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
CA7 Holds That Petitioner Failed to Exhaust Challenges to Essential Elements of Asylum, Withholding, and CAT Claims
The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust administrative remedies because she did not adequately present to the BIA arguments challenging essential grounds for the denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. (Gonzalez Perez v. Blanche, 9/8/26)
BIA Holds That Maduro’s Removal from Power and Transfer of Executive Authority Constituted Changed Country Conditions in Venezuela
The BIA held that the removal of former President Maduro from power and the ensuing transfer of executive authority constituted a change in country conditions in Venezuela for purposes of assessing an applicant’s prospective fear of persecution. Matter of A–E–V–M–, 30 I&N Dec. 20 (BIA 2026)
CA8 Says CAT Order Is Not a Final Order of Removal and 30-Day Petition for Review Deadline Is Not Subject to Equitable Tolling
The court held that a CAT order is not a final order of removal reviewable on its own under INA §242(a)(1) and that the 30-day deadline for filing a petition for review is a mandatory claims-processing rule not subject to equitable tolling. (B.P. v. Blanche, 9/2/26)
CA8 Finds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Standalone Negative Reasonable Fear Determination
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction under INA §242(a)(1) to review an IJ’s affirmance of an asylum officer’s negative reasonable fear determination because the decision is not a final order of removal and does not affect the validity of one. (Sebastian-Perez v. Blanche, 9/2/26)
USCIS Interim Final Rule on Affirmative Asylum Referrals Without Interview
USCIS interim final rule allowing asylum officers to refer certain asylum applications to EOIR without conducting an asylum interview. The rule is effective 7/28/26. Comments are due 9/28/26. (91 FR 47101, 7/28/26; 91 FR 55735, 8/31/26)
TRAC: Asylum Denials Rise to 94% Amid the Remaking of the Immigration Court
TRAC reports that in June 2026, 94% of asylum cases decided were denied. Immigration judges granted only 771 individuals asylum during that period—less than a quarter of the number of individuals awarded asylum just three years ago.
AILA Files Amicus Brief on Asylee Adjustment of Status Eligibility
AILA argued that adjustment of status is a legal term of art and that Congress did not require applicants under the asylee adjustment statute to maintain current asylum status. (Wassily v. Bondi, 8/31/26)
CA9 Holds That Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Rule Conflicts with Asylum Statute and That Agency Erred on Mixed Motives Analysis
The court held that the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways Rule conflicts with the asylum statute by restricting eligibility based on manner of entry, and that the agency also legally erred by failing to apply the complete mixed motives framework. (Garcia Morales v. Blanche, 8/31/26)
USCIS Announces Compliance with Preliminary Injunction to Lift Adjudication Hold for Travel Ban Countries
USCIS announced it will comply with the 8/24/26 district court order in Red Eagle Law v. Edlow that temporarily lifts asylum and benefit adjudication holds for nationals of the 39 travel ban countries and Palestinian authority imposed by PMs 602-0192 and 602-0194, pending further litigation.
CA9 Holds That Agency Improperly Relied on Trivial Inconsistencies and Disregarded Translation Difficulties in Adverse Credibility Finding
The court held that the adverse credibility determination lacked substantial evidence because the agency improperly relied on trivial inconsistencies and disregarded significant translation difficulties, and that it also legally erred in denying CAT relief. (Mbueno-Vita v. Blanche, 8/28/26)
CA9 Holds That BIA Erred by Requiring Quantitative Evidence of Torture and Failing to Give Reasoned Consideration to Expert Reports
The court held that the BIA erred by imposing a quantitative evidence requirement, where the regulations require it to consider all evidence relevant to the possibility of future torture, and by failing to give reasoned consideration to expert reports. (Parada Calderon v. Blanche, 8/28/26)
Practice Alert: DOS Issues Cable on Asylum-Related Questions to Visa Applicants
On April 28, 2026, DOS issued a cable directing consular officers to ask nonimmigrant visa applicants if they fear returning to their country of residence, and to refuse visas for those who respond affirmatively.
USCIS Updates Guidance on Rosario Class Action Protections for Asylum-Based EAD Applicants
USCIS updated guidance for Rosario class members, clarifying eligibility and procedures for certain asylum applicants seeking an initial EAD. The guidance reaffirms the 30-day processing requirement and explains options for addressing delays.
CA1 Holds No Remand Needed Where IJ Applied First Circuit Law in the Alternative and BIA Adopted That Rationale
The court held that no remand was needed where the IJ applied First Circuit law in the alternative and the BIA adopted it, that the adjustment and asylum-timeliness rulings were unreviewable, and that the Jamaican petitioner’s proposed PSG was not cognizable. (Bromfield v. Blanche, 8/25/26)
CA3 Finds CAT-Only Petition Moot After Removal and Holds Reentry Bar Is Not a Collateral Consequence
The court held that a petition for review challenging only the denial of CAT deferral was moot upon petitioner’s removal to El Salvador, because the reentry bar is not a collateral consequence of CAT denial and ICE Directive No. 11061.1 did not apply. (Mejia-Henriquez v. Att’y Gen., 8/25/26)
District Court Issues Preliminary Injunction to Lift Adjudication Hold for Travel Ban Countries
The court certified a class of nationals of the 39 travel ban countries and Palestinian authority whose pending asylum or benefit applications are subject to the adjudication hold in PM-602-0192 or PM-602-0194 and granted a preliminary injunction against the hold. (Red Eagle Law v. Edlow, 8/24/26)
CA1 Upholds BIA’s Rejection of Asylum Claim Based on Form Order Granting Relative Asylum Without Reasoning or Facts
The court upheld the BIA’s conclusion that a form order granting a relative asylum, without reasoning or facts, showed no prima facie eligibility for asylum, and found that the Brazilian petitioners showed neither past persecution nor a well-founded fear. (Pereira Alves v. Blanche, 8/24/26)
Call for Examples: EOIR Notice Issues
The EOIR committee is requesting AILA Members provide examples of delays in receiving notice (or instances of not receiving notice) to further illustrate current issues with notice from EOIR.
CA8 Finds Substantial Evidence Supported No Nexus Between Domestic Abuse and Guatemalan Petitioner’s Proposed Social Groups
The court held that substantial evidence supported the denial of asylum, withholding, and CAT relief because the record did not compel a finding that petitioner’s abuse was on account of a proposed social group or that Guatemala would acquiesce in torture. (Matias-Pablo v. Blanche, 8/14/26)
CA5 Finds INA §242(a)(2) Does Not Strip Jurisdiction to Review Denial of Motion to Submit Late-Filed Evidence
The court held that INA §242(a)(2) does not strip jurisdiction to review the denial of a motion to submit late-filed evidence, and that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s adverse credibility determination and its denial of CAT deferral of removal. (Lopez-Barrera v. Blanche, 8/14/26)
CA5 Holds That Removal Under INA §237(a)(4)(A)(i) for Violating an Export Law Is Not Limited to National Security Threats
The court held that the removal ground for export law violations, INA §237(a)(4)(A)(i), is not limited to national security threats and covered the petitioner’s unlawful export of firearms, and that substantial evidence supported the denial of CAT deferral. (Olibris v. Blanche, 8/14/26)
CA9 Holds That Former Salvadoran Police Officer Failed to Show Persecution Was on Account of His Former Police Status
The court held that substantial evidence supported the finding that the petitioner, a former Salvadoran police officer, failed to establish a nexus to his status as a former officer, because all the threats he received occurred while he was still active. (Gonzalez-Argueta v. Blanche, 8/13/26)
Practice Alert: USCIS Interim Final Rule on Mandatory E-filing
On August 11, USCIS published an Interim Final Rule establishing a framework for mandatory e-filing. The USCIS Operations Committee provides this alert explaining the process by which USCIS can mandate that certain forms are filed electronically and how individuals may apply for a waiver.
SAVE and E-Verify Announce Status Change Reports Now Include TPS and Asylum-related EADs
SAVE and E-Verify announced that Status Change Reports now include invalidated EADs for categories C08 (asylum applicant), C09 (adjustment of status applicant under INA §245), A12 (TPS holder) and C19 (TPS applicant). Previously, it included only category C11 (parolee) EADs.
CA4 Holds That INA §242(b)(1)’s 30-Day Petition for Review Deadline Is Subject to Equitable Tolling
The court held that INA §242(b)(1)’s 30-day deadline is subject to equitable tolling, and found that the BIA erred in its political opinion and particular social group (PSG) analyses and abused its discretion in denying CAT relief. (Navarro Cerritos v. Blanche, 8/11/26)