ASAP

Employer Rollercoaster: Determining Work Authorization for Employees on TPS, Humanitarian Parole, or Authorized for Employment as F-1 Students

By Bruce Buchanan

May 16, 2025
8 minute read

At a Glance

The Trump administration is seeking to end a number of programs granting work authorization to foreign nationals.
This article discusses the programs targeted for termination and next steps for employers.

The last three months have been a rollercoaster ride for employers trying to determine whether certain employees will retain work authorization. The Trump administration is pushing for significant changes affecting employees authorized to work under Temporary Protected Status (TPS), parole for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans (CHNV), Curricular Practical Training (CPT) or Optional Practical Training (OPT) programs, which have resulted in legal challenges. This article will first explore the various programs targeted for termination by the Trump administration, which would revoke an employee’s work authorization. It will then turn to employers’ efforts to manage the rollercoaster ride.

TPS for Venezuelans under the 2023 Designation

The rollercoaster ride started on January 17, 2025, when former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Mayorkas extended TPS for Venezuelans under the 2023 designation to October 2, 2026, with employment authorization documents (EADs) extended to April 2, 2026. The ride abruptly changed direction on February 3, 2025, when new DHS Secretary Noem vacated the January 17, 2025 extension, thereby terminating TPS for Venezuelans under the 2023 designation as of April 2, 2025. Just as employers were trying to determine the work status of their TPS Venezuelan employees, the ride took a sharp turn on March 31, 2025, when a U.S. district court judge prohibited Secretary Noem from ending the Venezuelan 2023 TPS designation.

This rollercoaster ride may yet take another turn as the Trump administration has appealed the judge’s order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which declined to grant a stay. The Trump administration then filed an appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS). Currently, employers, lawyers, and Venezuelans are awaiting SCOTUS’ decision on whether it will stay the March 31 order or accept this case on its docket. Stay tuned!

CHNV Parolees

On another rollercoaster, we have the parolees under the CHNV program. On January 6, 2023, the Biden administration launched a humanitarian parole program allowing certain nationals from the four countries to apply for entry to the United States for a temporary stay of up to two years. For this parole program, there is no one date that employers may review, although parole ends two years after entry into the United States. On March 25, 2025, DHS issued a notice terminating, as of April 24, the humanitarian parole held by Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans, who entered the United States through this program.

Just as employers were deciding what action to take, if any, concerning CHNV parolees, the rollercoaster plummeted when, on April 14, 2025, a federal judge halted and enjoined DHS’ notice terminating humanitarian parole status and work authorizations for nationals from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.

The Trump administration appealed and on May 5, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied DHS’ motion for a stay pending appeal. Three days later, DHS filed an emergency appeal to SCOTUS, seeking a stay. Currently, this case is awaiting SCOTUS’ decision.

SEVIS and F-1 Students

In April 2025, the Trump administration began to revoke many foreign students’ Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) records. At first blush, this action appears to have negligible impact on employers. However, many F-1 students are working for employers under CPT, OPT, or STEM OPT. Thus, potential loss of SEVIS status may impact their work authorization.

Just as employers were determining the impact of this decision, the rollercoaster changed course as the Trump administration, after losing a number of lawsuits, reversed its decision and reinstated all students’ SEVIS accounts. Time will tell if the Trump administration tries another angle.¹

CBP One Parolees

On April 8, 2025, the Trump administration sent the rollercoaster down by sending notices terminating parole to individuals who had been paroled into the country after presenting themselves at the border to seek asylum under the process made available through the CBP One app (hereinafter referred to as “CBP One parolees”). Some of these notices informed individuals that they must “immediately” leave the country, although other versions said their parole would end in seven days or 15 days. It is unclear how many individuals received these notices, although CBP stated it did not issue notices terminating temporary legal status under CBP One to all 936,000 beneficiaries.

These notices have continued to be issued and, although it was first believed that these notices were only going to CBP One parolees, it appears these notices are also going to CHNV parolees. As stated earlier, the termination of CHNV parole status was enjoined in April 2025.

Starting April 23, 2025, E-Verify began notifying participating employers and E-Verify employer agents that they needed to log in to E-Verify and review the case alerts on the revocation of EADs. The notification stated DHS recently sent direct notifications to certain individuals, who were paroled into the United States, that DHS had terminated their parole and revoked their parole-based EADs. It is important for E-Verify employer agents to promptly notify their employees of any alerts on the revocation of employees’ EADs. In the last week, E-Verify has started to insert the employees’ names in the case alerts. Of course, if a company is not enrolled in E-Verify, DHS has no way of informing it of any revocations.

Lawsuits have been filed seeking to enjoin the termination of the CBP One parole program. However, to date, no court has enjoined the revocation of CBP One parole status.

Employers’ Reactions

An employer’s reaction to these changes depends on what program is involved and whether a court enjoined enforcement of the termination of the program.

For termination of TPS for Venezuelans under the 2023 designation, there is no action for employers to take at this time as a federal judge enjoined the vacating of TPS for Venezuelans under the 2023 designation. The same rationale applies to the CHNV program and SEVIS revocations because these administrative actions have been blocked by the courts or rescinded by the administration.

However, what can employers do about the revocation of CBP One’s parole status of employees? First, if an employer is not informed by its employee or E-Verify of such revocation, it has no knowledge and, in most cases, should not take any action. An employer does not have any affirmative duty to review its I-9 forms and supporting documents, if any, to determine who has CBP One parole status.² Furthermore, even if an employer wanted to determine CBP One parole status, it may not be able to do so. If one simply reviews a completed I-9 form, it will not state what is the employee’s country of origin or what category is their EAD. That information is only on the EAD.

If employers receive notices of revocations through E-Verify, they must determine whether the revocation is based upon CHNV or CBP One parole. If it is determined that the employee is a CHNV parolee, the injunction prevents the employer from taking any action. However, how does one determine if the employee is a CHNV parolee? First, the employer needs to review the EAD, if the employer retains the documentation. If so, review the country of birth to see if it is one of the four countries and has the C11 category. If both are true, the injunction prevents further action.

On the other hand, if the employee is not from any of the four countries and has a C11 category, the employer must question the employee on whether they possess alternative documentation and work authorization.³ These employees may have received TPS (A12 or C19), or pending asylum (C08) applications; thus, they may possess other EADs with a different category/code. If so, the employee retains work authorization through the expiration of the separate EAD.

If there is no alternative documentation and the employee is not covered by one of the injunctions, the employer must terminate the employee or face the consequences if audited by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and is found to knowingly employ an undocumented employee.

Second, if an employer receives notification of an employee’s revocation, it must question those CBP One parolees to determine if they possess alternative documentation and work authorization in the same manner as described above for the CHNV parolees. An employer may not even realize that they employ CBP One parolees. A question one might be asking is why an employer would not know of CBP One status? Many employers do not retain supporting documentation as it is not required under federal law. Even if retained, a C11 category does not mean these employees acquired their status through CBP One as the category is not exclusive and includes other parole categories as well. As stated earlier, many parolees have since applied for other statuses, such as asylum or TPS, and received new EADs with different category codes.

Conclusion

It is anticipated that employers will continue to ride the rollercoaster as the Trump administration attempts to revoke work status for millions of foreign nationals and courts enjoin certain actions taken by the Trump administration to do so. It behooves all employers to seek the advice of immigration attorneys to ride out the rollercoaster with its ups and downs and hairpin curves.

¹ Although not relevant within the scope of “employment authorization of these F-1 students,” it should be noted that while the SEVIS records are being reinstated, some students may still be facing visa issues, as the Trump administration has not reversed all visa revocations.

² There may be instances where an employer desires to determine which employees are facing revocation of their work authorization. For instance, if an employer is aware of many employees entering on CBP One and some of those employees have disclosed receipt of an USCIS email revoking their status, an employer may want to review all employees in C11 status so that all C11 employees are treated equal.

³ There may be a concern that the employer’s questioning the employee could constitute discrimination and violate Section 1324b. Thus, the employer faces a choice – do nothing to determine if it is employing an undocumented worker and face penalties if audited by ICE if the employee is undocumented, or face a charge with the EEOC or the Department of Justice, Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER). It should be noted that IER has informally stated this is not discrimination; however, it has failed to put such in writing.