TPS status. The complication — and the reason TPS travel is dangerous in practice — sits in two precedent decisions and one 2022 USCIS policy shift.
The first decision is Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly, 25 I&N Dec. 771 (BIA 2012), which held that a noncitizen who departs the United States on advance parole has not made a “departure” that triggers the three- and ten-year unlawful-presence bars at INA §212(a)(9)(B), 8 U.S.C. §1182(a)(9)(B). Arrabally was decided in the adjustment-of-status context, but USCIS extended its logic to TPS travel: a TPS holder who left and returned on advance parole did not trigger the bars and — more importantly — was considered “paroled” on re-entry, which for many made later adjustment of status under INA §245(a), 8 U.S.C. §1255(a) possible despite an earlier entry without inspection.
The second decision is Matter of Z-R-Z-C-, Adopted AAO Decision 2020-02, which sharply curtailed that second benefit. The AAO held that a TPS beneficiary who travels on advance parole is not “inspected and admitted or paroled” for §245(a) adjustment purposes — instead, on return, the person is restored to the same status they held before departure. For TPS holders who had originally entered without inspection, that closed the §245(a) door that Arrabally seemed to open.
Why it matters
The Biden administration partially reopened that door on July 1, 2022, when USCIS issued updated guidance in the Policy Manual creating a new TPS travel authorization document (Form I-512T) that operates as a true parole on return for adjustment purposes for travel authorized on or after that date. But Matter of Z-R-Z-C- still controls travel that occurred before July 1, 2022. The practical effect is a bright-line date practitioners must screen for: a TPS holder who left the United States on advance parole in, say, 2017 and seeks today to adjust through a U.S.-citizen spouse faces a Z-R-Z-C- problem that a 2024 traveler does not.
There is a separate, larger risk that exists for every TPS holder regardless of date: the underlying removal exposure. TPS does not erase a prior order of removal. A TPS holder with an outstanding in absentia order who departs — even on advance parole — may execute that order on departure as a self-deportation under INA §101(g), 8 U.S.C. §1101(g). Some practitioners read Matter of Arrabally to foreclose that argument, but the question is unsettled and a TPS holder with an unresolved removal order should not travel without first reopening and resolving that order in immigration court.
A third risk is the country of intended travel. A TPS holder who travels to the country of TPS designation may face the argument on return that conditions cannot, in fact, prevent safe return — undermining the very basis for the designation. USCIS has not formalized this as a denial ground, but it has surfaced in re-registration adjudications and in employer-sponsored adjustment contexts.
Way forward
Before filing Form I-131 for a TPS holder, walk through five screening questions. First, is there any outstanding removal order, voluntary-departure order, or pending removal proceeding? If yes, do not travel until that is resolved in immigration court. Second, did the person enter the United States with or without inspection? If without inspection, the timing of travel under Matter of Z-R-Z-C- versus the July 1, 2022 USCIS Policy Manual update determines whether INA §245(a) adjustment is later available. Third, is the destination the TPS-designated country itself? If yes, document the humanitarian or compelling reason for travel — a dying parent, a probate matter, custody of a child — and keep proof in the client’s file. Fourth, will the underlying TPS designation remain in force throughout the travel window? A TPS holder whose country’s designation expires while they are abroad may not be re-admitted in TPS status. Fifth, is there an unlawful-presence problem that pre-dates the TPS grant? Matter of Arrabally helps with departures during TPS, but earlier accrued unlawful presence — for example, from an expired student visa years before TPS — remains its own analysis under INA §212(a)(9)(B).
The USCIS Policy Manual, Form I-131 program page, and the USCIS Adopted and Precedent AAO Decisions list together form the operational reference set practitioners should keep open when advising on TPS travel.
Disclaimer
This article is informational and not legal advice. The interaction of TPS travel, advance parole, and adjustment of status changes with every USCIS policy update and remains contested in some circuits. Verify against the primary source — the USCIS Policy Manual, Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly, 25 I&N Dec. 771 (BIA 2012), and Matter of Z-R-Z-C-, Adopted AAO Decision 2020-02 before advising any specific client.