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
Letter from Representatives Urging Consideration of LGBT Family Ties in Discretion Decisions
A 9/27/11 letter from 69 members of Congress to DHS Secretary Napolitano and Attorney General Holder requesting that LBGT family ties be considered in determining cases that merit relief from deportation.
Supreme Court Grants Cert in Three Immigration Cases
On 9/27/11 the Supreme Court granted certiorari in three immigration cases. Two cases involve the imputation of residence and LPR status to minors for cancellation purposes. The third case involves the retroactivity of INA §101(a)(13)(C)(v) as applied to returning residents.
DHS PIA for ICE’s Alien Medical Tracking Systems
DHS Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) describing the IT systems that are used to track information from medical records for individuals in ICE custody, the data maintained in these medical tracking systems, the purposes for which the data is collected and used, and more.
CA7 Rejects Asylum Claim Based on Fear of Retribution from Co-Defendants
The court rejected Petitioners’ claim that the U.S. must grant them asylum because it placed them in danger by inducing their cooperation in a criminal visa fraud case, noting that the S visa might be more appropriate. (Jonaitiene v. Holder, 9/26/11)
CA9 on Authentication of Foreign Documents
The court found that the IJ erred by refusing to allow Petitioner to authenticate foreign documents through his own testimony, and concluded that he was statutorily eligible for adjustment of status as the unmarried son of a U.S. citizen. (Jiang v. Holder, 9/26/11)
CA9 Finds ELF Is a Terrorist Organization; Grants Deferral under CAT
The court upheld the BIA’s findings that the Eritrean Liberation Front is a Tier III terrorist organization and that Petitioner engaged in terrorist activities, but finding the possibility of torture more likely than not, granted deferral. (Haile v. Holder, 9/26/11)
Senators Ask President Obama to Rescind Prosecutorial Discretion Initiatives
A 9/26/11 letter from 19 Senators asking President Obama to rescind the recent directives on prosecutorial discretion, dismantle the working group tasked with reviewing removal cases, and make DHS Secretary Napolitano available for questioning on DHS enforcement policies.
CA2 Says Petitioner’s Undocumented Husband Was “Available” to Testify
The court held that Petitioner’s undocumented husband was “available” to testify despite his fear of apprehension, noting that he would have been eligible for derivative asylum status and had every incentive to testify on his wife’s behalf. (Chen v. Holder, 9/23/11)
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Request for Release from Detention
Sample petition for writ of habeas corpus and request for release from detention. (December 2010) (Complaint, Amendment, Other Pleading)
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief
Sample petition for writ of habeas corpus to remedy unlawful detention and request that the court find the automatic stay provision at 8 CFR §1003.19(i)(2) unconstitutional. (April 2010) AILA Doc. No. 11092261.
CA9 Remands CAT Claim for Deferral of Removal from Honduras
The court found that the BIA mischaracterized the record with regard to one expert’s consistency with DOS reports, criticized the expert’s testimony for reasons not supported by the record, and failed to acknowledge a second expert witness. (Cole v. Holder, 9/22/11)
CA3 Says Ten-Year Bar to Admissibility Trumps §245(i) Adjustment
The court gave deference to the BIA’s reasonable statutory interpretation that the ten-year bar under INA §212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) precludes adjustment of status under INA §245(i) and denied the petition for review. (Cheruku v. Att’y Gen. of the U.S., 9/22/11)
The Morton Memo: Supplemental Guidance for ICE Agents
There is a joke developing out here in the field: How many ICE agents does it take to apply the June 17, 2011, Morton Memo? Answer: Two—one to read it and another to ignore it. That's how I felt last week when the ICE Detroit Field Office issued a terse denial to a well documented application [̷
CRCL Releases First and Second Quarterly Reports for FY2011
DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) combined quarterly report to Congress, dated 9/20/11, providing data and analysis regarding the office’s activities during the first and second quarters of FY2011 and a flow chart of the CRCL process.
BIA on 5-Year Statute of Limitations for Rescission of LPR Status
The BIA held that the five-year statute of limitations in §246(a) does not bar removal of an alien admitted on an immigrant visa because that section relates only to rescission of LPR status acquired through adjustment. Matter of Cruz de Ortiz, 25 I&N Dec. 601 (BIA 2011)
CA9 Rejects Challenge to §212(c) Special Motion to Reopen Deadline
The court held that the April 26, 2005 deadline to file motions to reopen for §212(c) relief is a constitutionally sound procedural rule and that absent exceptional circumstances, petitioners that miss the deadline are not entitled to relief. (Luna v. Holder, 9/19/11)
CA2 Says Firm Resettlement Inquiry Is Not Limited to Post-Persecution Ties
The court held that the firm resettlement inquiry requires consideration of all ties established by an alien in a third country before entering the U.S., including ties formed prior to the persecution giving rise to the asylum claim. (Tchitchui v. Holder, 9/19/11)
DHS HSAC Secure Communities Task Force Report
DHS Homeland Security Advisory Council’s Task Force on Secure Communities report recommending ways ICE may improve the Secure Communities program.
CA9 Rejects Leap Year Argument in Defining “One Year” Term of Imprisonment
The court held that for purposes of INA §101(a)(43)(F), a sentence of 365 days qualifies as a “term of imprisonment [of] at least one year,” even when the sentence was served in whole or in part during a leap year. (Habibi v. Holder, 9/14/11; amended 12/8/11).
BIA Says IJ Scope of TPS Review Is Not Limited to Evidence Submitted to USCIS
The BIA held that the IJ may consider any material and relevant evidence in support of a TPS application that is renewed in removal proceedings, regardless of whether the evidence was previously considered by USCIS. Matter of Figueroa, 25 I&N Dec. 596 (BIA 2011)
BIA Says IJ Scope of I-751 Review Is Not Limited to Evidence Submitted to DHS
The BIA held that the IJ should consider new evidence submitted in support of a renewed I-751 with a waiver of the joint filing requirement regardless of whether the evidence was previously considered by DHS. Matter of Herrera Del Orden, 25 I&N Dec. 589 (BIA 2011)
TRAC Report on Removal Proceedings in the Decade since 9/11
A Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) report, dated 9/9/11, providing an overview of removal proceedings initiated in the Immigration Courts, and comparing data on removal proceedings from the decades before and after 9/11/01.
CA9 Says BIA Erred in Refusing to Permit Withdrawal of Prior Attorney’s Admissions
The court held that the attorney’s admission of the NTA’s allegation that Petitioner smuggled his brother was the result of ineffective assistance. The BIA erred in not permitting Petitioner to withdraw the admission. (Santiago-Rodriguez v. Holder, 9/9/11)
CA9 Says Incorrect Standards Were Applied in Refusing to Excuse Late Asylum Application
The IJ applied incorrect legal standards when finding Petitioner had not shown changed or extraordinary circumstances to excuse his late application and the IJ erred in finding that the application was not filed in a reasonable time period. (Singh v. Holder, 9/8/11)
CA3 Sets Standard for Determining Whether LPR Is an Applicant for Admission
The court held that the standard for determining whether an LPR should be treated as an applicant for admission, and thus paroled for prosecution, is probable cause to believe he has committed a crime under INA §212(a)(2). (Doe v. Att’y Gen. of the U.S., 9/8/11)