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 on IJ/BIA Jurisdiction Over Motions to Reopen
The court found that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in holding that Petitioner’s appeal from the IJ’s denial of her first motion to reopen deprived the IJ of jurisdiction to adjudicate a subsequent motion to reopen. (Lemus-Reyes v. Holder, 2/28/11)
CA7 Upholds Denial of Lebanese Asylum Claim
The court found that the IJ properly considered Petitioner’s Hezbollah-related claim, did not ignore his future persecution claims, and applied the correct standard of review in denying asylum. (Kiorkis v. Holder, 2/28/11)
AILA's Pro Bono Newsletter, Winter 2011
In the Winter 2011 Pro Bono Newsletter, get help in overcoming common obstacles to pro bono implementation and hear an Equal Justice Works fellow describe her experience working at a detention center in Texas.
CA2 Finds No Due Process Violation in Service of NTA on Minor
The court held that a defect in the service of a notice to appear on a minor alien under 8 CFR §103.5a(c)(2)(ii), standing alone, does not implicate the minor alien’s fundamental rights. (Nolasco v. Holder, 2/25/11)
CA2 on Illegal Entry and Reinstatement of Removal
The court upheld the reinstatement of removal under INA §241(a)(5), rejecting Petitioner’s argument that her re-entry into the United States using another person’s passport did not constitute an illegal entry for reinstatement purposes. (Beekhan v. Holder, 2/25/11)
USCIS Q&A for 2/24/11 Quarterly National Stakeholder Meeting
USCIS Q&A for its 2/24/11 quarterly national stakeholder meeting with agency program officers and directorates. Topics include fee waivers, the visa bulletin, asylee derivatives, RFE templates, H-1B cap exemptions, and more. Original invitation and agenda follow Q&A.
CA3 Says Withdrawal of Application for Admission Interrupted Physical Presence
Upon return from a trip to Canada, Petitioner knowingly withdrew his application for admission in lieu of a formal admissibility determination, such that his continuous presence was terminated for cancellation purposes. (Demandstein v. Att’y Gen. of the U.S., 2/24/11)
USCIS Memo on New TRIG Exemption for Solicitation
USCIS 2/23/11 policy memo guiding the implementation of a new discretionary exemption that authorizes USCIS not to apply the solicitation inadmissibility grounds to certain individuals who, under duress, solicited funds or members for a terrorist organization.
USCIS Memo on New TRIG Exemption for Military-Type Training
USCIS 2/23/11 policy memo guiding the implementation of a new discretionary exemption that authorizes USCIS not to apply the military-type training inadmissibility grounds to certain individuals who, under duress, received military-type training from a terrorist organization.
CA9 Remands, Discusses Adverse Credibility and Deliberate Fabrication
The court upheld the IJ’s adverse credibility determination as supported by substantial evidence, but found that the heightened requirements for determining that Petitioner’s application for asylum was frivolous were not met. (Liu v. Holder, 2/23/11)
BIA Remands for Analysis of Third Silva-Trevino Step
The BIA held that absent otherwise controlling authority, IJs and the BIA are bound to apply all three steps of the Silva-Trevino methodology for determining whether an offense constitutes a CIMT. Matter of Guevara Alfaro, 25 I&N Dec. 417 (BIA 2011)
AILA Comments on Coordination of USCIS and ICE on Cases in Proceedings
AILA’s comments in response to the USCIS interim memorandum on coordinating the adjudication of applications and petitions involving individuals in removal proceedings. Special thanks to Mary Kramer.
CA9 Upholds Removal of Palestinian Citizen with Alleged Ties to Hamas
The court held that the BIA’s determination that Petitioner was inadmissible in that he was likely to engage in terrorist activity or provide material support to a terrorist organization was supported by substantial evidence. (Abufayad v. Holder, 2/16/11)
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)
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.
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)
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.
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.
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)