On July 21, 2026, U.S. District Judge Nathaniel Gorton of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted an emergency administrative stay in Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts v. USCIS, No. 1:26-cv-13038, temporarily blocking USCIS from enforcing two policies tied to the 2025 tax and spending law known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (H.R. 1). The order came one day before the policies were set to take effect on July 22, 2026 — and it offers immediate, if temporary, relief to tens of thousands of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders and asylum seekers.
What USCIS Was About to Do on July 22
H.R. 1, signed into law on July 4, 2025, rewrote the rules for TPS-based work authorization. Under USCIS’s implementation, TPS-related Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) tied to renewal applications filed before July 22, 2025 would lose the extended 540-day automatic extension and instead be capped at a one-year automatic extension — or the remaining length of the TPS designation, whichever is shorter. For many beneficiaries who filed their renewals in mid-2025, that one-year cap would have expired on July 22, 2026, cutting off their legal right to work with essentially no notice.
A second provision at issue let USCIS reject or penalize asylum applicants (Form I-589) who had not paid a new annual asylum fee, including by denying their initial work permit requests outside the previous 30-day processing timeline.
What the Court Actually Ordered
The plaintiffs — the Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts, the National TPS Alliance, the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP), and labor unions SEIU and 32BJ SEIU — argued that USCIS applied the new rules retroactively without proper notice, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. Judge Gorton’s five-page order granted a narrower stay than plaintiffs sought:
| Policy | Court’s Action |
|---|---|
| TPS EAD one-year cap (retroactive expiration) | Blocked through at least August 5, 2026 — affected EADs remain valid past July 22 |
| 30-day work permit processing deadline for asylum seekers | Blocked — USCIS does not need to meet the 30-day timeline, but also cannot penalize applicants for the agency’s own delay |
| Annual asylum application fee | Not blocked — USCIS may continue collecting the fee while litigation proceeds |
In other words, this is a partial win: the fee itself stays in place, but the harshest consequences — losing work authorization overnight and having asylum applications penalized for USCIS’s own processing delays — are paused.
Who This Affects Right Now
This stay is most urgent for TPS holders from countries whose EAD renewal applications were filed before July 22, 2025 and who were relying on the 540-day automatic extension — including many nationals of Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Somalia, Syria, Ethiopia, Burma, Yemen, and South Sudan. It also affects pending asylum applicants awaiting an initial work permit decision.
This is an emergency, short-term order, not a final ruling. Judge Gorton has scheduled further proceedings by August 5, 2026 to decide whether to extend the stay while the underlying lawsuit continues. TPS holders and asylum applicants affected by these provisions should keep copies of their receipt notices and prior EAD approval and watch for updates as the August 5 hearing approaches.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does this stay mean my TPS work permit is safe long-term?
No. The stay is temporary and only holds until at least August 5, 2026. The court could extend it, narrow it, or let it expire depending on how the underlying case proceeds.
Do I still have to pay the asylum application fee?
Yes. The court left the annual asylum fee requirement in place. Only the EAD expiration and 30-day processing provisions were stayed.
What should I do if my TPS EAD was set to expire on July 22, 2026?
Under this order, USCIS should not be enforcing that retroactive cutoff for now. Keep your documentation and monitor official USCIS updates, since the situation can change after the August 5 hearing.
Source: U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts v. USCIS, No. 1:26-cv-13038.
