Featured Issue: U.S. Immigration Courts under Trump 2.0
The U.S. immigration court system plays a critical role in upholding due process and ensuring fair hearings for individuals facing deportation. However, since January 20, 2025, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has implemented significant changes that challenge the structural integrity of these courts. This page aims to provide up-to-date information on the policy and legal shifts affecting the U.S. immigration court system.
Latest Updates
Updates from EOIR
Browse the Featured Issue: U.S. Immigration Courts under Trump 2.0 collection
DHS Notice Expanding the Categories of Persons Eligible for Expedited Removal
DHS notice expanding the categories of persons designated eligible for expedited removal. The notice, including the new designation, is effective on 7/23/19. Comments may be submitted on or before 9/23/19. (84 FR 35409, 7/23/19)
CA5 Upholds Denial of Motion to Reopen Where Petitioner Provided a Guatemalan Address for Notice Purposes (Withdrawn)
The court upheld BIA’s denial of petitioner’s motion to reopen her in absentia removal order, finding that it was not sufficient for the petitioner to provide a Guatemalan address to the immigration court pursuant to INA §239(a)(1)(F)(i). (Luna-Garcia v. Barr, 5/15/19, withdrawn 7/23/19)
AILA: DHS Attempts Massive Expansion of Unilateral Deportation Power
DHS announced a new policy designed to dramatically expand expedited removal to apply throughout the United States to anyone who has been in the United States for less than two years; the American Immigration Council is already planning litigation.
AILA Quicktake #271: DHS Announces the Expansion of Expedited Removal
AILA Associate Director of Government Relations Kate Voigt discusses DHS's announcement about a new policy, effective 7/23/19, to dramatically expand expedited removal, which will ramp up ICE's power everywhere in the United States, subjecting hundreds of thousands of people to rapid deportation.
CA3 Upholds Denial of Cancellation of Removal to Indian Businessman Who Had Resided in the United States Since 1998
The court upheld the BIA’s conclusion that petitioner, who had entered the U.S. in 1998 from India on a visitor’s visa, was ineligible for cancellation of removal, because he could not show that the requisite hardship would result from his removal. (Radiowala v. Att’y Gen., 7/22/19)
CA7 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Guatemalan Petitioner Who Received Extortion Threats from Gangs
The court upheld the BIA and IJ’s finding that there was a lack of a nexus between the extortion threats and gang harassment that the petitioner had experienced in Guatemala and any protected ground for relief. (Hernandez-Garcia, et al. v. Barr, 7/22/19)
What Would Fix the Immigration Courts? Well, Independence is a Start!
AILA Secretary Kelli Stump highlights recent efforts by AILA and its partners to urge Congress to establish an Article I immigration court system to ensure that “when cases are as serious as they are, when lies and livelihoods are on the line“ justice is served and people get a fair day in cou
CA4 Says Conviction for Participation in a Criminal Street Gang in Virginia Is Not a CIMT
The court granted the petition for review, concluding that Virginia’s statute prohibiting participation in criminal gang activity does not categorically qualify as a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) for purposes of INA §237(a)(2)(A)(i). (Rodriguez Cabrera v. Barr, 7/19/19)
CA7 Upholds Asylum Denial to Mexican Petitioner Who Feared Persecution as the Mother of a Cartel Member’s Child
Where the Mexican petitioner claimed she feared persecution as the mother of a cartel member’s child, the court held there was nothing in the record that required BIA to conclude that she had experienced past persecution or reasonably feared future persecution. (N.Y.C.C. v. Barr, 7/19/19)
TRAC Report Shows ICE Fails to Target Serious Criminals in Immigration Court Filings
A TRAC report shows that, per data through June 2019, only 2.8 percent of DHS Immigration Court filings sought removal citing criminal activity. At 10 Immigration Courts, such cases were less than 0.5 percent of DHS filings.
CA1 Finds BIA Erred in Concluding Nepali Petitioner No Longer Had Well-Founded Fear of Persecution
The court granted in part the petition for review, finding that substantial evidence did not support the BIA’s decision to deny the Nepali petitioner’s asylum application, because the government did not rebut the presumption of a well-founded fear of persecution. (Dahal v. Barr, 7/18/19)
CA9 Grants Mexican Petitioner’s Untimely Motion to Reopen Due to Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
The court held that the BIA erred in finding that the petitioner had failed to show prejudice from his prior attorney’s ineffective assistance with respect to deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and relief under former INA §212(c). (Flores v. Barr, 7/18/19)
CA9 Says Ambiguous Record of Conviction Does Not Bar Eligibility for Cancellation of Removal
The en banc court held that, in the context of eligibility for cancellation of removal, a petitioner’s state law conviction does not bar relief where the record is ambiguous as to whether the conviction constitutes a disqualifying predicate offense. (Marinelarena v. Barr, 7/18/19)
CA5 Finds Haitian Petitioner with Schizophrenia Was Not Denied Due Process at Removal Hearing
The court held that the IJ did not violate petitioner’s due process rights by failing to adhere to the procedural safeguards that were put in place after his competency hearing, finding that there was no variance that would amount to due process violations. (Pierre-Paul v. Barr, 7/18/19)
Lawsuit Seeks Clarity on How Immigrants Serving Time Are Deported From The United States
The American Immigration Council, AILA, and the Immigrant Defense Project filed a lawsuit to compel the government to release information about DOJ’s Institutional Hearing Program, an obscure program that expedites the deportation of immigrants who are serving time for criminal offenses.
The Institutional Hearing Program: An Overview
The American Immigration Council provides this fact sheet with an overview of the Institutional Hearing Program’s history and what is known about the way it works. It also highlights some of the due process concerns that surround the program.
Texas Bail Bondswoman Sentenced to Imprisonment for Smuggling Hundreds of Immigrants
Pursuant to an investigation by ICE Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), Hema Patel, a Texas-based bail bondswoman was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for her role in smuggling hundreds of immigrants, primarily from India, into the United States.
DHS and DOJ Interim Final Rule Barring from Asylum Eligibility Individuals Who Transit Through a Third Country Without Seeking Protection
DHS and DOJ interim final rule establishing a mandatory bar to asylum eligibility for persons who transit through a third country and enter or attempt to enter the southern U.S. border without having applied for protection in a third country. The rule is effective 7/16/19. (84 FR 33829, 7/16/19)
CA8 Says Conviction for False Reporting in Nebraska Is a CIMT
The court held that petitioner’s conviction for making a false statement to a peace officer in Nebraska was categorically a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT), and upheld BIA’s determination that petitioner was ineligible for cancellation of removal. (Adame-Hernandez v. Barr, 7/16/19)
CA8 Remands for Further Proceedings After Finding District Court Retained Jurisdiction over Naturalization Application
The court found that proceedings in the district court under § 1447(b) do not become moot when USCIS purports to deny a naturalization application after the applicant has already initiated the court proceedings. (Haroun v. DHS, 7/15/19)
ACLU Files Lawsuit Against ICE to Guarantee Detained Noncitizens Access to Counsel
The ACLU Foundation of Northern California filed a lawsuit on behalf of Pangea Legal Services seeking an injunction that would prohibit ICE from blocking noncitizens from meaningful access to counsel. (Pangea Legal Services v. McAleenan, et al., 7/12/19)
CA3 Finds BIA Erred in Rejecting Nepali Petitioner’s Motion to Remand Where He Established Prima Facie Asylum Claim
The court held that the BIA erred by failing to accept the petitioner’s new evidence as true when evaluating his prima facie claim for asylum relief, and found that the BIA incorrectly analyzed his claim by applying the incorrect standard to his new evidence. (Tilija v. Att’y Gen., 7/12/19)
CA3 Says IJs Have Jurisdiction over Removal Proceedings Where NTA Fails to Specify Time and Place of Hearing
Distinguishing the Supreme Court’s ruling in Pereira v. Sessions, the court held that a Notice to Appear (NTA) that fails to specify the time and place of an initial removal hearing does not deprive an IJ of jurisdiction over the removal proceedings. (Nkomo v. Att’y Gen., 7/12/19)
CA9 Says DOJ May Give Preferential Treatment in Awarding COPS Grants to Cities That Help Enforce Federal Immigration Laws
The court reversed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the City of Los Angeles in an action challenging DOJ’s use of certain factors in determining scores for applicants to the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant program. (City of Los Angeles v. Barr, 7/12/19)
Testimony of Acting Inspector General on Mistreatment Allegations at Detention Facilities
The House Committee on Oversight and Reform held a hearing on “The Trump Administration’s Child Separation Policy: Substantiated Allegations of Mistreatment.” Jennifer L. Costello, Acting Inspector General, testified about overcrowding and prolonged detention conditions at detention facilities.