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
AILF/AILA Comment on EOIR's Proposed Rule to Amend Voluntary Departure Regulations
AILF and AILA submitted comments to EOIR's proposed rule on voluntary departure. The proposed rule provides that the filing of a motion to reopen or reconsider of a petition for review automatically terminates the grant of voluntary departure.
Human Rights First Memo on Amendments to “Terrorism Bars” and Related Waivers Under the INA
Human Rights First prepared this memo addressing amendments to the INA regarding terrorism inadmissibility grounds and DHS’s discretion to issue waivers. Thank you to Human Rights First for providing this memo.
CA2 on §245(i) and Chinese Student Protection Act
The court found reasonable the BIA’s holding that INA §245(i) does not provide an avenue for renewing or amending a Chinese Student Protection Act adjustment application that was previously denied because the applicant EWIed. (Lin v. BCIS, 1/28/08)
CA5 Says No “Dangerousness” Exception to Zadvydas’ Indefinite Detention Bar for Mentally Ill
CA5 held that INA §241(a)(6), as construed by Zadvydas, does not authorize potentially indefinite detention of a removable alien based on a determination by the government that the alien’s mental illness renders him a dangerous risk to the community. (Tran v. Mukasey, 1/28/08)
CA11 Finds BIA Abuse of Discretion for Failure to Follow Precedent in Denying In Absentia Motion
The BIA’s failure to follow its own precedent or offer a reasoned explanation for failing to do so when ruling on Petitioner’s motion to reopen was an abuse of discretion. (Cisneros v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 1/28/08)
CA9 Finds Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Without Strict Adherence to Lozada
CA9 held that where an attorney was suspended after failing to respond to prior charges, failure to inform counsel of the accusations or file a complaint as required by Lozada would be futile and does not bar an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. (Apolinar v. Mukasey, 1/24/08)
CA7 Reaffirms Valere and the §212(c) “Comparable Grounds” Test
CA7 reaffirmed its holding in Valere v. Gonzales that removability for an aggravated felony involving sexual abuse of a minor is not waiveable under former INA §212(c) because there is no comparable ground of inadmissibility under INA §212(a). (Zamora-Mallari v. Mukasey, 1/24/08)
CA2 Upholds IJ’s Negative Credibility Finding Based on False Document
The court found that the IJ’s determination that Petitioner’s Pakistani Peoples Party card was invalid was a proper basis for discrediting his testimony. (Zaman v. Mukasey, 1/23/08)
CA9 Holds Forgery Under Cal. Penal Code §475(c) is Not Categorically an Aggravated Felony
The court held that Cal. Penal Code §475(c) encompasses conduct involving real, unaltered documents and is therefore not categorically an offense “relating to…forgery” under INA §101(a)(43)(R). (Vizcarra-Ayala v. Mukasey, 1/23/08)
Tacoma Immigration Court to Operate Independently from Seattle
On 1/22/08 EOIR announced that the Tacoma Immigration Court will begin operations as a court separate from the Seattle Immigration Court in late January. The change will affect detainees at the Northwest Detention Center.
CA9 Holds Fourth Degree Assault Under WA Law is not Categorically a Crime of Violence
The court held that a conviction for fourth degree assault in violation of Wash. Rev. Code §9A.36.041 is not categorically an aggravated felony “crime of violence” under INA §101(a)(43)(F). (Perez v. Mukasey, 1/22/08)
CA11 Rejects Togolese Asylum Claim Based on Brief Detention
The court sua sponte vacated its earlier decision, making no substantive changes. The court upheld the BIA’s finding that Petitioner failed to establish that his 36-hour detention amounted to past persecution. (Djonda v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 1/22/08)
CA11 Holds Georgia Simple Battery is an Aggravated Felony “Crime of Violence”
The court held that a conviction for simple battery in violation of Ga. Code Ann. §16-5-23(a)(2), which criminalizes the act of intentionally causing physical harm to another, is an aggravated felony. (Hernandez v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 1/18/08)
CA11 Finds Persecutor Bar Applies to Guard at Forced Abortion Facility
The court held that the standard for determining whether an applicant is ineligible for asylum and withholding due to assistance or participation in persecution is whether his or her conduct was active, direct and integral to the underlying persecution. (Chen v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 1/17/08)
BIA Finds “Theft Offense” Not Within the Definition of Aggravated Felony
The BIA held that the respondent’s welfare fraud offense is not a “theft offense” within the INA’s definition of an aggravated felony. Matter of Garcia-Madruga, 24 I&N Dec. 436 (BIA 2008)
CA11 Upholds Regulation Governing Jurisdiction Over Adjustment for Arriving Aliens
The court held that 8 CFR §1245.2(a)(1), which gives USCIS jurisdiction over most adjustment of status applications by arriving aliens in removal proceedings, is a valid interpretation of INA §245(a). (Scheerer v. Chertoff, 1/15/08)
CA9 Amends Kalouma Decision re: Proof of Identity in Asylum Claims
In response to a petition for rehearing by the government, the court amended its 08/28/07 decision (AILA Doc. No. 07101260) with a few additional paragraphs of analysis. The court rejected the government’s reliance on Farah v. Ashcroft. (Kalouma v. Gonzales, 1/15/08)
CA9 Holds CA Hit and Run Statute is Not Categorically a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
The court held that a violation of Cal. Vehicle Code §20001(a), leaving the scene of an accident resulting in bodily injury or death, is not categorically a crime involving moral turpitude. (Cerezo v. Mukasey, 1/14/08)
CA7 Finds IJ “Cared Little about the Evidence” in Nigerian CAT Claim
The court found that the flaws in the IJ’s reasoning made it question the fairness of the hearing, and that the IJ failed to consider rebuttal evidence regarding whether Petitioner’s crimes were aggravated felonies. (Bosede v. Mukasey, 1/14/08)
ICE Releases Family Residential Detention Standards
ICE posted family residential detention standards on its website. AILA Doc. No. 08011464.
CA11 Finds “Courage Does Not Negate Fear” in Colombian Asylum Claim
The court vacated the IJ’s finding that Petitioner, a Colombian lawyer, failed to show a well-founded fear. The court found that she had shown past persecution and was entitled to a rebuttable presumption. (Santamaria v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 1/11/08)
IJ’s Decision Must Contain Explicit Order of Removal When Withholding Granted Without Asylum
The BIA held that when an IJ issues a decision granting an alien’s application for withholding of removal, without a grant of asylum, the decision must include an explicit order of removal. Matter of I-S- & C-S-, 24 I&N Dec. 432 (BIA 2008)
ICE Memo: Involuntary Sedation of Immigration Detainees
This January 9, 2008, ICE memo requires a federal district court order before the Division of Immigration Health Services can administer involuntary sedation to individuals subject to deportation.
CA1 Holds Attempted Conscription by FARC Is Not a Basis for Asylum
The court held that coercive conscription by the FARC did not trigger an entitlement to asylum, where conscription might be motivated by the desire to fill their ranks and the target might resist for non-political motives. (Tobon-Marin v. Mukasey, 1/8/08)
CA7 Denied Claim Based on Identity Theft and Failure to Prove Homosexuality
The court held that Petitioner’s convictions for identity theft were properly characterized as aggravated felonies. It also rejected his withholding claim based on homosexuality, due to incredible testimony and lack of corroborating evidence. (Eke v. Mukasey, 1/7/08)