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
CA1 Upholds Petitioner’s Removability for Fraud and Denial of Relief Based on Serious Nonpolitical Crime Bar
The court held that the petitioner was removable for fraud and willful misrepresentation and failed to establish eligibility for asylum, withholding of removal, or Convention Against Torture (CAT) protection. (Usma Acosta v. Blanche, 5/1/26)
EOIR Announces Closure of San Francisco Immigration Court After 9/4/26
EOIR announced it will close the San Francisco Immigration Court at the close of business on 9/4/26 and make its Sansome Street location a hearing location under the Concord Immigration Court's adminstrative control. EOIR will issue new hearing notices for all cases reassigned to the Concord court.
CA7 Finds Niz-Chavez Does Not Warrant Equitable Tolling of Motion-to-Reopen Deadline
The court found petitioner was not entitled to equitable tolling based on Niz-Chavez v. Garland, where the asserted defect in the Notice to Appear (NTA) was apparent at the time of the original proceedings and petitioner failed to act diligently. (Coatl-Chiquito v. Blanche, 4/30/26)
Practice Alert: New Immigration Fees Authorized by the Reconciliation Bill
USCIS has published an Interim Final Rule codifying the collection of fees and other provisions for asylum, Form I-94, temporary protected status, and employment authorization documents. This alert will continue to be updated with any new details provided.
CA7 Holds That Failure to Appear Was Not Due to Exceptional Circumstances Where Petitioner Failed to Notify the Court
The court held that the petitioner did not establish exceptional circumstances under INA §240(b)(5)(C), where his failure to appear resulted from financial hardship and transportation difficulties rather than exceptional circumstances beyond his control. (Nimaga v. Blanche, 4/29/26)
CA6 Holds That Petition-for-Review Deadline Is Subject to Equitable Tolling but Dismisses Petition as Untimely
The court held that the 30-day deadline to file a petition for review under INA §242(b)(1) is subject to equitable tolling, but found that the petitioner was not entitled to tolling on the record and thus dismissed the petition as untimely. (Oxlaj-Perez v. Blanche, 4/29/26)
BIA Holds IJ Must Enter In Absentia Order and Lacks Authority to Administratively Close Proceedings Where Respondent Fails to Appear
The BIA held that when respondents, including minors, fail to appear and DHS has established proper notice and removability, the IJ lacks authority to administratively close proceedings and must enter an in absentia removal order. Matter of Orozco Becerra, 29 I&N Dec. 600 (BIA 2026)
CA6 Upholds Denial of Motion to Reopen Where Petitioner Failed to Identify Specific Interpreter Errors
The court held that the petitioner did not establish grounds to reopen his removal proceedings based on alleged interpreter errors where he failed to identify specific mistranslations or show prejudice. (Deh v. Blanche, 4/29/26)
BIA Finds Respondent’s False Imprisonment Conviction and Other Criminal Conduct Demonstrated Dangerousness and Did Not Warrant Release on Bond
The BIA held that the respondent’s conviction for false imprisonment and his arrest on other charges demonstrated that he was a danger to the community and did not warrant release on bond. Matter of Martinez-Rodriguez, 29 I&N Dec. 656 (BIA 2026)
BIA Finds IJ Erred in Granting Cancellation as a Matter of Discretion Where Respondent’s Extensive Criminal History Outweighed His Equities
The BIA held that the IJ erred in granting cancellation of removal as a matter of discretion because the respondent’s extensive criminal history outweighed his equities and found that the record did not support a finding of rehabilitation. Matter of Mills, 29 I&N Dec. 668 (BIA 2026)
AILA Law Journal, Vol. 8, Number 1, April 2026
The April 2026 edition of the AILA Law Journal is now available.
Practice Alert: AILA Tracking Detentions at USCIS Biometrics Appointments
AILA is tracking increased reports of detentions at USCIS biometrics appointments.
BIA Holds That FBI Memorandum Indicating Respondent Is National Security Risk Warrants Significant Weight in Bond Proceedings
The BIA held that an FBI Letterhead Memorandum indicating that the respondent is a potential national security risk warrants significant weight in bond proceedings, and ordered the respondent detained without bond. Matter of Shentu, 29 I&N Dec. 595 (BIA 2026)
BIA Holds That IJ Erred in Terminating Proceedings Based Solely on DACA Receipt Without Considering Opposition to Termination
The BIA held that the IJ erred in terminating removal proceedings based solely on the fact that respondent had been accorded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and without considering reasons for any opposition to termination. Matter of Santiago-Santiago, 29 I&N Dec. 589 (BIA 2026)
CA1 Holds That There Is No Categorical Bar to Political Opinion Claims Based on Opposition to Gangs
Granting the petition for review and remanding, the court held that the BIA erred in applying a categorical rule that opposition to gangs cannot constitute a political opinion and failed to adequately address the petitioner’s religion-based asylum claim. (Lopez Martinez v. Blanche, 4/23/26)
BIA Holds That Political Opinion Must Be Tied to Government and That Opposition to Gangs Is Insufficient
The BIA held that to establish a political opinion under the INA, a noncitizen must have an actual or imputed belief or conviction regarding a discrete cause tied to a government, and that opposition to criminal gangs is insufficient. Matter of D–G–E–A– & N–G–G–E–, 29 I&N Dec. 570 (BIA 2026)
BIA Holds That Lack of Candor Regarding Criminal History Is a Significant Adverse Factor in Exercise of Discretion on Cancellation of Removal
The BIA held that a noncitizen’s lack of candor regarding his criminal history is a significant adverse factor when exercising discretion on an application for cancellation of removal. Matter of Richards, 29 I&N Dec. 658 (BIA 2026)
CA4 Holds Matter of K– Does Not Apply Where Petitioner Admits Drug Offenses in Seeking Cancellation of Removal
The court held that Matter of K– does not apply where a petitioner, represented by counsel, admits to controlled substance offenses under oath in seeking cancellation of removal, and that such admissions preclude a finding of good moral character. (Sandoval Diaz v. Blanche, 4/20/26)
AILA and NIJC Argue Immigration Judges Must Develop the Record
AILA and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) filed an amici brief outlining immigration judges’ affirmative duty to develop the record in removal proceedings and how this duty applies to pro se respondents and cases where counsel’s performance falls below minimum professional standards.
CA1 Reverses Denial of Adjustment to Venezuelan Petitioner Where BIA Engaged in Impermissible Factfinding
The court reversed and remanded, holding that the BIA engaged in impermissible factfinding by relying on a factual determination not supported by the record in reversing the IJ’s grant of adjustment of status to the Venezuelan petitioner. (Taveras Martínez v. Blanche, 4/17/26)
CA4 Holds That North Carolina PJC with Community Service Constituted Conviction under INA §101(a)(48)(A)
The court held that the petitioner’s North Carolina Prayer for Judgment Continued (PJC) conditioned on community service constituted a conviction under INA §101(a)(48)(A) rendering him ineligible for cancellation of removal based on two CIMT convictions. (Gardner v. Blanche, 4/14/26)
CA7 Finds That Petitioner Failed to Show Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship and That BIA Did Not Abuse Discretion in Denying Reopening
The court held that the petitioner failed to establish exceptional and extremely unusual hardship for cancellation of removal under INA §240A(b)(1) and found that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion to reopen his removal proceedings. (Petrov v. Blanche, 4/14/26)
BIA Holds IJs Must Conduct In Absentia Hearing Where Record Contains Evidence of Alienage Despite DHS Nonappearance
The BIA held that where respondent is charged as present without admission or parole, neither party appears, and the record contains evidence of alienage, the IJ errs in terminating proceedings instead of conducting an in absentia hearing. Matter of Bolivar-Bolivar, 29 I&N Dec. 548 (BIA 2026)
EOIR to Stop Hearings at San Francisco Immigration Court’s Montgomery Street Location
EOIR announced it will stop holding hearings at the San Francisco Immigration Court’s Montgomery Street location after 5/1/26. Some cases will be reassigned to the court’s Sansome Street location, and filings for such cases should be filed at the Sansome Street location beginning 5/4/26.
AILA Files Amicus Brief in CA9 Defending Right to Counsel in Reasonable Fear Proceedings
AILA argued that meaningful access to counsel is essential in reasonable fear proceedings. Despite requesting counsel, the detained petitioner was forced to proceed pro se at the RF interview and IJ review, undermining statutory and due process protections. (Amador-Canacas v. Bondi, 4/9/26)