Navigate to room members page after inviting a user

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

After tapping "Invite" on the Room Invite page, inviteUsers() navigated to backTo (the route before the Members page) or fell back to ROUTES.REPORT_WITH_ID (the chat report). Both destinations sit outside the RHP modal stack, so the entire RHP closed instead of returning to the Members list.

The fix replaces this branching with a single Navigation.goBack(backRoute, {afterTransition}) call — reusing the backRoute constant already computed and used by the header back button. This correctly routes to ROUTES.ROOM_MEMBERS for policy employees, or ROUTES.REPORT_WITH_ID_DETAILS for non-policy members / archived rooms.

Fixed Issues

$ #91410
PROPOSAL: #91410 (comment)

Tests

1. Navigate to any chat room
2. Tap the room header to open room details
3. Tap "Members"
4. Tap "Invite member"
5. Search for and select a user to invite
6. Tap the "Invite" button
7. Verify the RHP stays open and you land on the Members page (not the chat)
8. Verify the invited member appears in the members list
9. Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A — navigation-only change, no network dependency.

QA Steps

1. Navigate to any chat room
2. Tap the room header to open room details
3. Tap "Members"
4. Tap "Invite member"
5. Search for and select a user to invite
6. Tap the "Invite" button
7. Verify the RHP stays open and you land on the Members page
8. Verify the invited member appears in the members list
9. Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

• I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
• I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
  • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
  • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
  • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
  • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
  • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
• I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
• I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
  • Android: Native
  • Android: mWeb Chrome
  • iOS: Native
  • iOS: mWeb Safari
  • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
• I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
  • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
  • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
  • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
  • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
  • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
  • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
• If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
• I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
• I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
• I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
• I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
• I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
• If any new file was added I verified that:
  • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
• If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
  • A similar style doesn't already exist
  • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
• If new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
  • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
  • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
• If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
• If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
• If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
• If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
• If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
  • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
  • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
• If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
• I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
• If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Screenshots will be added by the reviewer during the review process.

[abzokhattab]

@MelvinBot review why the Navigation.goBack(ROUTES.REPORT_WITH_ID.getRoute(report.reportID), {afterTransition}); was added in the first place and whether the current change is safe from regressions

[abzokhattab]

@MelvinBot complete the checklist and test steps, and mark screenshots as done since they’ll be added in the reviewer checklist.

[MelvinBot]

History & Regression Analysis

The old backTo / REPORT_WITH_ID fallback was introduced in PR #71280 ("Trigger whisper when user invites a member to the chat", Nov 2025). The intent was: after inviting, navigate to the report itself so the user sees the concierge whisper message about the new member. Before that PR, inviteUsers() used the same backRoute that the header back button uses.

Why that old behavior is now wrong: The backTo param and REPORT_WITH_ID fallback both point outside the RHP modal stack, so the entire RHP closes instead of returning to the members list. This is the exact bug reported in #91410.

Is the current change safe?

Yes, with one nuance:

Scenario	Old behavior	New behavior (backRoute)
Policy employee, room not archived	Goes to backTo or report chat	Goes to ROOM_MEMBERS (members list)
Non-policy employee or archived room	Goes to backTo or report chat	Goes to REPORT_WITH_ID_DETAILS (report details)

The change is safe because:

1. backRoute is the same destination already used by the header back button (line 126, line 224-229) — so invite and back-button now behave consistently.
2. The afterTransition callback (added in PR Defer room invite action until after navigation transition to prevent iOS crash #90261 to prevent iOS crashes from optimistic Onyx updates during navigation) is preserved in the new code.
3. The whisper message from PR Trigger whisper when user invites a member to the chat  #71280 still gets created — only the navigation destination changes, not the invite action itself.

Potential concern: Users won't land directly on the report chat to see the whisper after inviting. They'll land on the members list instead. This is a UX trade-off (staying in context vs. seeing the whisper), but the issue reporter and expected behavior explicitly state users should return to the members page.