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
Testimony on Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security
On 4/2/08, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary held a hearing on “Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security.”
AILA/USCIS Q & As (4/2/08)
The Q & As address multi-year EADs and Advance Parole docs, H-1B1 cap, the DV lottery and 245 processing, K-3 processing, replacing a lost I-94 card, I-130s for beneficiaries in removal, premium processing, the I-9 Handbook, H-1B portability, VAWA, CSPA, EB-5s, I-751s and much more.
Immigration Law Advisor, March 2008 (Vol. 2, No. 3)
Immigration Law Advisor with an article on burden of proof and voluntariness under persecutor bars to asylum-based relief, federal court activity for February 2008, an article on recent trends on CIMTs, aggravated felonies, and relief, BIA precedent decisions, and a regulatory update.
Vera Institute Paper on Unaccompanied Children
The Vera Institute of Justice provides a literature review, which examines articles by an assortment of scholars, advocates, and practicing attorneys, provides an overview of the published research on unaccompanied children in the United States within a legal and historical context.
CA9 Refuses to Allow VWP Entrant to Contest Removal Through Adjustment of Status
The court held that a Visa Waiver Pilot entrant may not contest removal through adjustment of status, where he was neither eligible for adjustment of status, nor had filed the adjustment application within the 90-day period of authorized stay. (Momeni v. Chertoff, 3/31/08)
CA1 Upholds Adverse Credibility Over Dissent
The court upheld the adverse credibility finding, where discrepancies were clearly present and went to the heart of the claim. The dissent faulted the court for condoning a policy of blindsiding applicants with adverse credibility findings. (Cuko v. Mukasey, 3/31/08)
CA8 Finds Notice Properly Served on Fourteen Year Old
CA8 finds that BIA reasonably concluded that Petitioner, who was 14 years old at the relevant time, was properly served and that 8 CFR §103.5a(c)(2)(ii) does not violate due process. (Llapa-Sinchi v. Mukasey, 3/28/08)
CA7 Upholds Removability for Distribution of a Look-Alike Substance Under IL Law
CA7 found sufficient connection between look-alike substances and actual controlled substances and held that a conviction for unlawful delivery of a look-alike substance in violation of Illinois law was a violation of a state law relating to a controlled substance. (Desai v. Mukasey, 3/28/08)
CA2 Remands for Reconsideration of Derivative Citizenship Claim
The court held that an inexplicable delay in processing a parent’s naturalization application should not defeat a derivative citizenship claim. (Poole v. Mukasey, 3/27/08)
CA2 Rejects Vagueness Challenge to INA Stalking Provision
The court held that INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i), which renders deportable a person who has been convicted of a crime of stalking, is not void for vagueness on its face or as applied to Petitioner. (Arriaga v. Mukasey, 3/27/08)
CA3 Finds Error in Application of National Security Bar
The court found that the AG ignored clear congressional intent by inquiring whether an applicant “may pose” a danger to the security of the U.S. instead of asking whether he “is” a danger in considering the national security bar. (Yusupov v. Att’y Gen. of U.S., 3/27/08)
CA1 Upholds Adverse Credibility Finding Under REAL ID Analysis
The court found internal inconsistencies in Petitioner’s testimony and rejected Petitioner’s contention that the contradictions were minor. (Lin v. Mukasey, 3/26/08)
BIA Finds Alternative Proof of Ghanaian Divorce To Be Valid
The BIA held that while a court order remains the preferred method of establishing a divorce for a customary tribal marriage under Ghanaian law, affidavits executed by heads of household that meet evidentiary requirements may be sufficient. Matter of Francis Kodwo, 24 I&N Dec. 479 (BIA 2008)
CA9 Finds Adjustment Unavailable to Persons Who Enter the U.S. by Fraudulent Means
The court held that Petitioner, who obtained entry into the United States by presenting an identification that was not his own to an immigration officer, was statutorily ineligible for adjustment of status under INA §245(a). (Orozco v. Mukasey, 3/25/08)
Supreme Court Finds State Law Not Pre-empted by Presidential Memo or Avena
The Supreme Court found that neither the ICJ's decision in Avena, nor a Presidential Memo, constitute directly enforceable federal law that pre-empts state limitations on the filing of successive habeas petitions. (Medellin v. Texas, 3/25/08)
Stakeholder/USCIS Q & As (3/25/08)
The Q & As address I-589 nunc pro tunc application filing procedures, material support, repeat requests for fingerprints, filing fees for adjustment applications in proceedings that are later administratively closed, Child Status Protection Act, Fee waivers, DV 90 Day filing procedures, and more.
CA9 Remands Asylum Claim where IJ Failed to Make Credibility Finding
The court held that the IJ erred by failing to make a credibility finding, noting that instances where the IJ has conflated an adverse credibility finding with an adverse decision on the merits have been appearing before the court with increasing frequency. (Huang v. Mukasey, 3/24/08)
CA3 Refuses to Impute Parent’s Continuous Residence to Minor
The court held that the BIA did not err in refusing to impute to a person who entered the U.S. as a minor, the parent’s prior years of continuous residence for purposes of cancellation of removal. (Augustin v. Att’y Gen. of the U.S., 3/20/08)
Opportunity to House an EOIR Legal Orientation Program Attorney
The Vera Institute of Justice seeks letters of intent from nonprofits that are interested in hosting an EOIR Legal Orientation Program attorney at their site. The goal is to educate detained individuals in removal proceedings so they can make more informed decisions.
CA9 Finds Possession with Intent to Sell Marijuana is an Aggravated Felony
Amendement to decision in Rendon v. Mukasey, 2/15/08. (Rendon v. Mukasey, 3/19/08)
CA8 Discusses False Claim to U.S. Citizenship as it Pertains to Form I-9
The court held that a person who marks the “citizen or national of the United States” box on Form I-9 to secure employment with a private employer has falsely represented himself for a benefit or purpose under the Act under INA §212(a)(6)(C)(ii)(I). (Rodriguez v. Mukasey, 3/19/08)
CA7 Finds IJ Erred in Rejecting Asylum Claim of Albanian Whistleblower
CA7 found it premature for the IJ to only analyze Petitioner’s activities during his military service. The court also found that it was not decisive that the corruption of which Petitioner complained did not pervade every level of the Albanian government. (Haxhiu v. Mukasey, 3/19/08)
Supreme Court Grants Certiorari to Consider Persecutor Bar to Asylum
On March 17, 2008, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to decide whether a person who was compelled, against his will, to assist or take part in persecution is barred from asylum under the persecutor bar. (Negusie v. Holder)
CA8 Finds No Jurisdiction to Review the BIA’s Refusal to Self-Certify an Untimely Appeal
The court held that the BIA’s refusal to take jurisdiction over an untimely appeal through the self-certification process was an unreviewable action committed to the agency's discretion.(Liadov v. Mukasey, 3/14/08)
CA8 Upholds BIA Denial of MTR Afghan CAT Claim Based on Changed Conditions
In addressing Petitioner’s constitutional claim that the BIA failed to consider the country reports and affidavit submitted with his motion to reopen, the court held the record did not support his claim because the BIA specifically mentioned them.(Hanan v. Mukasey, 3/14/08)