In recent weeks, many employers have found themselves in unfamiliar territory: TPS litigation is moving quickly, headlines suggest increased ICE enforcement and HR teams are being asked to “double-check everything.”
That reaction is understandable. It’s also where compliance problems often begin.
When enforcement anxiety drives decision-making, employers tend to overcorrect by reverifying employees who shouldn’t be, requesting unnecessary documents or treating the Form I-9 process as a fraud investigation. They rarely recognize it for what it is: a good-faith employment eligibility verification process.
Below is an update on recent TPS developments and a set of practical I-9 reminders designed to help employers stay compliant without creating new risk.
TPS Developments: Where Things Stand
Honduras, Nepal and Nicaragua
In 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) terminated Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for nationals of Honduras, Nepal and Nicaragua. However, on Dec. 31, 2025, a federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued an order vacating DHS’s termination decisions. As a result, TPS protections — including employment authorization — for eligible nationals of these countries were restored while the litigation continues.
Although DHS has publicly stated that it disagrees with the ruling and may pursue further action, the court order is currently in effect. Employers should therefore treat affected TPS beneficiaries from these countries as authorized to work under TPS unless and until new guidance is issued.
Haiti
DHS previously announced that Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haiti would terminate on Feb. 3, 2026. On Feb. 2, 2026, however, a federal judge in Washington, D.C.issued an order blocking the termination while litigation proceeds.
USCIS has confirmed that TPS-related Employment Authorization Documents issued to Haitian nationals remain valid pursuant to the court order, including EADs that would otherwise have expired under prior DHS announcements.
As a result, TPS for Haiti has not terminated, and affected employees continue to have valid work authorization unless and until further guidance is issued.
Venezuela
DHS determined that Venezuela no longer meets the statutory requirements for TPS. The 2023 Venezuela TPS designation was terminated after the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the termination to take immediate effect on Oct. 3, 2025.
However, a federal court order dated May 30, 2025, provides continued protection for a limited group of individuals. TPS beneficiaries who were issued TPS-related documentation (including EADs, Forms I-797 or Forms I-94) on or before Feb. 5, 2025, showing Oct. 2, 2026, expiration dates, retain valid work authorization through Oct. 2, 2026.
Separately, DHS terminated the 2021 Venezuela TPS designation, effective Nov. 7, 2025, pursuant to a Federal Register notice. As a result, most Venezuelan TPS beneficiaries no longer have valid TPS-based work authorization, and employers must evaluate work authorization on an individual, document-by-document basis rather than applying a blanket rule.
I-9 Guidance for Employers
Because TPS-related court orders do not provide a specific end date for the automatic extension of employment authorization, employers should take a cautious, well-documented approach to Form I-9 compliance.
- Do not reverify early. Employers should not reverify employment authorization or take adverse action against TPS employees solely because a TPS termination was announced or because litigation is ongoing. If an employee’s work authorization continues under a court order, early reverification is not required.
- Annotate the Form I-9 when a court order applies. When an employee’s employment authorization continues based on a TPS-related court order and there is no defined end date for the extension:
- Add a notation in the Additional Information field of the Form I-9 stating that employment authorization is extended pursuant to a court order.
- Include the case name, case number and date of the court order in the notation.
- Example: “Employment authorization extended per court order — National TPS Alliance et al. v. Noem et al., No. 25-cv-05687-TLT (N.D. Cal.), Dec. 31, 2025.”
- Maintain supporting documentation. Employers should retain a printout or PDF of the relevant USCIS web page, Federal Register notice or court order in the employee’s I-9 file or compliance records to support the notation made on the form.
- Reverification occurs on Supplement B. If and when reverification is required (for example, when an employee’s extended work authorization reaches an actual expiration date and there is no court order extending it), employers should complete Supplement B (Reverification and Rehire) of the current Form I-9.
Enforcement Anxiety Is Not a Compliance Strategy
As employers respond to a combination of TPS litigation, evolving guidance and increased attention on worksite enforcement, many are conducting internal reviews of their I-9 records. Internal audits can be an appropriate compliance step when done carefully. However, as these audits expand beyond TPS-specific cases, we are seeing a rise in common and avoidable I-9 errors — especially in areas where reverification is either unnecessary or prohibited.
Do Not Reverify Lawful Permanent Residents
A Permanent Resident Card (Form I-551, or “green card”) may contain an expiration date, but the employee’s authorization to work does not expire.
Employers must not:
- Track green card expiration dates,
- Request updated or renewed green cards, or
- Reverify lawful permanent residents in Section 3 or Supplement B.
Reverifying lawful permanent residents can constitute unlawful discrimination or document abuse, even when done during an internal audit or in response to enforcement concerns.
Increased ICE activity does not expand an employer’s reverification obligations.
What Employers Are — and Are Not — Required to Do When Reviewing Documents
Another area where enforcement anxiety causes problems is document review itself.
Employers are required to examine documents presented for Form I-9 purposes to determine whether they reasonably appear to be genuine and relate to the employee presenting them.
That is the standard.
Employers are not required — or permitted — to:
- Act as document fraud experts,
- Demand additional documents because a document “looks old” or unfamiliar,
- Reject valid documents because they are not what the employer expected, or
- Interrogate employees about their immigration status beyond the Form I-9 process.
If a document reasonably appears to be genuine and relates to the employee, the employer should accept it. Over-scrutiny can be just as risky as under-scrutiny.
Top Five I-9 Mistakes We’re Seeing Right Now
1. Reverifying everyone “just to be safe.”
- Blanket reverification is not authorized by Form I-9 regulations. Employers may reverify only employees whose work authorization has a true expiration date. Reverifying U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents can violate the anti-discrimination provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act and has been the basis for DOJ enforcement actions.
2. Tracking green card expiration dates.
- Green cards expire. Work authorization does not.
3. Asking TPS employees for updated documents when an automatic extension applies.
- If the law says the document is extended, asking for more can be document abuse.
4. Inventing expiration dates because USCIS did not provide one.
- Consistency is defensible. Creativity is not.
5. Treating E-Verify as a compliance shield.
- An “Employment Authorized” result does not cure an improperly completed I-9.
Additional Practical Tips Employers Often Forget
- Internal I-9 audits should be structured and limited. Fix errors where permitted but do not create new ones by overcorrecting.
- Use neutral, standardized language when communicating with employees about I-9 issues. Avoid references to nationality or immigration status.
- Train HR teams to escalate uncertain cases rather than “solve” them on the spot.
- Apply policies uniformly. Inconsistency is one of the fastest ways to attract scrutiny.
- Document your rationale when relying on automatic extensions or court orders so decisions can be explained later if needed.
Final Thought
TPS litigation, shifting court orders and enforcement headlines create uncertainty — but uncertainty does not require panic.
Employers who stay grounded in I-9 fundamentals, understand the limits of their role and resist anxiety-driven decisions are far better positioned to withstand audits, investigations and employee complaints.
