Supreme Court Wrapping Up Term with Major Immigration Rulings

The U.S. Supreme Court is finishing its term with a flurry of decisions. Thursday's major decisions marked a win for the Trump administration regarding its immigration policies. Here is a look at these rulings, as well as what can be expected as the court wraps up its current term.

Court Rules with Trump on Temporary Protected Status Case

The highest court in the land issued two significant rulings in immigration cases on Thursday, siding with President Donald Trump on both issues. The court ruled that the president has the power to end the temporary deportation protections that had been in place for millions of foreign nationals coming from war-torn countries such as Haiti and Syria.

The ruling on this Temporary Protected Status (TPS)  was one of the most hotly contested immigration issues to make its way up to the high court during the president's second term in the Oval Office. The decision effectively means that as many as 350,000 Haitians and 6,000 Syrians currently living in the U.S. may lose their right to work and remain in the country. These foreigners will need to become eligible under a different form of legal protection to remain on U.S. soil.

The Trump administration has been working for months to remove TPS for over a dozen nations and their citizens as part of a broader effort to reduce illegal immigration. Thursday's ruling is a major win for the White House on this front.

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito wrote the 6-3 opinion. The three liberal justices were part of the dissent, with Justice Elaine Kagan authoring a rebuke of the ruling. Kagan criticized Trump for past comments that he has made about Haitians, calling his words “so repellent and racially inflected that the majority declines to put them in print.”

The revocation of TPS is likely to have negative consequences in the hospitality industry. Jan Gautam, CEO of IHRMC Hotels & Resorts, told CNN on Thursday that the ruling means that he will lose about 20% of his staff spread out over dozens of hotels in Florida. While Gautam said that he respects the judicial system and the ruling, he noted that he will have to "let everyone go, and we'll suffer and they'll suffer."

The TPS holders hailing from Haiti work in a variety of roles in Florida's hospitality sector, ranging from landscapers to supervisors. According to a 2025 analysis by the policy and advocacy organization FWD.us, almost 190,000 Haitian TPS holders worked in the U.S. legally. Although Florida employs the largest share of these workers, there are thousands of other TPS holders employed in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, and more.

The analysis by FWD.us also found that Haitians on TPS contribute approximately $5.9 billion to the economy each year. The group also pays about $1.6 billion in federal, payroll, state, and local taxes.

The Haitians and Syrians on TPS are likely not to be the only people impacted by this ruling. The White House will likely use this ruling to review other cases surrounding TPS. The Trump administration has tried to end this status for 13 of 17 nations originally put in the program, leading to several other lawsuits still making their way through the court system. The other countries include Venezuela, Honduras, Afghanistan, Nepal, Cameroon, Myanmar (Burma), Ethiopia, Somalia, South Sudan, Yemen, and Nicaragua.

Decision on Asylum Drew Staunch Rebuke from Court's Liberals

Also on Thursday, the Supreme Court gave President Trump the green light to revive a past policy that allows law enforcement officers to reduce the number of asylum seekers into the U.S. Once again, it was Justice Alito who wrote the 6-3 majority decision. Alito wrote that “We hold that an alien who is standing in Mexico does not arrive in the United States by attempting, and failing, to set foot in this country. An alien arrives in the United States only when he crosses the border."

Under current immigration law, the government generally is bound to process a migrant who arrives at a port of entry if they are fleeing racial, religious, and political persecution in their homeland. However, the metering gave federal agents at the border the authority to turn away these asylum seekers before they formally set foot on U.S. soil, denying them the opportunity to be granted asylum. While the policy got its start under the administration of former President Barack Obama, it was formalized by the Trump White House during his first term.

This decision ignited visible tension in the courtroom between the conservative and liberal justices. Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor took the rare step of reading the dissent from the bench. This symbolic gesture was met by dismay from Alito, marking an unusual outburst for the typically measured court. In her dissent, Sotomayor said that the metering policy simply incentivizes unlawful entry in the country, warning that "more people will die."

What is next for the court? This term officially ends on June 30. However, there are still rulings yet to be issued. The court confirmed that it will hand down more opinions on Monday. Some of the landmark cases still waiting to receive their verdict include the legality of state bans on transgender students in girls' sports and whether Trump has the power to fire officials working for federal agencies.

Curious for more stories that keep you informed and entertained? From the latest headlines to everyday insights, YourLifeBuzz has more to explore. Dive into what’s next.