- Losing their legal status could lead to job losses, homelessness, and family separations and could create a major humanitarian crisis.
- Many Ukrainians and other immigrants in similar programs work in industries like agriculture, construction, and hospitality, which rely heavily on immigrant labour.
- The U.S. government could work with these countries to ensure that people sent back receive proper support, including aid for rebuilding their homes and communities.
The Trump administration’s decision to revoke the temporary legal status of 240,000 Ukrainians in the U.S. is causing concern. Along with this move, plans to remove legal protections from 530,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela are also on the table. These decisions, part of a broader effort to limit humanitarian programs like Temporary Protected Status (TPS), have raised many questions about the future of these migrants and the potential long-term effects on U.S. immigration policy.
What Does This Mean for Those Affected?
The most immediate concern with this decision is the risk of mass deportations. For many Ukrainians who fled the war with Russia, the idea of being sent back is especially troubling, given the ongoing conflict in their homeland. This situation could also affect people from other countries, like Haiti and Venezuela, who fled violence and instability. These migrants have built lives in the U.S.—finding jobs, housing, and even starting families. Losing their legal status could lead to job losses, homelessness, and family separations. Simply put, this decision could create a major humanitarian crisis.
About 1.8 million people in the U.S. are benefiting from temporary protection programs. Of that group, the 240,000 Ukrainians are among those most vulnerable to deportation. Many have integrated into U.S. society, and taking away their protection would cause severe disruption.
Economic and Legal Impact
The economic impact of ending these protections cannot be ignored. Many Ukrainians and other immigrants in similar programs work in industries like agriculture, construction, and hospitality, which rely heavily on immigrant labour. If these workers are forced to leave, there could be severe shortages in key industries, hurting local economies. It could also reduce consumer spending in communities that depend on the spending power of immigrant families.
In addition, there will likely be legal battles. Advocacy groups have already promised to challenge this decision, as they did with previous immigration policies. This would only add to the backlog in U.S. immigration courts, making an already stressed system even more overwhelmed.
Alternative solutions
One possible long-term solution is to create pathways for these people to stay in the U.S. permanently. This could include providing a path to citizenship for those who have been in the country for a certain number of years or allowing them to apply for asylum, significantly if conditions in their home countries haven’t improved. Another solution could be to expand the refugee resettlement program to give people fleeing violence or natural disasters a chance at a fresh start.
Instead of stripping away protections, the U.S. government could work with these countries to ensure that people sent back receive proper support, including aid for rebuilding their homes and communities. This approach would relieve these individuals and ensure that the U.S. remains a place that upholds human rights and provides refuge to those in need.
Conclusion
The Trump administration’s decision to end temporary legal status for 240,000 Ukrainians and others is a controversial one, and its consequences could be far-reaching. It’s not just about the individuals who will face deportation but also about the impact on communities, businesses, and the economy. However, potential solutions, like creating pathways to permanent residency or expanding refugee resettlement programs, could help address the humanitarian and economic concerns. Ultimately, it’s essential to find a way to balance immigration policy with compassion, recognising the critical contributions these immigrants make to American society.
Sakshi Yadav is pursuing a Master’s Degree in International Studies from Christ University, Bangalore. Her research areas include International Political Economy, South Asia, South Pacific and U.S. Foreign Policy. Views expressed are the author’s own.
Aayush Pal 
Dr Nanda Kishor M S & Dr Akhil Kumar