-
July 13, 2026
TPS, Work Authorization, and Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation After Mullin v. Doe
What Employers Need to Know About Emerging TPS-Related Defenses and Litigation Risks
The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Mullin v. Doe could have significant implications for Pennsylvania employers, insurers, and third-party administrators handling workers' compensation claims involving employees with Temporary Protected Status (TPS). While the case did not arise in the workers' compensation context, its impact on TPS and employment authorization may affect how certain claims are investigated, defended, and litigated. In Mullin, the Court held that the federal statute governing TPS largely precludes judicial review of Department of Homeland Security decisions to designate, extend, or terminate TPS. The decision reinforces DHS's authority to determine when TPS protections—and the work authorization that accompanies them—begin and end. For Pennsylvania employers, that creates a new challenge. Work authorization issues may become increasingly relevant in workers' compensation litigation, particularly where disputes involve earning power, job availability, return-to-work efforts, labor market surveys, or ongoing wage-loss benefits. The problem is that TPS-related work authorization is rarely straightforward. An Employment Authorization Document (EAD) may appear expired while remaining valid through an automatic extension published in the Federal Register. Conversely, TPS-based work authorization may have ended despite assumptions to the contrary. Determining whether an employee was legally authorized to work on a particular date often requires reviewing USCIS records, TPS filings, EAD history, Federal Register notices, and evolving federal regulations. Employers should resist the temptation to rely on a single document or a claimant's description of his or her immigration status. The answer frequently requires targeted discovery and careful analysis of federal records. In appropriate cases, counsel may need to obtain TPS applications, employment authorization records, USCIS notices, renewal filings, and related documentation to establish whether work authorization existed during the period at issue. Because federal immigration law and Pennsylvania workers' compensation law increasingly intersect, mistakes can be costly. Employers who fail to investigate may overlook important defenses. Employers who act on assumptions may find themselves relying on information that is inaccurate or outdated. The takeaway from Mullin is simple: when TPS status becomes an issue in a workers' compensation claim, employers should proceed carefully and obtain experienced legal guidance before drawing conclusions regarding a claimant's ability to work. Hill Wallack LLP's Workers' Compensation Practice Group regularly advises employers, insurers, and third-party administrators on complex workers' compensation matters involving employment authorization, earning power disputes, return-to-work issues, and immigration-related defenses. As TPS-related issues continue to emerge in workers' compensation litigation, our attorneys stand ready to help clients navigate these evolving legal challenges through proactive counseling, strategic discovery, and effective litigation advocacy.
