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
CA5 Finds Certification of Form I-89 Did Not Confer LPR Status
The court held that the petitioner did not become an LPR until USCIS formally approved his application after he was 18, and thus he was ineligible for citizenship under the Child Citizenship Act of 2000. (Gutierrez v. Lynch, 7/18/16)
EOIR FAQs on Temporary Closure of Eloy Immigration Court
EOIR FAQs on the measles outbreak and the operational status of the Eloy Immigration Court. The Eloy Immigration Court temporarily suspended hearings on 5/31/16, following confirmation by the Arizona Department of Health Services of a measles outbreak in certain areas within Eloy Detention Center.
AILA: Government Requests Rehearing of Deferred Action Case
AILA commented on the Department of Justice’s request for the Supreme Court to rehear the United States v. Texas case when a ninth Supreme Court justice is confirmed, urging that the Court rehear the case.
ICE Fact Sheet on Initiative to Increase Community Engagement
ICE fact sheet on the Office of Community Engagement’s (OCE) initiative to increase community engagement and station ICE Community Relations Officers in every field office in the country to serve as a link between the agency and stakeholders.
DHS FAQs on Existing Guidance on Enforcement Actions at Sensitive Locations
DHS fact sheet consisting of FAQs on ICE and CBP’s existing sensitive location policies regarding enforcement actions at places such as schools, medical facilities, places of worship, weddings or funerals, and public demonstrations.
ICE FAQs on Enforcement Actions at Sensitive Locations
ICE FAQs on existing sensitive location policies regarding enforcement actions at places such as schools, medical facilities, places of worship, weddings or funerals, and public demonstrations.
CBP FAQs on Enforcement Actions at Sensitive Locations
CBP FAQs on existing sensitive location policies regarding enforcement actions at places such as schools, medical facilities, places of worship, weddings or funerals, and public demonstrations.
CA5 Says BIA Failed to Consider Factors Central to Determining Reason for Persecution
The court found that the BIA failed to consider several factors essential to determining whether one central reason for the Ethiopian asylum applicant’s maltreatment by the government was persecution on account of a protected ground. (Sealed Petitioner v. Sealed Respondent, 7/15/16)
CA7 Finds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Petitioner's Eighth Motion to Reopen
The court dismissed the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction, holding that petitioner, who had tried eight times to have his removal order rescinded, neither presented a legal or constitutional question. (Joseph v. Lynch, 7/14/15)
AILA Welcomes Legislation Designed to Protect Refugees
AILA welcomes the introduction of the Refugee Protection Act of 2016 in both the House and Senate; the bill includes provisions to address many of the severe, longstanding problems in the U.S. refugee and asylum systems.
CBP Practice Pointer: Overcoming Expedited Removal Orders
AILA’s CBP Liaison Committee provides a practice pointer on overcoming expedited removal orders where there is an arguable abuse of discretion or clear legal error.
BIA Rescinds In Absentia Order Because NTA Was Sent to Outdated Address
Unpublished BIA decision rescinds in absentia order because NTA was sent in 2008 to an outdated address contained in 1999 adjustment application. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Sanchez, 7/14/16)
Sign-On Letter to Senators on Opposing Mandatory Notification Legislation
On 7/11/16, AILA joined 215 immigrant, legal, civil rights, faith-based, and labor organizations in urging U.S. senators to oppose any legislation or amendment that would entangle state and local law authorities with immigration enforcement through mandatory notifications.
CA4 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Ethnic Hutu Alleged to Have Participated in Rwanda Genocide
The court denied the petition for review, finding that petitioner, an ethnic Hutu and citizen of Rwanda alleged to have participated in the Rwandan genocide, did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he was not subject to the “persecutor bar.” (Munyakazi v. Lynch, 7/11/16)
CA5 Says Texas Misdemeanor Assault Conviction Is Not a “Crime Involving Moral Turpitude”
The court vacated the BIA’s judgment and remanded, holding that petitioner’s prior Texas misdemeanor assault conviction did not qualify as a “crime involving moral turpitude” that rendered him ineligible for cancellation of removal. (Gomez-Perez v. Lynch, 7/11/16)
Department of the Treasury Notice on Immigration Bond Interest Rates
Department of the Treasury notice that for the period beginning 7/1/16 and ending 9/30/16, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Immigration Bond interest rate is 0.27 per centum per annum. (81 FR 44926, 7/11/16)
CA9 Says Guatemalan Petitioner Failed to Show a Reasonable Fear of Torture
The court upheld the IJ's decision affirming an asylum officer's negative reasonable fear determination, concluding that substantial evidence in the record supported the IJ's conclusion that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a reasonable fear of torture. (Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch, 7/7/16)
CA3 Says Petitioner’s Fraudulent Procurement of TPS Rendered Him Inadmissible
The court upheld the district court, holding that petitioner’s fraudulent procurement of TPS in 1992 made him inadmissible for LPR status, and because he had not been “lawfully admitted” for permanent residence, he could not be naturalized. (Saliba v. Att'y Gen., 7/8/16)
CA2 Finds Petitioner’s 1997 Pennsylvania Conviction Was a Controlled Substance Offense
The court held that petitioner’s 1997 conviction under a Pennsylvania statute was categorically a controlled substance offense, and dismissed the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction to review the removability order. (Collymore v. Lynch, 7/8/16)
CA8 Finds Asylum Applicant Failed to Show a Material Change in Country Conditions in Nigeria
The court held that petitioner’s motion to reopen was untimely due to her inability to show a material change in country conditions in Nigeria, which would have excused her from the 90-day time limitation for filing the motion. (Zeah v. Lynch, 7/8/16)
AILA Quicktake #170: Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Affirms Flores Settlement
The American Immigration Council's Legal Director Melissa Crow shares details of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ affirmation of the Flores Settlement Agreement stating that the Obama administration's family detention practices violate that agreement.
CA3 Upholds Denial of Naturalization Application Due to Failure to Disclose Prior Removal Order
The court affirmed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the government, finding that the appellant failed to meet his burden of showing that he was lawfully admitted and was therefore not eligible for naturalization. (Koszelnik v. DHS Secretary, et al., 7/8/16)
CA6 Says INA's Residual Definition of “Crime of Violence” Is Unconstitutionally Vague
Applying the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States, the court granted the petition for review, holding that the INA §1101(a)(43)(F)’s residential definition of “crime of violence” is void for vagueness. (Shuti v. Lynch, 7/7/16)
CA7 Says USCIS Erred in Evaluating Widow’s Request to Remove Permanent Residence Conditions
The court held that because USCIS mistakenly evaluated petitioner's request to remove the conditions on her permanent residence as a request for a waiver, it erroneously placed on petitioner the burden of proving that the marriage was bona fide. (Putro v. Lynch, 7/7/16)
CA4 Says “Virginia Forgery” Is an Aggravated Felony
The court denied the petition for review, concluding that “Virginia forgery” is an aggravated felony under the INA, because it is a categorical match with the federal generic definition of forgery. (Alvarez v. Lynch, 7/7/16)