
Employers face new work authorization questions after Supreme Court rulings on TPS for Haiti and Syria. I-9 reverification must follow USCIS guidance, not headlines.
The Supreme Court issued two immigration decisions on June 25 that directly affect employer work authorization compliance. One ruling blocks judicial review of Temporary Protected Status terminations for Haiti and Syria. The other holds that asylum seekers waiting on the Mexican side of the border have not "arrived in the United States" for inspection purposes.
The TPS cases, consolidated as Mullin v. Doe and Trump v. Miot, reversed lower-court orders that had halted termination of TPS for Haiti and Syria. Syria TPS was scheduled to end November 21, 2025. Haiti TPS was set to expire February 3, 2026. District courts had stayed those terminations, and USCIS and E-Verify guidance said certain TPS-based employment authorization documents remained valid under the court orders. The Supreme Court ruled that TPS-related non-constitutional claims are barred from judicial review under the TPS statute, and that the Haitian plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed on the equal protection claim. The Court remanded the cases for further proceedings.
The asylum ruling, Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, addressed "metering" – a Customs and Border Protection practice that limits how many people may enter a port of entry each day for inspection and possible asylum processing. The Court held that federal law does not require inspection or asylum processing for a person who remains in Mexico and has not crossed into the United States.
For employers, the most pressing question is work authorization. Employees whose authorization rests on TPS for Haiti or Syria may be affected. Immigration attorneys Alycia Moss and Catherine Renshaw of Fennemore said employers should rely on USCIS, E-Verify, and Form I-9 guidance rather than news reports alone. DHS and USCIS may issue updated implementation and I-9 guidance following the decision, they noted.
A Supreme Court ruling does not by itself tell an employer which specific employee may continue working. That determination depends on the employee's current documents, applicable automatic-extension rules, and updated agency guidance. TPS provides protection from removal and work authorization during the designation period. When a TPS designation ends, TPS-based work authorization may also end unless the employee has another valid basis for employment authorization or an automatic extension applies.
Employers must employ only individuals authorized to work in the United States. They also must avoid discrimination, unfair documentary practices, and national-origin-based treatment. The attorneys advised reviewing Form I-9 records for upcoming reverification dates, including EADs in category A12 or C19, without singling out employees based on nationality or citizenship. They said to check USCIS I-9 Central, E-Verify, and the country-specific TPS pages for Haiti and Syria before acting on TPS expiration or automatic-extension rules. Add reverification deadlines to tracking systems. Do not request documents earlier or more often than Form I-9 rules allow. When reverification is required, let the employee choose which valid List A or List C document to present. Do not demand a specific document. Do not suspend, terminate, or place an employee on leave based only on headlines. Prepare neutral communications focused on I-9 requirements, not nationality or assumptions about future status.
The decisions do not resolve every operational question. Border procedures, TPS implementation, and I-9 guidance may continue to change. The attorneys said employers and affected individuals should monitor official DHS, USCIS, E-Verify, CBP, Federal Register, and court updates before making decisions that affect employment, travel, or immigration status.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.