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
CA4 Reverses BIA, Remands MS-13 Asylum Claim
The court found that the BIA’s determination that “family members of those who actively oppose gangs in El Salvador by agreeing to be prosecutorial witnesses” was not a particular social group, was manifestly contrary to law. (Crespin-Valladares v. Holder, 2/16/11)
CA1 Says Expedited Removal Breaks Physical Presence for Cancellation
The court denied the petition for review, finding the BIA’s determination that an expedited removal order halts continuous physical presence for purposes of cancellation of removal was reasonable. (Vasquez v. Holder, 2/16/11)
Lopez-Mendoza, Motions to Suppress, and Tolentino
AILA Amicus Committee alert on INS v. Lopez-Mendoza and its impact on Tolentino v. NY, a case that explores whether pre-existing identity-related governmental documents, obtained through police action violative of the Fourth Amendment, are subject to the exclusionary rule.
CA6 Remands, Finding Past Persecution in Sierra Leone Withholding Claim
The court held that the record established that Petitioner was targeted for his political opinion when his house was burned down, and the totality of the circumstances, including his son’s murder, satisfies a finding of past persecution. (Vincent v. Holder, 2/15/11)
CA7 Upholds Use of Collateral Estoppel in Removal Case of Former Nazi
The court denied the petition for review, finding that Petitioner was afforded a full and fair opportunity to litigate his claims in denaturalization proceedings, and upheld the IJ’s application of the collateral estoppel doctrine. (Firishchak v. Holder, 2/14/11)
CA9 Remands VAWA Special-Rule Cancellation Case
The court held that the mistreatment of Petitioner’s children by their LPR father constituted battery, a heightened level of violence is not required, and the IJ erred in relying on state law to determine what constitutes battery. (Lopez-Birrueta v. Holder, 2/14/11)
DHS Secretary Napolitano Announces FY2012 Budget Request
DHS press release on Secretary Napolitano’s unveiling of the FY2012 budget request. The press release breaks down FY2012 budget priorities, such as securing and managing U.S. borders, as well as enforcing and administering immigration laws, and links to a fact sheet.
CA1 Upholds Denial of Asylum for Coptic Christian from Egypt
The court found (1) the harm Petitioner suffered did not rise to the level of persecution; (2) a lack of connection between the harm and government action or inaction; and (3) no nexus to show that the harm was on account of his religion. (Morgan v. Holder, 2/11/11)
CA9 Rejects Equal Protection Challenge to 10-Year Non-LPR Cancellation Rule
The court found a rational basis for requiring 10 years continuous residence with exceptions for certain absences, as opposed to a total-number-of-days requirement where Petitioners fell short of 10 years by only a few weeks. (Hernandez-Mancilla v. Holder, 2/10/11)
USCIS Final Memo on Coordinating Adjudications for Individuals in Removal Proceedings
USCIS 2/8/11 final policy memo provides guidance for coordination with ICE on the adjudication of applications and petitions for individuals in removal proceedings. The final memo supersedes an interim memo for comment on this subject posted by USCIS on 2/8/11.
CA11 on Aggravated Felony Bar to §212(h) Waivers
The bar to a §212(h) waiver for a person who has “previously been admitted” as an LPR and has been convicted of an aggravated felony since such admission, does not apply to persons who adjusted to LPR status in the U.S. (Lanier v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 2/4/11)
USCIS Memo on Handling Applications for Individuals in Removal Proceedings
A 2/4/11 USCIS interim memo for comment on guidance for coordination with ICE on the adjudication of applications and petitions involving individuals in removal proceedings before EOIR. Memo follows instructions, and is in effect until further notice. Comments due 2/22/11.
CA9 Upholds Jury Verdict Against Arizona Rancher for Assault and IIED
The court upheld the verdict in favor of 4 immigrants on claims of assault and intentional infliction of emotional distress against an Arizona rancher. The case was presided over by the late Chief Judge (D. Ariz.), John Roll. (Vicente v. Barnett, unpublished, 2/3/11)
CA9 Finds IJ Abused Discretion in Refusing Continuance
Applying Matter of Hashmi, the court remanded the case to the IJ to afford Petitioner the opportunity to apply for adjustment, noting that USCIS delay in adjudicating I-130s is no reason to deny a reasonable continuance request. (Malilia v. Holder, 2/3/11)
CA6 Says “Departure Bar” to Motions to Reopen Is Not a Jurisdictional Rule
The court held that 8 CFR §1003.2(d) is not a jurisdictional rule, and therefore, the BIA may not disclaim jurisdiction to review Petitioner’s motion to reopen, which was filed after he departed the United States under an order of removal. (Pruidze v. Holder, 2/3/11)
BIA Overrules Matter of Shanu Regarding “Date of Admission” for CIMT Removability
The BIA held that a conviction for a CIMT triggers removability under INA §237(a)(2)(A)(i) only if the crime was committed within five years of the date of the admission by virtue of which the alien was then in the U.S. Matter of Alyazji, 25 I&N Dec. 397 (BIA 2011)
CA5 Refuses Stand-Alone §212(h) Waiver for Deportable Person
The court rejected the argument that a §212(h) waiver may stand alone, and found that the BIA properly determined that Petitioner was ineligible for a waiver because he was inside the U.S. and had not also filed for adjustment of status. (Cabral v. Holder, 2/2/11)
Call for Experiences with the Adam Walsh Act
AILA Amicus Committee alert on the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act and issues that still need clarification from USCIS. Committee also ask members to share their experiences with these cases.
EOIR FY2010 Statistical Year Book
EOIR's FY2010 Statistical Year Book includes a compilation of figures and tables on individuals who have appeared before an immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals.
TRAC Report on Federal Criminal Enforcement
The Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) released a report on federal criminal enforcement and staffing showing a sharp increase in federal immigration prosecutions between FY2007 and FY2010 in districts along the Southwest border and those away from the border.
Immigration Law Advisor, January 2011 (Vol. 5, No. 1)
Immigration Law Advisor, a legal publication from EOIR, with an article on the venue for immigration appeals in the U.S. circuit courts and why the venue matters, circuit court decisions for December 2010 and calendar year 2010 totals, and article on “parole,” and a regulatory update.
DOJ OIL January 2011 Litigation Bulletin
DOJ Office of Immigration Litigation January 2011 Litigation Bulletin covers citizenship laws around the world, the launch of the Human Trafficking Enhanced Enforcement Initiative, the constitutional right to a hearing for a VWP entrant, updates, summaries, and more.
CA2 Asks BIA to Clarify “Aggravating Circumstances” Standard in Forced IUD Case
The court vacated Matter of M-F-W-, and remanded to the BIA to articulate the standard it applied in determining that aggravating circumstances did not exist to raise Petitioner’s forced IUD insertion to the level of persecution. (Wong v. Holder, 2/1/11)
CA9 Finds No Nexus to Political Opinion in Indian Asylum Claim
The court found that the harm Petitioner suffered at the hands of the Indian police was motivated by the desire to stop publication of Petitioner’s father’s book, rather than to persecute Petitioner for his political opinion. (Sharma v. Holder, 2/1/11)
CA3 on Prosecution vs. Persecution
The court denied the petition for review, finding insufficient evidence that the prosecution of Petitioner by the Chinese government for assisting illegal immigrants from North Korea would be based on his political opinion. (Li v. Att’y Gen. of the U.S., 2/1/11)