Congressman Seth Moulton (MA-06) introduced legislation aimed at reversing last week’s Supreme Court decision that cleared the way to strip deportation protections from hundreds of thousands of Haitians.
The bill, according to his office, would specifically restore federal courts’ authority to review decisions to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS), ensuring judicial oversight over these determinations.
The measure, called the TPS Relief Act, directly targets the Court’s 6-3 ruling in Mullin v. Doe, which held that the TPS statute bars judges from reviewing most challenges to a decision to end a country’s designation. Moulton’s office explains that the bill would amend the relevant portion of federal law — 8 U.S.C. §1254a(b)(5)(A) — to make explicit that courts may review any decision to terminate a TPS designation, thus reinstating judicial review that the Supreme Court eliminated.
“America must protect those who have helped this nation flourish, regardless of their origin, nationality, or appearance,” Moulton said in announcing the bill. “Congress has a constitutional obligation to act, and I will keep fighting until we do. No administration should have unchecked and unreviewable power to uproot families and undermine our workforce. Passing the TPS Relief Act would ensure that they won’t.”
The strategy rests on a distinction that matters. The Supreme Court’s decision in Mullin v. Doe was an interpretation of a statute enacted by Congress, not a ruling on the Constitution. Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion concluded that the law’s bar on “judicial review of any determination” related to a TPS designation was, in his words, “clear” and “very broad,” reaching all of the challengers’ non-constitutional claims. Because the dispute turns on what the statute means, Congress retains the power to rewrite it and effectively overturn the result, which is precisely what Moulton’s bill seeks to do.
The strategy rests on a distinction that matters. The Supreme Court’s decision in Mullin v. Doe was an interpretation of a statute enacted by Congress, not a ruling on the Constitution. Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion concluded that the law’s bar on “judicial review of any determination” related to a TPS designation was, in his words, “clear” and “very broad,” reaching all of the challengers’ non-constitutional claims. Because the dispute turns on what the statute means, Congress retains the power to rewrite it and effectively overturn the result, which is precisely what Moulton’s bill seeks to do.
In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan argued the law already permits courts to review whether the Homeland Security secretary followed the procedures Congress required before ending a designation. The TPS Relief Act would put that reading into the text itself, removing any ambiguity.
What the ruling set in motion
Moulton says the decision puts hundreds of thousands of Haitians and several thousand Syrians, many of whom have lived and worked in the U.S. for years, at risk of losing status within a month. The Court and other estimates vary but suggest similar or slightly higher numbers of affected people.
The ruling affects more than Haiti and Syria. It blocks court review for TPS holders in multiple countries—potentially jeopardizing the status of up to 1.3 million people from 17 nations. The administration has sought to end TPS for many of these countries since the beginning of its second term.
Temporary Protected Status was created by Congress in 1990 to shield foreign nationals who cannot safely return home because of armed conflict, disaster, or other extraordinary conditions. Moulton’s office notes the contradiction at the core of the terminations: even as Washington moves to send people back, the State Department warns Americans in the strongest terms against traveling to Haiti or Syria, citing gang violence, terrorism, kidnapping, and collapsing health care.
For the Haitian diaspora, the bill speaks to an immediate fear, and Moulton frames the loss in economic as well as humanitarian terms. Immigrants, and Haitian immigrants in particular, make up an estimated 32 to 40 percent of workers in home-care settings, his office says, and a sudden wave of removals would hit nursing homes, hospitals, factories, small businesses, and local economies hard.
It is a point Massachusetts leaders have pressed for months. Moulton joined a January field hearing in Mattapan — the heart of Boston’s Haitian community — where lawmakers heard directly from Haitian families and advocates about the human consequences of losing TPS. He also signed the discharge petition led by Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley, pushing for a House vote on H.R. 1689, legislation to extend Haiti’s TPS designation, and joined the congressional amicus brief, led by Representatives Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Pressley, urging the Supreme Court to reject the terminations on separation-of-powers grounds. Earlier, he backed a letter led by Senator Elizabeth Warren warning the administration about the damage to the health-care workforce.
A steep climb
Introducing a bill is only the first step. For the TPS Relief Act to become law, it must pass Congress and be signed by President Trump—or win enough votes to override a veto—a high bar for legislation intended to reverse a core administration policy. Moulton acknowledges the fight ahead, with the bill now serving as a rallying point for its supporters.
For the hundreds of thousands of Haitians watching the calendar, the timing is unforgiving. The Court’s ruling is expected to take effect roughly a month after its judgment, and the case must still return to the lower courts. That leaves a narrow window in which legislation, litigation, and individual legal options are all racing the same clock.

https://ctninfo.com/congressman-moul…haiti-tps-ruling/
https://www.facebook.com/CaribbeanNewsMedia

https://ctninfo.com/congressman-moul…haiti-tps-ruling/
https://www.facebook.com/CaribbeanNewsMedia
Editorial Disclaimer: This article was originally written in English. The French and Haitian Creole versions are produced using AI translation, and errors are possible — the English version is authoritative. CTN also uses AI to convert text into audio. Readers and listeners should rely on the English text where any discrepancy arises.


