Can You Be Deported Even If You Have a Work Permit?

A Work Permit Is Not a Status. It Is Permission to Work.

An EAD is issued under 8 CFR 274a.12, which sorts people into two broad groups. The first, under subsection (a), covers people whose employment authorization flows automatically from a status they already hold, such as asylees, refugees, or Temporary Protected Status holders. The second, under subsection (c), covers people who have to apply for the card because their underlying situation doesn't come with automatic work authorization. That includes applicants with a pending asylum case, applicants with a pending adjustment of status application, and DACA recipients.

In most of the (c) categories, the thing sitting underneath the card is a pending application or a temporary, revocable form of relief, not a grant of permanent lawful status. The card answers one question: can this person legally work right now. It does not answer whether this person has a secure legal right to remain in the United States. Those are two different questions, decided under two different bodies of law, and conflating them is where most of the confusion starts.

The Grounds for Removal Don't Reference Employment Authorization

Section 237(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a), lists the grounds on which someone already in the United States can be found deportable. A few of the most commonly applied provisions:

- 237(a)(1)(A): inadmissible at the time of entry or adjustment of status
- 237(a)(1)(B): present in the United States in violation of immigration law
- 237(a)(1)(C)(i): failed to maintain the nonimmigrant status the person was admitted under, or violated the conditions of that status
- 237(a)(2): certain criminal convictions, including crimes involving moral turpitude, aggravated felonies, and controlled substance offenses

None of these provisions carve out an exception for someone holding a valid work permit. The EAD is a work authorization document. It was never designed to function as a defense to removability, and it doesn't.

How a Work Permit Can End While You're Still Holding the Card

Under 8 CFR 274a.14, employment authorization terminates automatically on the occurrence of any of several events: the expiration date printed on the card, the institution of removal proceedings, a grant of voluntary departure, or termination triggered elsewhere in the regulation, such as denial of the application the EAD was tied to. None of this requires a separate notice or hearing before the card stops being valid.

The October 2025 change adds another layer. Renewal applicants used to get an automatic 540-day extension of their existing card while USCIS processed the renewal, which meant a delay at the agency rarely turned into a real gap in work authorization. That automatic extension is now gone for most categories. If a renewal takes longer than expected, the person can end up with an expired card and no automatic bridge to the next one. That is a work authorization problem on its own, and it is also a sign of something broader: this form of authorization was built to be conditional and time-limited from the start. It was never structured to function as a stable legal status.

Categories Where This Misunderstanding Shows Up Most

DACA. A pending or even an approved DACA request does not create a legal immigration status. It is a form of prosecutorial discretion, and USCIS's own guidance is direct about the fact that it does not prevent DHS from issuing a Notice to Appear.

TPS. Temporary Protected Status shields a person from removal for as long as the designation for their country remains active, but it is temporary by design and does not erase grounds of deportability that predate the TPS grant. In specific circumstances, an immigration judge can still enter a removal order against someone who currently holds TPS.

Pending asylum. Filing for asylum and receiving a work permit while the case is pending does not, by itself, prevent removal proceedings from being initiated. Once someone is already in proceedings, a properly filed asylum application generally prevents a final removal order until the immigration judge decides the case. That protection comes from the pending application before the court, not from the work permit.

Pending adjustment of status. Someone with a pending Form I-485 and a work permit tied to that application remains removable if the underlying case is denied, or if an independent ground of deportability applies, most commonly a criminal conviction discovered during the background check.

A Pattern I See in Practice

The scenario I encounter most often in consultations involves someone who has held a valid work permit for years, often tied to a pending asylum case or a pending adjustment application, and who has never had any status beyond that pending case. They have been working, paying taxes, and renewing the card on schedule, and it is entirely understandable that they start to treat the card itself as proof that things are fine. Then something changes. A conviction from years earlier surfaces during a routine background check. The underlying application is denied. A renewal is delayed under the new rules and the gap itself becomes the problem. In every version of this pattern, the work permit was never the thing protecting them. The pending case, or the status behind it, was doing whatever protective work existed, and once that changed, the card changed with it.

This section describes a common fact pattern I see across cases, not any specific client or matter. Details have been generalized so that no individual case is identifiable.

What Actually Protects You From Removal

- The underlying lawful status itself, not the card. Lawful permanent resident status, asylee or refugee status, or a nonimmigrant status maintained without violation, is what carries legal weight.
- Even lawful permanent residents, who hold far more secure status than any EAD holder, can be placed in removal proceedings under 237(a)(2) for certain convictions or under 237(a)(1)(A) for fraud at the time of admission or adjustment. If a green card does not make someone immune, a work permit tied to a pending or temporary status certainly does not.
- An active application or appeal filed in the correct forum, since some, though not all, genuinely pause a final removal order.
- Staying clear of new criminal exposure or immigration violations while a case is pending. A new violation creates independent removability that neither the work permit nor the pending application can undo.
- Close attention to renewal timelines, now that the automatic extension safety net has been narrowed for most categories.

What To Do If You're Not Sure Where You Stand

If you hold a work permit and you are uncertain whether you have any protection beyond it, a few steps matter more than others: get a full review of your immigration record, including any prior filings, notices, or orders you may not remember or fully understand; confirm the actual status or application underlying your EAD category, not just the fact that the card is valid; calendar your renewal well ahead of the expiration date given the loss of the automatic extension; and address any old criminal history proactively rather than waiting for it to surface during a background check or a future filing.

If you want a clear answer about what your work permit does and does not protect you from, contact Law Offices of Shawn S. Sedaghat at (818) 382-3333.

This article discusses general legal principles. Any case examples are composite illustrations based on common fact patterns and do not describe a specific client or matter. Nothing here constitutes legal advice or creates an attorney-client relationship. Immigration regulations, including those governing employment authorization renewals, changed as recently as October 2025 and are subject to further change; readers should confirm current rules before relying on this article.

Shawn S. Sedaghat is an immigration attorney at Law Offices of Shawn S. Sedaghat focused on deportation defense, immigration appeals, asylum, family-based immigration, and employment-based immigration. He is the firm’s founder and principal attorney and has more than 30 years of experience handling U.S. immigration matters.