Some Sanity in Temporary Protected Status

On September 23, the Department of Homeland Security issued an extension Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Liberia, Guinea Bissau, and Sierra Leone allowing them to remain in the country until May 2017. TPS for citizens of those three have looming expiration dates.

The announcement included the message, “The Department of Homeland Security urges individuals who do not have another immigration status to use the time before the terminations become effective in May to prepare for and arrange their departure from the United States or to apply for other immigration benefits for which they may be eligible.“

This announcement is not only unusual; it is, as far as we know, unprecedented to wind down this status that protects against deportation and urge those who will revert to illegal immigrant status and the termination of their legal work status to prepare to leave the U.S. Whether that May 2017 expiration is actually imposed, and whether DHS will make any meaningful effort to remove people whose TPS has expired, remains to be seen. It would, of course, be even more remarkable if it were done earlier during the presidential election and while President Obama was still in office.

About Author


Jack, who joined FAIR’s National Board of Advisors in 2017, is a retired U.S. diplomat with consular experience. He has testified before the U.S. Congress, U.S. Civil Rights Commission, and U.S. Commission on Immigration Reform and has authored studies of immigration issues. His national and international print, TV, and talk radio experience is extensive (including in Spanish).


  1. avatar

    The old saying applies, I will believe it when I see it. This administration has a long history of bait and switch. Remember you can keep your doctor? Documents released since then showed he knew he was lying when he said that. When these people go home, then and only then you know it’s real.

    Now Hillary supporters are trying to make the laughable assertion that the media is biased against her. Nonsense. Suppose Trump had a Muslim chief aide whose mother had a long history of supporting Sharia law positions, including death for leaving Islam, or had written an article in the past justifying wife beating? Actually, those things apply to Hillary and her chief aide Huma Abedin and her mother Saleha. But has Hillary been directly asked one time if she disavows those things? Nope, not once.

    There is also the matter of the Clinton Foundation, which has gone unexamined by the media for many years. This is an obvious conflict of interest, considering that she was a public official for much of the time. Yes, they have given much to charity, but the facts are that they, especially Bill, have profited greatly by, there is no other way to put it, selling influence. No one gives them those huge amounts of money by accident. And they have taken huge amounts from some of the countries that have financed extremist elements, including an estimated 75 million from Saudi Arabia.