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
EOIR Announces Changes to Toll-Free Number for Case Information
Effective 8/23/10, EOIR will launch a new automated case status information system. The toll-free number, 1-800-898-7180, will not change, but a new local number, 240-314-1500, will be in service. Callers will need to enter the A number and date of the charging document.
ICE Arrests 63 Individuals in Arizona Cross Check Operation
ICE press release on the arrest of 63 foreign nationals with prior criminal convictions and immigration fugitives in a three-day enforcement operation in Arizona. The release includes information on the removal process for individuals arrested.
IACHR Finds U.S. Removal Proceedings Violated International Law
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights found that the U.S. violated Petitioners' rights under the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man by failing to consider humanitarian defenses to removal. (Smith and Armendariz v. U.S., 7/12/10). AILA Doc. No. 10081363.
BIA Companion Case to Cortez on Conviction for Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
The BIA held that a conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude does not render petitioner ineligible for cancellation of removal if crime is punishable by imprisonment for less than one year and falls under the petty offense exception. Matter of Pedroza, 25 I&N Dec. 312 (BIA 2010)
BIA Clarifies Almanza on Conviction for Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
The BIA held that a conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude for which a sentence of a year or longer may be imposed renders petitioner ineligible for cancellation of removal, regardless of eligibility for petty offense exception. Matter of Cortez, 25 I&N Dec. 301 (BIA 2010)
CA2 on BIA Jurisdiction to Reopen Under the Departure Bar
The court held that the BIA did not err in concluding that the departure bar under 8 CFR §1003.2(d) divested it of jurisdiction to consider a sua sponte motion to reopen where the petitioner had already been removed. (Zhang v. Holder, 8/12/10)
CA7 Finds CIMT Charge Does Not Impact Aggravated Felony Bar to Relief
CA7 held that a petitioner was ineligible for a §212(c) waiver, finding that if he was removable on an aggravated felony charge, it was irrelevant whether he might be eligible for a waiver based on his separate charge for a CIMT. (Mancillas-Ruiz v. Holder, 8/11/10)
CA6 Says Petitioner’s Series of Job Losses in Kyrgyzstan Did Not Amount to Persecution
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of the petitioner’s asylum claim, finding that her series of job losses, which were a result of her opposition to the corruption of the wife of the former president of Kyrgyzstan, did not rise to the level of persecution. (Japarkulova v. Holder, 8/11/10)
CA7 Reverses Denial of Colombian Asylum Claim
The court granted the petition for review and reversed the BIA’s denial of the petitioner’s asylum claim, holding that the petitioner was persecuted in the past on account of her anti-FARC political opinion. (Martinez-Buendia v. Holder, 8/10/10)
CA1 Dismisses Cancellation Case for Lack of Jurisdiction
The court found no jurisdiction to review the denial of cancellation of removal where the claimed error of law was not raised before the IJ or the BIA and other claims were challenges to factual findings. (Santana-Medina v. Holder, 8/10/10)
CA9 Discusses Time Calculation for Filing Petition for Review
The day after Thanksgiving is a legal holiday for purposes of calculating time for the filing of a petition for review under Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 26(a). (Yepremyan v. Holder, 8/10/10)
BIA Finds Extreme Hardship to Teenage Daughter with Special Education Needs
Unpublished BIA decision finding respondent eligible for cancellation, as he established that his teenage daughter with special education needs and a young child would experience exceptional and extremely unusual hardship if he were removed. Courtesy of Diana M. Bailey.
ICE Request for Public Comment on Immigration Detainer Policy
ICE issued a request for public comments on a draft immigration detainer policy. ICE is interested in an assessment of how this policy would affect individuals, communities, the operation of the criminal justice system, and law enforcement partners. Comments are due 9/30/10.
CA1 Remands Citing DHS Child Asylum Guidelines
The court vacated the panel opinion and BIA decision with advice to the BIA to remand to the IJ for evaluation of the Honduran asylum claim in light of DHS Guidelines for Children’s Asylum Claims. Vacated 4/6/10 opinion follows order. (Mejilla-Romero v. Holder, 8/6/10)
CA7 Finds Failure to Appeal BIA Asylum Denial Limits Review
The court denied the petition for review and found that because petitioner did not appeal from the decision of the BIA on his asylum claim, the court was limited to reviewing the denial of his motion to reopen and reconsider (Victor v. Holder, 8/6/10)
CA7 Finds Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies in Withholding Claim
The court dismissed the petition for review, finding that the petitioner failed to exhaust administrative remedies by not preserving the individual-persecution argument for his withholding of removal claim on appeal to the BIA. (Aguilar-Mejia v. Holder, 8/6/10)
CA8 Says District Court May Review I-130 Denial
In light of the Supreme Court decision Kucana v. Holder, the court held that the bar to judicial review of discretionary decisions under INA §242(a)(2)(B)(ii) does not preclude district court review of an I-130 denial. (Ginters v. Frazier, 8/5/10)
Summary of the Emergency Border Security Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2010 (H.R. 5875)
AILA summary of the Emergency Border Security Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2010 (H.R. 5875) as amended by the Senate on 8/5/10.
Senate Passes $600 Million Emergency Border Security Bill
On 8/5/10, the Senate amended and passed the Emergency Border Security Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2010 (H.R. 5875).
CA8 Finds Misuse of a Social Security Number is a Crime of Moral Turpitude
The court gave deference to the BIA’s interpretation and found reasonable its conclusion that misuse of a social security number in violation of 42 USC §408(a)(7)(B) is a crime involving moral turpitude. (Guardado-Garcia v. Holder, 8/4/10)
CA8 Finds §212(a)(9)(C)(i)(I) Inadmissibility Trumps §245(i)
The BIA’s decision in Matter of Briones, which held that aliens inadmissible under INA §212(a)(9)(C)(i)(I) are not eligible for §245(i) adjustment of status, was a reasonable interpretation of ambiguous statutory provisions. (Renteria-Ledesma v. Holder, 8/4/10)
CA2 on the Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine
The court held the government's motion to dismiss based on the fugitive disentitlement doctrine in abeyance, finding that the motion is more appropriately considered after the parties have fully briefed and argued the merits of the case. (Wu v. Holder, 8/4/10)
CA6 Finds BIA Rejection of Pro Se Brief Did Not Prejudice Decision
The court denied the petition for review, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice where the BIA rejected his pro se brief and he failed to resubmit the brief when he obtained counsel and filed the motion to reconsider. (Ikharo v. Holder, 8/2/10)
CA6 on Ineffective Assistance of Counsel and Equitable Tolling
The court remanded an ineffective of assistance of counsel claim in an asylum case, holding that the BIA abused its discretion in finding that petitioner did not show due diligence. (Mezo v. Holder, 8/2/10)
EOIR Opens Immigration Court in Pearsall, Texas
EOIR press release on the opening of the Pearsall Immigration Court in Texas including the mailing address for court filings, court location, hours of operation and telephone number.