Featured Issue: Asylum Under Trump 2.0
On the first day of his second term, President Trump suspended all entries at the U.S. Southern Border for asylum seekers. Since then, the Administration has implemented sweeping restrictions that shut America’s doors to people fleeing persecution. These policies violate federal law, erode constitutionally protected due process, exacerbate the asylum backlog, and give those seeking safety an increasingly narrow path to protection.
Left unchecked by Congress, these policies will have dire consequences for both asylum seekers and the integrity of our legal system. Asylum seekers—especially those without access to counsel—are at grave risk of being returned to harm.
It doesn’t have to be this way. The Administration can maintain order at U.S. borders and effectively manage migration without sacrificing fairness and adherence to the law. With more trained asylum officers, a streamlined legal process, legal representation for asylum seekers, and more effective coordination between relevant agencies, the U.S. can establish a safe, orderly, and humane asylum system.
Browse the Featured Issue: Asylum Under Trump 2.0 collection
Think Immigration: Credibility Begins Before the Hearing–Why Immigration Psychological Evaluations Must Be More Record-Aware
In this blog post, AILA Law Journal author Dr. Nilda Perez shares a bit more on the topic of her law journal article, explaining how "individualized, evidence-aware, and clinically disciplined" psychological evaluations can help immigration practitioners build a more accurate and complete record.
Client Flyer: Protecting Your Asylum Application
AILA provides a flyer to inform your clients of ways to reduce the chance that their asylum case will be pretermitted. The flyer is available as a generic PDF version and a Word version you can customize with your firm's information.
CA9 Holds That Standalone Petition Challenging Only a CAT Order Does Not Establish Jurisdiction Under INA §242(a)(1)
The court held that a petition challenging only a CAT order, without seeking review of a final removal order, does not invoke jurisdiction under INA §242(a)(1) because a CAT order is not itself a final removal order and does not merge into one. (Navarrete v. Blanche, 3/23/26, amended 11/6/26)
Asylum Cases on Credibility
This issue-specific page lists published asylum cases that relate to credibility determinations. The page includes published federal court and BIA cases from 2008 through the present. Special thanks to AILA member R. Mark Frey.
Asylum Cases on Miscellaneous
This issue-specific page lists miscellaneous published asylum cases by topic. The page includes published federal court and BIA cases from 2008 to the present. Special thanks to AILA member R. Mark Frey.
Asylum Cases on Motion to Reopen
This issue-specific page lists published asylum cases that relate to motions to reopen. The page includes published federal court and BIA cases from 2009 to the present. Special thanks to AILA member R. Mark Frey.
Asylum Cases on Political Opinion
This issue-specific page lists published asylum cases that relate to persecution on account of political opinion. The page includes published federal court and BIA cases from 2008 to the present. Special thanks to AILA member R. Mark Frey.
Asylum Cases on Deferral of Removal Under CAT
This issue-specific page lists published asylum cases that relate to deferral of removal under CAT. The page includes published federal court and BIA cases from 2008 to the present. Special thanks to AILA member R. Mark Frey.
BIA Holds Finding of Likely Future Torture Was Speculative Where It Relied on General Country Conditions Evidence
The BIA held that the IJ’s finding of likely future torture was speculative where generalized country conditions evidence failed to establish a particularized risk or support the IJ’s finding that the respondent could not internally relocate. Matter of K–Y–V–R–, 30 I&N Dec. 203 (BIA 2026)
CA6 Holds That It Lacks Jurisdiction over Standalone Reasonable-Fear Challenge
The court held it lacked jurisdiction over a petition challenging only an IJ’s negative reasonable-fear determination and recognized that Riley v. Bondi abrogated precedent permitting standalone review of withholding and CAT rulings. (Castro-Fuentes v. Blanche, 10/27/26)
CA9 Remands Denial of Relief Where IJ Misunderstood Bisexuality and Denied Opportunity to Corroborate
The court held that the agency misunderstood the petitioner’s particular social group based on his bisexual orientation and erred by failing to give petitioner notice and a meaningful opportunity to present additional corroborating evidence to support his claim. (A.M. v. Blanche, 10/23/26)
Think Immigration: An AILA Law Journal Issue for Our Times
AILA Law Journal Editor-in-Chief Cyrus Mehta describes the new edition, writing that the editorial board sought to “bring forward a collection of both original and thought-provoking articles by authors who have creatively advanced topics and ideas that may have received too little attention.”
CA5 Finds Past Persecution Creates No Presumption of Future Torture and BIA May Screen New Evidence in Denying Remand
The court held that past persecution creates no presumption of future torture under the CAT, that substantial-evidence review governs CAT eligibility, and that the BIA may assess new evidence for reliability and probative value when deciding whether to remand. (Zahid v. Blanche, 10/20/26)
CA4 Holds Past Abuse Alone Is Insufficient for CAT Protection and Upholds No-Nexus Finding on PSG of Imputed Homosexuals
The court held that past abuse alone does not establish CAT eligibility without a showing of likely future torture, and that substantial evidence supported the finding of no nexus to the petitioner’s proposed particular social group (PSG) of imputed homosexuals. (Qaiymah v. Blanche, 10/19/26)
CA8 Upholds Denial of Asylum and Humanitarian Asylum Based on Fundamental Change in Circumstances and Insufficiently Severe Past Harm
The court held that substantial evidence supported the agency’s finding that DHS rebutted the presumption of a well-founded fear of future persecution by showing a fundamental change in circumstances in The Gambia, and affirmed the denial of humanitarian asylum. (Jatta v. Blanche, 10/16/26)
AILA Law Journal, Vol. 8, Number 2, October 2026
The October 2026 edition of the AILA Law Journal is now available.
CA1 Upholds Asylum Denial Where Stalking, Threats, and Emotional Harm Did Not Compel a Finding of Persecution
The court held that substantial evidence supported the findings that the petitioner, stalked for three years in Honduras by a man who threatened her partner, did not establish past persecution or an objectively reasonable fear of future persecution. (Alvarado-Hernandez v. Blanche, 10/15/26)
District Court Approves Class Action Settlement Agreement in Ms. L. v. ICE
The district court approved a class action settlement agreement in a lawsuit relating to families who were apprehended together by the U.S. government at the U.S.-Mexico border between 1/20/17 and 1/20/21, but were then separated and kept apart. (Ms. L., et al. v. ICE, et al., 12/1/23)
DHS IFR Reducing Notice of Intent to Terminate Refugee Status to 10 Days
DHS interim final rule to reduce the response period for a Notice of Intent to Terminate (NOIT) for refugees from 30 days to 10 days. The IFR is effective 10/14/26. Comments are due 11/13/26. (91 FR 65077, 10/14/26)
USCIS Final Rule on Removal of Automatic Extensions for Certain EADs
USCIS final rule affirming the October 2025 interim final rule that ended automatic extension of employment authorization documents (EADs) for certain EAD categories. The rule is effective 10/14/26. (91 FR 65306, 10/14/26)
Practice Alert: DHS Interim Final Rule Shortens NOIT Response Period for Refugees to 10 Days
USCIS proposes an interim final rule (IFR) regarding refugee cases USCIS intends to terminate, which significantly shortens the number of days an individual with refugee status has to respond to USCIS notification that it intends to terminate their refugee status.
CA4 Remands Where BIA Discounted New Death Threat Evidence of Nexus to Family-Based Asylum Claim
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion by placing too much weight on the IJ’s pre-death-threat findings and too little weight on the petitioner’s new evidence of death threats, and that there was a nexus between the threats and her family group. (Fajardo-Rivas v. Blanche, 10/13/26)
BIA Holds IJs Should Generally Deny Asylum Applications for Citizens of Highly Developed Democratic Countries
The BIA held that IJs should generally deny asylum applications filed by nationals of highly developed, democratic countries that respect and protect human rights and that EU citizens are presumptively ineligible for a discretionary asylum grant. Matter of B–S–A–N–, 30 I&N Dec. 145 (BIA 2026)
Practice Alert: Reports of Ramped Up ICE Enforcement in October 2026 and Preparing Clients
The first week of October 2026 marks a new immigration enforcement surge across the U.S., including an operation specific to California called "Operation Safe California." The Administration is implementing increased ICE arrest quotas to out of status individuals even with no criminal history.
CA8 Finds Petitioner’s Due Process Claim Failed Absent Prejudice and That PSG of Honduran Citizens Who Refused Gang Demands Lacked Particularity
The court held that the petitioner’s due process claim failed because she did not show prejudice, and upheld the denial of asylum where her proposed PSG of Honduran citizens who refused to comply with gang demands was not sufficiently particular or recognized. (Alvarenga v. Blanche, 10/8/26)