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
BIA Vacates CAT Deferral Where IJ Relied on Generalized Country Conditions and Overlooked Applicant’s Individualized Circumstances
The BIA held that the IJ clearly erred in finding likely torture based on generalized country conditions evidence while overlooking the applicant's individualized circumstances, and that he did not show likely acquiescence by a public official. Matter of H–L–S–M–, 29 I&N Dec. 767 (BIA 2026)
BIA Remands Where IJ Did Not Meaningfully Address Credibility Inconsistencies and Internal Relocation Evidence
The BIA held remand was warranted because the IJ’s credibility finding did not meaningfully address apparent inconsistencies and, assuming the respondent established past persecution, failed to consider years of internal relocation without harm. Matter of H–I–A–H–, 29 I&N Dec. 823 (BIA 2026)
The Member Presale for the New 20th Edition of Kurzban’s Immigration Law Sourcebook Is Now Open!
AILA members can secure the lowest price that will be offered on this fully updated essential resource. But you must act now—offer ends on August 17, 2026.
BIA Says Evidentiary Hearing Generally Unnecessary to Apply Safe Third Country Bar Absent Individualized Risk in ACA Country
The BIA held that where a noncitizen subject to an asylum cooperative agreement (ACA) shows no individualized risk of harm in the country of removal, an evidentiary hearing is generally unnecessary to apply the safe third country bar. Matter of A–C–M–, 29 I&N Dec. 703 (BIA 2026)
Practice Alert: USCIS Update on Telephonic Appearance Policy
AILA's USCIS Operations Committee provides updates on the May 18, 2026 guidance on telephonic representation following response from USCIS regarding how to submit requests for telephonic appearances under "limited circumstances."
District Court Clarifies Vacatur of USCIS Policies That Paused Adjudication of Certain Benefit Requests
On June 11, 2026, the U.S. District Court in Rhode Island issued a second order clarifying the challenged policies in Dorcas Int'l Institute of Rhode Island, et al v. USCIS, et al as unlawful under the APA, and ordered the government to provide a status update on implementation within 24 hours.
USCIS Files Appeal of the Court Order Vacating Policies That Paused Adjudication of Certain Benefit Requests
On June 12, 2026, USCIS filed an appeal to the First Circuit Court of Appeals in response to the vacatur of policies pausing adjudication of certain benefit requests.
USCIS Announces Compliance with Court Order Vacating Hold Policies
USCIS announced that it will comply, pending further litigation, with the district court's 6/5/26 and 6/11/26 orders in Dorcas v. USCIS. The court vacated policies that placed processing holds on applications and added consideration of country-specific factors to discretionary benefit adjudications.
District Court Vacates USCIS Policies That Paused Adjudications of Certain Benefits Requests
The Benefits Hold Policy, the Global Asylum Hold Policy, the Comprehensive Re-Review Policy, and the Country-Specific Factors Policy were found unlawful, discriminatory, and beyond agency authority and vacated under the APA. (Dorcas Int'l Institute of Rhode Island, et al v. USCIS, et al, 6/5/26)
USCIS Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Limit Discretionary Employment Authorization
USCIS NPRM to limit eligibility for discretionary EADs. Notably, it would bar those arrested, charged, indicted, or convicted of a crime; who admit to committing a violent crime; or whom DHS determines to be in a gang from receiving discretionary EADs. Comments are due 8/4/26. (91 FR 34352, 6/5/26)
USCIS Announces New Asylum Office in San Antonio
USCIS announced that it opened an additional asylum office location in San Antonio, Texas. Beginning 5/28/26, individuals who filed for asylum with USCIS and reside in the Houston Asylum Office's jurisdiction may be interviewed at either the Houston or San Antonio Asylum Office.
BIA Holds That Respondent’s Federal Health Care Fraud Conviction Was for a Particularly Serious Crime
The BIA dismissed the respondent’s appeal, holding that his conviction for health care fraud under 18 USC §1347 was for a particularly serious crime barring asylum and withholding of removal, and affirming the denial of CAT protection. Matter of J–O–A–, 29 I&N Dec. 672 (BIA 2026)
BIA Finds Respondent Not Credible and Ineligible for Asylum, Withholding, and CAT Due to Inconsistencies Related to Identity
The BIA held the IJ properly found the respondent was not credible, and ultimately ineligible for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), due to various inconsistencies related to his identity. Matter of I–S–M–, 29 I&N Dec. 811 (BIA 2026)
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.
CA1 Vacates Orders for Failing to State with Sufficient Particularity Whether BIA Addressed Imputed-Mungiki Persecution Arguments
The court held that the BIA’s orders dismissing the petitioner’s appeal did not state with sufficient particularity their basis for rejecting his arguments that Kenyan police would persecute him as a presumed Mungiki based on his family status or Kikuyu ethnicity. (Muchiri v. Blanche, 6/3/26)
CA4 Holds That BIA Reversibly Erred by Treating Petitioner’s “Salvadoran Women” Social Group as Raised for the First Time on Appeal
The court held the BIA reversibly erred by treating petitioner’s “Salvadoran women” particular social group (PSG) as raised for the first time on appeal and declining to reach its merits, requiring remand, while denying her remaining asylum and CAT claims. (Alvarado-Paz v. Blanche, 6/1/26)
BIA Holds That Harm Suffered While a Minor Is Not Necessarily Persecution and Pattern or Practice Claims Require an Objective Showing
The BIA held that harm suffered while a minor does not necessarily constitute persecution, and a pattern or practice withholding claim still requires an objective showing of a clear probability of persecution and has no subjective component. Matter of I–U–V–, 29 I&N Dec. 816 (BIA 2026)
CA3 Holds It Has Jurisdiction to Review Withholding and CAT Denials Absent a Challenge to a Final Order of Removal
The court held it has jurisdiction under INA §242(a)(1) to review withholding and CAT denials absent a challenge to a final order of removal, denied the petitioner’s CAT claim as speculative, and left the withholding denial intact by an equally divided court. (Laureano v. Att’y Gen., 5/29/26)
Presidential Determination Increasing Refugee Admissions for FY26
On 5/21/26, President Trump issued an Emergency Presidential Determination to increase the refugee admissions ceiling for FY26 from 7,500 to 17,500. The additional admissions will be allocated to Afrikaners from South Africa. (91 FR 31645, 5/27/26)
CA2 Remands Where BIA Failed to Make But-For Eligibility Determination Before Applying Material Support Bar
The court held that the BIA must determine whether a petitioner would be eligible for asylum or withholding of removal but for the material support bar, because USCIS will not consider granting a waiver absent such a determination. (Sufiyan v. Blanche, 3/12/26, amended 5/26/26)
DHS Announces ICE Directive Targeting “Fraudulent Asylum Claims”
DHS announced a new directive instructing ICE to take additional actions to target “fraudulent asylum claims,” including against attorneys who file false asylum claims. The announcement alleges that immigration attorneys regularly coach their clients to conceal information and lie to obtain asylum.
Practice Alert: Impact to Affirmative Asylum Applicants of DHS Rule Implementing H.R.1 Immigration Fees and Consequences of Non-Payment
This alert summarizes asylum fee framework as it applies to affirmative asylum cases, including the consequences of non‑payment and key practice considerations for counsel, such as strategies to reduce the risk of application rejection or loss of asylum‑based employment authorization.
BIA Holds That Government’s Deference to Tribal Conflict-Resolution Mechanisms Does Not Show It Is Unable or Unwilling to Control Persecutors
The BIA held that although a government may generally defer to tribal mechanisms for resolving tribal conflict, doing so does not indicate the government is unable or unwilling to control persecutors within a tribe. Matter of A–H–D–, 29 I&N Dec. 642 (BIA 2026)
BIA Holds That “Mexican Men with Schizoaffective Disorder" Is Not a Cognizable PSG
The BIA held that the group "Mexican men with Schizoaffective Disorder," defined only by such diagnosis, is not cognizable as a particular social group (PSG) under the INA. Matter of L–A–D–, 29 I&N Dec. 634 (BIA 2026)
BIA Holds That Respondent’s Pennsylvania Drug Conviction Was a Particularly Serious Crime Barring Asylum and Withholding
The BIA held that the respondent’s conviction for possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance was a particularly serious crime barring asylum and withholding, and affirmed the denial of CAT deferral absent public official acquiescence. Matter of G–L–C–, 29 I&N Dec. 717 (BIA 2026)