On July 21, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued an administrative stay temporarily preventing U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) from implementing certain agency policies adopted to carry out portions of H.R. 1 (the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”) while the court considers plaintiffs’ request for a stay pending judicial review. The challenged policies would have retroactively affected the employment authorization of certain Temporary Protected Status (TPS) beneficiaries and asylum applicants beginning July 22, 2026. The order is expected to have its most immediate impact on TPS beneficiaries whose employment authorization was subject to USCIS’s July 22 implementation guidance, including beneficiaries from several TPS-designated countries.
In Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts v. USCIS, No. 1:26-cv-13038 (D. Mass. July 21, 2026), Judge Nathaniel Gorton concluded that an administrative stay was warranted because many TPS beneficiaries faced the imminent loss of work authorization beginning July 22, 2026, while asylum applicants faced rejection of applications and other potentially severe consequences before the court could fully consider the legality of the challenged policies. The administrative stay will remain in effect until the court rules on the plaintiffs’ motion for a stay under the Administrative Procedure Act, which the court indicated will occur no later than August 5, 2026.
What the Court Order Does
The court temporarily stayed USCIS’s implementation of the following policies:
- Retroactively shortening the validity of certain Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) held by TPS beneficiaries that would otherwise expire under USCIS’s implementation of H.R. 1;
- Rejecting asylum applications solely because the applicant failed to pay the newly imposed annual asylum application fee;
- Terminating employment authorization based on nonpayment of the annual asylum application fee; and
- Initiating removal proceedings solely because an asylum applicant failed to pay the annual asylum application fee.
As a result, affected TPS beneficiaries may continue to rely on the employment authorization expiration dates that applied before USCIS’s retroactive implementation of the challenged policies while the administrative stay remains in effect. The order restores the prior expiration dates; it does not create a new extension of employment authorization.
What Remains in Effect
The court did not stay all aspects of USCIS’s implementation of H.R. 1. Specifically, USCIS may continue to:
- Collect the new annual asylum application fee; and
- Process initial asylum-based employment authorization applications without the prior 30-day adjudication timeline that had been eliminated by the April 2026 interim final rule.
Employer Considerations
Employers with employees working pursuant to TPS should be aware that this order temporarily pauses USCIS’s retroactive implementation of certain work authorization limitations affecting TPS beneficiaries and asylum applicants subject to the challenged policies. The decision provides important short-term relief but does not resolve the underlying legal challenge.
Form I-9 Considerations
Employers should avoid taking adverse employment action based solely on the July 22, 2026 employment authorization expiration dates established under the challenged USCIS policies while the administrative stay remains in effect. Employers should continue to monitor USCIS guidance and consult counsel regarding affected employees because the stay is temporary and may be modified or dissolved following further court proceedings.
Because the court has not yet ruled on the plaintiffs’ underlying request for a stay pending judicial review, employers should continue to closely monitor developments before taking employment eligibility actions based solely on the recently announced H.R. 1 implementation guidance.
WR Immigration is actively monitoring this litigation and will provide additional updates as the case progresses.
Case: Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, No. 1:26-cv-13038 (D. Mass. July 21, 2026).
Subscribe to the WR Immigration Newsletters
Start the RFP Process
Join the Corporate Benchmarking Roundtable
