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
TRAC Report on the Growing Immigration Case Backlog Despite Additional Judge Appointments
Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) report finding that the number of cases awaiting resolution before the immigration courts reached a new all-time high of 275,316 by the end of May 2011, despite the addition of 44 new immigration judges to the bench.
CA2 on Burden of Proof and Evidence of Good Faith Marriage
The court held that the burden is on the alien to prove a good faith marriage for waiver of the joint removal of conditions and that the IJ did not err in attaching significance to the couple’s post-marriage actions. (Boluk v. Holder, 6/7/11)
DHS PIA for the Automated Threat Prioritization Web Service
DHS/ICE Privacy Impact Assessment describing the general functionality of the Automated Threat Prioritization (ATP) web service, which receives, processes, and transmits criminal history information about individuals who are the subjects of enforcement actions.
EOIR Responds to AILA Regarding the Application of DOMA in Proceedings
A 6/6/11 letter from Juan P. Osuna, Director, EOIR, responding to a 4/6/11 letter from AILA and other organizations, stating that until the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is repealed or struck down EOIR will continue to apply DOMA as interpreted in the immigration context.
Grand Jury Indicts Couple on Charges Involving Domestic Servitude
Federal grand jury indictment charging a MD couple with forced labor conspiracy and harboring a domestic worker for financial gain. The indictment alleges the defendants procured a fraudulent B-1 visa to bring the victim to the U.S. to work as their domestic servant. (U.S. v. Edwards, 6/6/11)
BIA Says Arriving Aliens Subject to Expedited Removal May Be Placed in §240 Proceedings
The BIA held that DHS has the discretion to place arriving aliens in removal proceedings under INA §240, even if they may also be subject to expedited removal under INA §235(b)(1)(A)(i). Matter of E-R-M- & L-R-M, 25 I&N Dec. 520 (BIA 2011)
CA9 Says EAD Grant Does Not Confer Admission Status for Cancellation of Removal
The court held that the grant of work authorization pending the approval of adjustment of status does not confer admission status on an undocumented alien for purposes of calculating seven years continuous residence for cancellation. (Guevara v. Holder, 6/3/11)
CA9 on “Admitted in Any Status” for Cancellation of Removal
The court held that an approved I-130 Petition for Alien Relative does not confer admission status on an undocumented alien for purposes of showing seven years of continuous residence for cancellation of removal. (Vasquez de Alcantar v. Holder, 6/3/11)
USCIS Additional 30-Day Comment Request on Form I-212 Extension (Updated 6/2/11)
USCIS notice of an additional 30-day comment period on the extension of the validity of Form I-212, Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the U.S. after Deportation or Removal. Comments are due 07/05/11. (76 FR 31971, 6/2/11) (76 FR 14419, 3/16/11)
DHS Annual Report on Immigration Enforcement Activities in FY2010
DHS Office of Immigration Statistics Annual Report released June 2011, finding that DHS made 517,000 apprehensions and removed 387,000 foreign nationals from the U.S. in FY2010. ICE detained approximately 363,000 foreign nationals.
PHR Report: Indefinite Detention in the U.S.
A Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) report on the use of indefinite detention in the national security and immigration contexts, finds that the harms endured by indefinite detainees are unconstitutionally punitive and violate domestic and international law.
BIA Dismisses Appeal of Derivative Spouse Who Cannot Independently Qualify for TPS
The BIA held that an alien seeking TPS as a derivative spouse must be from a state designated for TPS eligibility and found that the IJ properly denied the respondent’s application for TPS as a late initial registrant. Matter of Echeverria, 25 I&N Dec. 512 (BIA 2011)
CA9 Says Reinstatement Does Not Apply to Petitioner Who Sought Relief Pre-IIRIRA
The court held that reinstatement of removal under INA §241(a)(5) is impermissibly retroactive when applied to individuals who applied for discretionary relief prior to IIRIRA’s effective date. (Chay Ixcot v. Holder, 6/1/11)
DOJ OIL May 2011 Litigation Bulletin
DOJ Office of Immigration Litigation (OIL) May 2011 Litigation Bulletin covers the BIA’s clear error standard of review, the Supreme Court’s consideration of whether tax crimes other than tax evasion may be aggravated felonies, proposed changes to the EB-5 Program, and more.
CA9 Affirms Oh v. Gonzales, Says 30-Day Appeal Deadline Is Not Jurisdictional
Finding no ambiguity, the court refused to apply Brand X and Chevron deference to the BIA’s decision in Liadov and concluded that the 30 day deadline for appeals under 8 CFR §1003.38 is not jurisdictional. (Irigoyen-Briones v. Holder, 5/31/11)
CA2 Remands for BIA Clarification on the Concept of Legitimation
In a case involving a claim for derivative citizenship, the court remanded to the BIA to clarify how it interprets “legitimation” under INA §101(c)(1) and to explain how its understanding of legitimation applies to Jamaican law. (Watson v. Holder, 5/31/11)
CA2 Asks BIA to Reconsider Continuance for Arriving Alien
In a case involving an arriving alien adjustment of status, the court found that the BIA erred in denying Petitioner’s continuance on the ground that it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate adjustment applications for arriving aliens. (Freire v. Holder, 5/27/11)
BIA Finds Conviction for Violating Kansas No-Contact Provision Is a Removable Offense
The BIA held that a conviction for violation of the no-contact provision of a protection order issued under the Kansas Protection from Abuse Act constitutes a removable offense under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(ii). Matter of Strydom, 25 I&N Dec. 507 (BIA 2011)
H.R. 1932 Keep Our Communities Safe Act of 2011 (Updated 7/15/11)
H.R. 1932, Keep Our Communities Safe Act, expands the use of detention for individuals who are in removal proceedings and who cannot be deported. The bill would also radically restructure the judicial review process for those in detention.
AILA Testimony on Detention Bill Submitted to House Immigration Subcommittee
AILA testimony submitted on 6/1/11 to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement for the 5/24/11 hearing on H.R.1932, the “Keep Our Communities Safe Act of 2011.”
House Judiciary Committee Hearing on Impact of Zadvydas v. Davis
Testimony from the 5/24/11 hearing before the House Judiciary Committee titled “H.R.1932, the Keep Our Communities Safe Act of 2011” including discussion on the impact of Zadvydas v. Davis on ICE detentions.
CA4 Says Inconclusive Conviction Record Is Insufficient to Meet Cancellation Burden
The court rejected the argument that Petitioner satisfied his burden of proof to demonstrate he had not been convicted of an aggravated felony by presenting an inconclusive, though complete, record of conviction. (Salem v. Holder, 5/24/11)
H.R. 1932 Keep Our Communities Safe Act of 2011
Legislation from Rep. Lamar Smith that would strip important due process protections of harmless individuals by needlessly increasing the government’s already broad authority to detain noncitizens.
AILA Denounces House Detention Bill
AILA press statement on upcoming House hearing to discuss H.R. 1932, a bill that would strip important due process protections of harmless individuals by needlessly increasing the government’s already broad authority to detain noncitizens.
CA8 Remands for BIA Finding on Equitable Tolling of MTR Deadline
The court remanded for the BIA to determine whether the motion deadline is equitably tolled based on ineffective assistance of counsel, and if so, to rule on the motion whether on the basis of the departure bar or other grounds. (Ortega-Marroquin v. Holder, 5/23/11)