A federal judge already twice rebuked by the Supreme Court is back at it—this time blocking the Trump administration from ending legal protections for thousands of Ethiopian migrants.
Judge Brian Murphy, a Biden appointee in Massachusetts, temporarily halted the administration’s plan to strip temporary protected status (TPS) from more than 5,000 Ethiopians—a move that would have made them deportable within 60 days.
Murphy said the Department of Homeland Security didn’t follow the law when it pulled the plug on the program.
That ruling lands right in the middle of the administration’s broader push to shrink TPS and tighten immigration enforcement.
But it also lands on a judge with a track record.
Murphy has repeatedly tried to block Trump-era deportation policies—especially efforts to send migrants to third countries. The Supreme Court has stepped in twice to reverse him, even issuing a rare 7–2 clarification saying he ignored its orders. An appeals court also shut down one of his more recent rulings just last month.
Critics say this is more of the same.
“This rogue judge lacks the subject matter jurisdiction to issue this order,” Sen. Eric Schmitt said. “The assault on the rule of law continues.”
Legal analyst Jonathan Turley piled on, warning that “this system cannot function with such rogue operators at the trial level.”
Iowa Solicitor General Eric Wessan pointed to what he sees as a fundamental problem: the law itself.
“One big problem for Murphy is the statute: It explains TPS determinations aren’t reviewable. Another is the Supreme Court, which has stopped similar orders twice,” Wessan said. “He finds neither statute nor SCOTUS stops him. I’m unconvinced.”
Murphy, for his part, insists he’s not defying the high court. He noted that the Supreme Court hasn’t fully explained its recent TPS-related rulings—and hasn’t stepped in on every similar case.
“There is no reason to assume” the justices have settled the issue, he wrote.
The lawsuit behind the ruling claims the administration’s TPS rollback isn’t just procedural—it’s discriminatory. Lawyers for the plaintiffs argue the policy is aimed at reducing non-white immigration, writing that the effort targets “the nationals of majority Black countries” in particular.
The Justice Department is expected to appeal, setting up yet another round in a growing legal fight between the Trump administration and a judge who keeps standing in its way.
