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
TRAC Report on Asylum Decision Disparities
A report by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) shows large disparities in asylum decisions among the nation's immigration judges, based on information from hundreds of thousands of asylum applicants in removal proceedings that were obtained from the Immigration Court under FOIA.
ICE Fact Sheet on the Delegation of Immigration Law Enforcement Authority to State and Local Officers
ICE fact sheet on Section 287(g) of Immigration and Nationality Act, addressing the delegation of immigration law enforcement authority to state and local law enforcement agencies.
CA3 Finds BIA’s Denial of MTR Asylum Claim “Irrational and Arbitrary”
The court held that the BIA acted arbitrarily in rejecting the MTR despite granting an earlier motion in an unpublished decision that was materially indistinguishable. (Shardar v. Att’y Gen. of U.S., 9/19/07)
CA2 Says IJ Erred in Relying on Restitution Order in Analysis of Crime
The court held that the IJ improperly relied on a restitution order in finding Petitioner’s fraud conviction was an aggravated felony but properly concluded that making false statements to acquire a firearm is a removable offense. (Dulal-Whiteway v. DHS, 9/19/07)
CA11 Remands CAT Claim of Haitian with AIDS who Fears Torture in Prison
The court found that the BIA erred in failing to consider Petitioner’s argument that he is entitled to CAT relief because he would be singled out for torture in Haitian prisons because of his AIDS-related mental illness. (Jean-Pierre v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 9/19/07)
CA9 Refuses to Allow FFOA Treatment Where Pretrial Diversion Was Previously Granted
The court held that Petitioner could not be considered a “first time offender” when ,in a previous arrest for drug possession, he was granted “pretrial diversion” under a state rehabilitation scheme that did not require him to plead guilty. (Melendez v. Gonzales, 9/19/07)
CA9 En Banc Court Holds Accessory After the Fact is Not a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
CA9 held that a CA conviction for accessory after the fact is not a crime involving moral turpitude because the conduct underlying the conviction does not necessarily involve baseness or depravity nor does the statute require a showing of such conduct. (Navarro-Lopez v. Gonzales, 09/19/07)
CA9 Discusses Aggravated Felony Fraud Provisions in the Context of Federal Tax Crimes
The court held that subscribing to a false statement on, and aiding in the preparation of, a tax return in violation of 26 USC §7206(1) and (2) are aggravated felonies, where the loss to the government exceeds $10,000. (Kawashima v. Gonzales, 9/18/07)
CA1 on Due Process and the 1-Year Asylum Deadline
The court joined its sister circuits in holding that the bar to judicial review of a determination that an asylum application was not timely filed does not violate due process. (Hana v. Gonzales, 9/17/07)
CA1 Finds Fleuti Doctrine Irrelevant to Admission of Returning LPRs
The court held that the Fleuti doctrine, that permitted “innocent, brief and casual” departures for LPRs, was abrogated by IIRIRA which created the concept of “admission” and set forth new criteria for returning LPRs. (Perez de Vega v. Gonzales, 9/17/07)
CA3 Finds Fabrication in Time-Barred Asylum Application Was Not “Material”
The court held that because the asylum application was time-barred, the falsehood had neither the natural tendency, nor the capability of influencing the decision of the IJ or the BIA. (Luciana v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 9/17/07)
CA7 Finds IJ/BIA Failed to Address Critical Evidence in W/H & CAT Claim
The court upheld the IJ’s finding that a Yemeni citizen did not suffer past persecution, but found that evidence on well-founded fear was overlooked, including testimony, DOS reports, and a letter from the Yemeni Human Rights Watch. (Binrashed v. Gonzales, 9/14/07)
CA7 Finds No Jurisdiction to Review the IJ’s Continuance Denial
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the IJ’s discretionary denial of Petitioner’s continuance. The IJ’s authority over continuances is derived from INA §240(a)(1), which confers plenary authority on IJs to conduct removal proceedings. (Ali v. Gonzales, 9/14/07)
CA7 Finds BIA Erred in Relying on Airport Interview to Deny Asylum Claim
The court noted that airport interviews are not always reliable for credibility, holding that the BIA erred in finding that Petitioner’s claim became markedly more “egregious” because he failed to mention his homosexuality in his credible fear interviews. (Moab v. Gonzales, 9/13/07)
CA2 Remands to BIA to Give Effect to JRAD
The court held that a JRAD protects from removal based on charges under IIRAIRA’s expanded aggravated felony definition because Congress placed no JRAD limit on the retroactivity of the expanded definition. (Nguyen v. Chertoff, 9/13/07)
CA9 Finds Arizona Aggravated DUI a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
A violation of Arizona Revised Statutes §28-1381(A)(1), driving under the influence aggravated by operating a vehicle without a valid license, is a crime involving moral turpitude. (Marmolejo-Campos v. Gonzales, 9/12/07)
CA2 Upholds Matter of J-E-, Finds Haitian Prison Conditions Not Torture
The court held that the failure to maintain standards of diet, hygiene, and living space in prison does not constitute torture unless conditions are sufficiently extreme and intentionally inflicted. (Pierre v. Gonzales, 9/11/07)
CA2 Upholds Matter of Smriko, Finds Refugees May Be Removed
The court joined the Third and Ninth Circuits in finding no immunity from removal for refugees. The court noted that even if Petitioner had retained refugee status after adjustment he would be subject to removal for drug trafficking. (Maiwand v. Gonzales, 9/11/07)
AILA Chapter Raid Preparation Plan
Program for chapters to put in place to plan for responding to mass workplace enforcement actions by ICE and other law enforcement agencies before they happen.
Isn't Lady Justice Still Blind?
AILA President Kathleen Campbell Walker states support for those who engaged in educating immigrants on their legal rights, and criticizes an ICE spokesperson's reported statement "encouraging" organizations that provide this information to stop doing so.
CA7 Holds Government Responsible for Ensuring Delivery of Hearing Notice
The court held that Petitioner did not “thwart delivery” of his hearing notice by failing to inform INS that mail must be addressed “in care of” his brother-in-law with whom he was staying.(Peralta-Cabrera v. Gonzales, 9/7/07)
CA7-Posner Issues Scathing Opinion Overturning Negative Credibility Finding
Judge Posner noted that an avalanche of asylum claims has placed unbearable pressures on a grossly understaffed system. In reversing the IJ’s negative credibility finding, he ruled that egregious failures by IJs could be understood but not excused. (Kadia v. Gonzales, 9/7/07)
CA3 Remands Honduran Gang Recruitment Case Due to Legal and Factual Errors
The court held that the IJ erred by requiring Petitioner to prove that the government refused to protect him rather than that the government was unable or unwilling to protect him. (Valdiezo-Galdamez v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 9/7/07)
CA3 Affords 30-Day Grace Period for Narrow Class Seeking Judicial Review Post-REAL ID
The court held that criminal deportees who received a final order of removal but did not file a habeas petition in district court before REAL ID’s effective date, are afforded a 30-day grace period—until June 11, 2005—to file a claim. (Kolkevich v. Att’y Gen. of the U.S., 9/6/07)
CA1 Says LPR Who Obtained Status by Fraud Is Ineligible for Cancellation
The court found that Petitioner, who failed to disclose an arrest on his adjustment of status application, was never “lawfully admitted for permanent residence” and was therefore ineligible for cancellation of removal. (Mejia-Orellana v. Gonzales, 9/6/07)