A U.S. federal judge has cleared the way for President Donald Trump’s administration to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for more than 5,000 Ethiopians living and working in the United States.
Eko Hot News reports that U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy on Tuesday allowed the administration to proceed with the termination while a broader legal challenge to the decision continues.
The ruling marks a major change in a case that has been before the federal courts for several months.
TPS provides temporary immigration protection to eligible nationals of countries facing conditions that make it unsafe or difficult for them to return.
The status also allows approved beneficiaries to legally live and work in the United States for the duration of the protection.
Ethiopians covered by the programme received TPS after the U.S. government determined that conditions in Ethiopia warranted the designation.
The Biden administration initially designated Ethiopia for TPS in 2022.
The designation was later extended in 2024 because concerns affecting the country remained.
However, the Trump administration moved to terminate Ethiopia’s TPS designation in December 2025.
The Department of Homeland Security said its review found that Ethiopia no longer met the legal requirements for continued TPS protection.
The termination was initially scheduled to take effect in February 2026.
Immigrant rights organisations challenged the decision in federal court.
Judge Murphy initially blocked the administration from ending the protections while the legal challenge proceeded.
In April, he ruled that the administration had not followed the process required by federal law when it attempted to terminate the designation.
The legal situation later changed following a June decision by the U.S. Supreme Court concerning the administration’s authority to terminate TPS designations.
That ruling limited the ability of federal courts to review certain challenges to the Department of Homeland Security’s decisions.
The development affected several cases involving TPS beneficiaries from different countries.
Judge Murphy subsequently reconsidered the Ethiopian case in light of the new legal precedent.
His latest ruling allows the government to move forward with ending the protections.
However, the broader lawsuit has not completely ended.
The judge has allowed arguments concerning whether the termination decision violated the constitutional rights of Ethiopian immigrants to continue.
Advocates have argued that the decision was influenced by improper considerations, including concerns relating to race or national origin.
The Trump administration has rejected those arguments.
The government has maintained that the decision was based on its assessment of conditions in Ethiopia and the requirements of the TPS programme.
The termination will affect more than 5,000 Ethiopian TPS beneficiaries.
The number is significant for communities that have lived and worked in the United States under the programme.
Many TPS beneficiaries have established families, jobs and community connections during their years in the country.
The end of TPS could therefore create uncertainty for affected individuals about their ability to remain legally in the United States.
Those whose TPS expires without another legal immigration status could become subject to immigration enforcement measures.
The development is part of the Trump administration’s wider effort to reduce the number of temporary immigration protections granted to foreign nationals.
The administration has also pursued the termination of TPS designations involving nationals from several other countries.
Federal judges have issued different rulings in some of those cases.
The legal disputes have created uncertainty for thousands of immigrants who depend on TPS to maintain their legal status and employment.
The Ethiopian case has attracted particular attention because the programme was originally established after U.S. authorities assessed conditions in Ethiopia as unsuitable for safe return.
The country has experienced significant political and humanitarian challenges in recent years.
Advocacy organisations argue that conditions remain difficult in parts of Ethiopia.
They have therefore called on the administration to reconsider the termination.
The government, however, maintains that Ethiopia no longer meets the statutory requirements for TPS.
The latest ruling does not grant permanent residency to Ethiopian TPS beneficiaries.
TPS is a temporary humanitarian protection and does not by itself provide a direct route to permanent residence.
Beneficiaries must generally qualify for another immigration status if they wish to remain in the United States after TPS ends.
The ruling is therefore expected to prompt affected Ethiopians to examine other available legal options.
Immigration attorneys and advocacy organisations are likely to continue advising beneficiaries as the case progresses.
The legal challenge may also continue to address constitutional questions that were not resolved by the latest ruling.
For now, the Trump administration has gained an important legal opening to implement its decision.
The development also demonstrates how recent Supreme Court decisions are influencing challenges to the administration’s immigration policies.
For Ethiopian communities across the United States, the ruling could have significant consequences.
Many affected individuals have been able to work legally and support their families under TPS.
The end of the programme could therefore affect both households and local communities.
The administration is expected to continue implementing its immigration agenda as similar TPS cases move through the courts.
Meanwhile, Ethiopian TPS beneficiaries and their representatives will be watching the ongoing litigation closely.
The case remains part of the broader national debate over temporary immigration protections and the authority of the federal government to end them.
For now, the latest ruling allows the government to proceed with ending TPS for more than 5,000 Ethiopians.
Further court proceedings could still determine whether additional legal challenges to the termination succeed.
