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
Featured Issue: U.S. Immigration Courts under Trump 2.0
The U.S. immigration court system plays a critical role in ensuring due process and fair hearings for people facing deportation. But the Trump Administration has made significant changes that challenge the integrity of these courts. On this page, you will find news and resources on these changes.
Call for Examples: Documenting Due Process in Immigration Courts
AILA is collecting examples from practitioners to illustrate the real-world impact of recent immigration court policies and practices. Your responses will help us document systemic problems to strengthen our advocacy efforts and provide a clearer picture of how these policies affect people in court.
Client Flyer: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)
AILA provides an updated flyer to share with clients with the most up to date information considering active litigation and government shutdown.
Practice Pointer: USCIS Transition to “Electronic Payments” and Implements ACH Debit Payment Option for Filing Fees
Please note that, due to inconsistencies in USCIS's initial communications about this change, earlier communications from AILA stated October 28 was the last day for paper-based payments; however, USCIS has confirmed to AILA that only electronic payments will be accepted beginning on October 28.
EOIR Announces 11 Immigration Judges and 25 Temporary Immigration Judges
EOIR announced the investiture of 11 immigration judges and 25 temporary immigration judges in California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington.
CA2 Holds That Qualifying “Child” Must Be under 21 When Cancellation Application Is Adjudicated
The court held that a qualifying “child” under INA §240A(b)(1)(D) must be under 21 at the time the cancellation of removal application is adjudicated, rejecting petitioner’s claim that his daughter’s age at the time of filing or the hearing should control. (Yupangui-Yunga v. Bondi, 10/24/25)
CA9 Denies Motion to Stay Removal Where Petitioners Failed to Show Likelihood of Success or Irreparable Harm
The court denied the petitioners’ motion to stay removal pending disposition of their petition for review, finding they failed to show a likelihood of success on their asylum and related claims or particularized irreparable harm under Nken v. Holder. (Rojas-Espinoza v. Bondi, 10/24/25)
BIA Holds That IJs Lack Authority to Terminate Withholding-Only Proceedings
The BIA concluded that discretionary termination of an applicant’s withholding-only proceedings is prohibited by 8 CFR §1208.2(c)(3)(i). Matter of J–A–N–M–, 29 I&N Dec. 287 (BIA 2025)
Practice Pointer: Pretermission of Asylum Applications: New Case Law and Policy Developments
Practice pointer on new threats to due process regarding expanding efforts to pretermit asylum claims without hearings—citing new BIA precedent and policy targeting Central/South Americans.
Attorney General Reinstates Matter of Negusie, Reaffirming No Duress Exception to Persecutor Bar
The AG vacated the stay of the BIA’s 2021 order and reinstated Matter of Negusie, which held that the bar to asylum eligibility for noncitizens who have engaged or assisted in the persecution of another does not contain a duress exception. Matter of Negusie, 29 I&N Dec. 285 (A.G. 2025)
Take Action Protect Families and Stop the Administration’s Abuse of Immigration Courts
The Administration is undermining the integrity of the U.S. immigration courts by prioritizing speed and enforcement over fairness and accuracy. Use AILA’s Advocacy Tool to demand Congress to stop the Administration’s Abuse of Immigration Courts.
Featured Issue: National Security-based Immigration Enforcement
Since taking office, the Trump Administration has weaponized alleged threats to national security to justify sweeping and punitive immigration enforcement actions. This page will track recent updates and news related to these actions.
Call for Examples: Defending Asylum - Collecting Stories for Advocacy (including Dismissals and Pretermissions)
AILA is collecting stories and data of asylum seekers who have been harmed or deeply impacted by changes in policy. We are particularly focused on people whose claims have been dismissed or pretermitted in either USCIS or immigration courts since 1/22/25.
CA6 Upholds Denial of Motion to Reopen Where Petitioner Failed to Establish Prima Facie Eligibility for Voluntary Departure
The court held that the BIA did not err in denying the petitioner’s motion to reopen to seek voluntary departure, finding that he failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case that he had the means to depart to Guatemala. (Pastor-Hernandez v. Bondi, 10/17/25)
Policy Brief: Critical Threats Endanger Due Process in Immigration Courts
Recent policy changes made to the immigration courts prioritize speed and enforcement over fairness, efficiency, and accuracy. These decisions raise critical due process concerns and produce fewer safeguards to error. This brief overviews these policy changes and recommendations for improvement.
CA9 Upholds IJ’s Adverse Credibility Finding Where Petitioner’s Marriage Fraud Was Not Central to His Asylum Claim
The court held that substantial evidence supported IJ’s adverse credibility finding based on petitioner’s marriage fraud to obtain immigration status, which, although not directly related to his persecution claim, was sufficient for the IJ to find him not credible. (Ani v. Bondi, 10/16/25)
Declarations for Unaccompanied Minors Accepting Voluntary Departure
Federal agencies are asking unaccompanied children to sign a form declaration that waives various rights and legal protections as a condition of accepting voluntary departure. AILA has obtained and transcribed two versions of this form.
CA10 Remands for Reinstatement of IJ’s Asylum Grant Where BIA Misapplied Clear-Error Standard of Review
The court held that the BIA misapplied the clear-error standard in 8 CFR §1003.1(d)(3)(i) when evaluating the IJ’s factual findings on nexus, internal relocation, and the Honduran government’s ability and willingness to protect the petitioner. (Ramos, et al. v. Bondi, 10/15/25)
Client Flyers
AILA offers concise educational flyers for members to share with their clients or prospective clients to inform them about a wide range of pertinent immigration law issues. Customizable versions are available.
Practice Alert: What Happens When the Government Shuts Down?
AILA National shares information on how federal agencies may be affected as a result of the government shutdown. This page will continue to be updated as more information is received.
CA7 Finds That BIA Properly Declined to Exercise Jurisdiction over Petitioners’ Appeal
Denying the petitioners’ challenge to the BIA’s summary dismissal of their appeal, the court agreed that the BIA lacked jurisdiction to review the appeal because the petitioners did not first move to reopen their case with the IJ. (Vergara Castellar, et al. v. Bondi, 10/8/25)
BIA Holds That IJs Are Not Required to Accept Party Stipulations in Making Findings of Fact and Conclusions
The BIA held that, in making findings of fact and conclusions of law, IJs exercise independent judgment and are not required to accept party stipulations. Matter of J–H–M–H–, 29 I&N Dec. 278 (BIA 2025)
EOIR Announces New Director
EOIR announced that Daren K. Margolin has been selected to serve as EOIR Director.
CA10 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Colombian Petitioners Who Alleged Persecution Based on Political Opinion
The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s denial of asylum, finding that there was no past persecution, nexus to political opinion, or government unwillingness to protect, and concluding that safe relocation was possible within Colombia. (Jimenez, et al. v. Bondi, 10/7/25)
District Court Blocks ICE from Detaining Unaccompanied Minors Once They Turn 18
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted an emergency motion to enforce the 2021 court ruling that prevents ICE from illegally locking up UACs in adult detention centers once they turn 18. (Garcia Ramirez, et al. v. ICE, et al., 10/4/25)