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
CA1 Upholds Denial of Asylum as to Petitioner Who Suffered Domestic Abuse in Ecuador
The court held that substantial evidence supported the agency’s determination that petitioner, who suffered domestic abuse in Ecuador, had failed to show past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution if she were to return to Ecuador. (Medina-Suguilanda v. Garland, 11/14/24)
CA1 Upholds Asylum Denial as to Petitioner Who Received Multiple Extortionate Death Threats in El Salvador
The court upheld the BIA’s and IJ’s denial of asylum as to petitioner, who had been assaulted by armed assailants in El Salvador and received death threats, finding that he did not meet his burden to demonstrate harm rising to the level of persecution. (Urias-Orellana v. Garland, 11/14/24)
CA9 Holds That BIA Erred in Finding No Nexus Between Salvadoran Petitioner’s Persecution and His Political Opinion
The court held that BIA erred by concluding the petitioner failed to establish a nexus between the persecution he suffered and his political opinion, by mischaracterizing his proposed social group, and by improperly ignoring evidence. (Aleman-Belloso v. Garland, 11/13/24, amended 2/18/25)
CA3 Finds Substantial Evidence Supported Denial of Asylum as to Guatemalan Petitioner Who Was Abused by Violent Ex-Partner
The court rejected the petitioner’s particular social groups (PSGs) consisting of “Guatemalan small business owners, victims of extortion by gang members” and “Guatemalan women viewed as property and unable to escape their violent ex-partners.” (Manuel-Soto v. Att’y Gen., 11/12/24)
Practice Alert: G-56 ERO Call-in Letters and Form I-340 Notice to Obligor for Administratively Closed Removal Cases
AILA members have reported that ICE is issuing G-56 ERO call-in letters and Form I-340 Notice to Obligor to individuals with removal cases that are currently administratively closed. Please share your examples.
Think Immigration: What’s Changed in Immigration Law over the Last Two Years? What Hasn’t!
In this blog post, AILA member Elizabeth Montano details some of the many changes to immigration law and policy over the last two years as she explains why she turns to Kurzban’s Immigration Law Sourcebook for the comprehensive resource she needs to serve her clients.
Time: What Donald Trump’s Win Means For Immigration
Time provides a summary of President-elect Donald Trump's proposed agenda as it relates to American immigration policy.
CA1 Finds BIA and IJ Erred in Finding That Petitioner Failed to Demonstrate a Sufficient Likelihood of Torture in Jamaica
The court concluded that the agency’s likelihood-of-future-torture finding, which formed the basis of its determination that the petitioner was ineligible for Convention Against Torture (CAT) deferral, rested on an erroneously narrow legal definition of torture. (Morgan v. Garland, 11/5/24)
Think Immigration: Getting Back to Basics - How to Improve the Entire Immigration System
AILA Law Journal Editor-in-Chief Cyrus Mehta previews the fall edition writing, “Our immigration laws will not get better unless we continue to advocate and share our expertise about how our existing system’s weaknesses harm America.”
CA2 Holds That IJ Improperly Applied Framework for Protecting an Incompetent Concitizen’s Rights and Privileges
The court found that the BIA erred in affirming the IJ’s finding that the IJ herself had implemented adequate safeguards to address the petitioner’s incompetency and protect his rights and privileges, and thus granted the petition for review and remanded. (Reid v. Garland, 11/5/24)
Practice Alert: Campos-Chaves and its Implications
AILA provides a practice alert on the implications of the Supreme Court decision in Campos-Chaves v. Garland.
BIA Holds That Respondent’s Enhanced Conviction When Considered as Combined Crime Qualified as CIMT
The BIA held that respondent’s compound conviction for gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated in California, with a sentencing enhancement for fleeing the scene of an accident, was categorically for a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). Matter of Khan, 28 I&N Dec. 850 (BIA 2024)
CA5 Upholds No-Hardship Finding for Cancellation Purposes Where IJ Properly Considered Relevant Hardships in the Aggregate
The court upheld the BIA’s determination that the IJ did not err in denying cancellation of removal based on the petitioner’s failure to establish that his removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his U.S.-citizen daughter. (Sustaita-Cordova v. Garland, 10/31/24)
CA6 Finds IJ Did Not Violate Any Obligation to Inform Petitioner of Her Potential Eligibility for a Fraud Waiver
The court held that petitioner’s failure to attend an interview, resulting in termination of her conditional permanent residence, was not sufficiently related to her fraudulent representations so as to render her “apparently eligible” for a fraud waiver. (Tukur Seldon v. Garland, 10/31/24)
CA11 Upholds Denial of Cancellation Where Petitioner’s Daughter Had Aged Out by the Time His Application Was Adjudicated
The court upheld BIA’s reaffirmance of its rule that a child who was under 21 years old when their parent applied for cancellation of removal, but has aged out by the time the application is adjudicated, does not qualify as a child under the statute. (Diaz-Arellano v. Att’y Gen., 10/29/24)
District Court Preliminarily Approves Settlement to Resolve Lawsuit Challenging ICE’s Categorical Denial of Parole to Asylum Seekers
The district court preliminarily approved a settlement agreement between ICE and asylum seekers in a case challenging ICE’s alleged practice of categorically denying parole to asylum seekers in violation of DHS’s 2009 Parole Directive. (Heredia Mons, et al. v. McAleenan, et al., 10/24/24)
CA5 Holds That BIA Deprived Petitioner of Due Process by Violating Its Own Regulations
The court held that the BIA violated 8 CFR §1003.1(d)(3)(i) and (iv) by remanding the petitioner’s case sua sponte to the IJ for factual findings that the IJ had already made, rather than reviewing the IJ’s findings for clear error as required. (Francois v. Garland, 10/24/24)
CA6 Concludes That BIA Engaged in Reasoned Decision-Making in Denying Petitioner’s Motion to Reopen
The court held that the BIA did not err in finding that the petitioner had failed to show that his removal to Mexico would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to one of his two U.S. citizen children, as required under INA §240A(b)(1)(D). (Galvez-Bravo v. Garland, 10/23/24)
CA9 Remands Asylum Claim Where M-18 Gang Made Specific and Menacing Death Threat Against 14-Year-Old Petitioner
The court held that the petitioners, a mother and her son, established that they suffered harm rising to the level of persecution, finding that members of the M-18 gang who murdered the son’s father were willing and capable of murdering the petitioners. (Corpeno-Romero v. Garland, 10/22/24)
AILA Amicus Brief Addresses Board's Definition of the "Child abuse, Child Neglect, and Child Abandonment" Ground for Removability
AILA's brief argued that the Board's definition of the "child abuse, child neglect, and child abandonment" ground for removability leads to unpredictable classifications of state offenses and harms families by separating generally caring and responsible parents from their children.
CA1 Finds IJ’s Adverse Credibility Determination as to Former Bodyguard in Guatemala Was Supported by Substantial Evidence
The court upheld the denial of asylum as to the Guatemalan petitioner, who formerly worked as a bodyguard for a congressman and feared returning to Guatemala because he believed that he would be the target of extortions and threats by gang members. (Garcia Oliva v. Garland, 10/21/24)
CA1 Upholds Asylum Denial to Ecuadorian Business Owner Subjected to Extortion Attempts and Death Threats
The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s finding that petitioner, the owner of a taxi company in Ecuador who had been targeted in extortion attempts by gang members and received death threats, failed to show past or future persecution. (Vargas-Salazar v. Garland, 10/17/24)
CA1 Upholds Denial of Special Rule Cancellation under NACARA to Salvadoran Petitioner
The court upheld the denial of petitioner’s special rule cancellation of removal application under the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA), finding he had not shown exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to himself or his spouse. (Figueroa v. Garland, 10/17/24)
CA9 Rescinds In Absentia Removal Order Where Petitioner Was Late for Hearing Due to Encountering Two Major Car Accidents
Granting the petition for review and remanding, the court held that the facts of the case amounted to exceptional circumstances warranting reopening of petitioner’s in absentia removal order and those of her minor children under INA §240(b)(5)(C)(i). (Montejo-Gonzalez v. Garland, 10/17/24)
DHS 60-Day Notice and Request for Comments on Form 405
DHS 60-day notice and request for comments on Office of the Immigration Detention Ombudsman (OIDO) Intake Form, DHS Form 405. Revisions are based on usability testing recommendations. Comments are due by 12/16/24. (89 FR 83509, 10/16/24)