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 Upholds Removal of Petitioner for Falsely Claiming U.S. Citizenship to Gain Private Employment
CA5 held that private sector employment is a “purpose or benefit” under the INA and thus a person who falsely claims U.S. citizenship in order to gain such employment is inadmissible under INA §212(a)(6)(C)(ii)(I) and removable under INA §237(a)(3)(D)(i). (Theodros v. Gonzales, 6/25/07)
BIA Discusses “Mixed Motive” Asylum Cases
The BIA held that under the REAL ID Act, in mixed motive asylum cases, race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion must be at least one central reason for the claimed persecution. Matter of J-B-N- & S-M-, 24 I&N Dec. 208 (BIA 2007)
CA9 Finds Jurisdiction Over Habeas Appeal Filed After REAL ID’s Enactment
The court held that a habeas petition is “pending” in district court within the meaning of §106(c) of the REAL ID Act, when the notice of appeal was not filed at the time the Act was enacted, but was filed within the 60-day period. (Singh v. Gonzales, 6/25/07)
CA9 Holds USC Grandchild is Not a Qualifying Relative for Cancellation of Removal
CA9 held that a U.S. citizen grandchild, in the lawful custody of non-citizen grandparents, does not meet the statutory definition of “child” for purposes of cancellation of removal, nor do they qualify by virtue of a de facto parent-child relationship. (Moreno-Morante v. Gonzales, 6/21/07)
CA2 Remands to Allow Petitioner to Respond to Administratively Noticed Facts
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in denying Petitioner’s motion to reopen based solely on administratively noticed facts, without giving Petitioner an opportunity to rebut the inferences drawn from those facts. (Chhetry v. DOJ, 6/20/07)
CA3 Holds Husband May Stand in Shoes of Wife in Population Control Case
The court upheld the BIA’s determination that one spouse’s qualifications for asylum may be imputed to the other spouse in coercive population control claims. (Chen v. Att’y Gen. of U.S., 6/20/07)
CA5 Discusses 120-Day Clock for Naturalization Adjudications Under INA §336(b)
The court held that when a CIS naturalization examination is premature because the FBI check is not complete, the 120-day period of INA §336(b) does not begin to run until CIS receives the FBI’s “definitive response,” as required by 8 CFR §335.2(b). (Walji v. Gonzales, 6/19/07)
BIA Discusses Waivers of Inadmissibility for LPRs
The BIA held that a returning lawful permanent resident seeking to overcome a ground of inadmissibility is not required to apply for adjustment of status in conjunction with a waiver of inadmissibility under section 212(h). Matter of Abosi, 24 I&N Dec. 204 (BIA 2007)
CA11 Remands Denial of MTR by Chinese Asylum Applicant with 2 USC Children
The court held that in light of the record, it was arbitrary and capricious for the BIA to find that Petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case for asylum or withholding based on the birth of two children in the US. (Li v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 6/18/07)
CA5 Finds No Equal Protection Violation in Refusing to Give Effect to Foreign Expungement
CA5 held no equal protection violation in refusing to treat a foreign conviction, which had been expunged under England’s Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, in the same manner as it would have treated a conviction expunged under the FFOA. (Danso v. Gonzales, 6/15/07)
CA6 Remands Asylum Denial in Iraqi Case and Criticizes Conduct of IJ
The court held that, based on the IJ’s conduct and its effect on Petitioner’s ability to testify accurately, it could not conclude that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was based on substantial evidence. (Elias v. Gonzales, 6/15/07)
CA6 Finds Chinese Labor Activist Was Persecuted for His Political Opinion
In reversing the IJ, the court found that Petitioner was persecuted not merely as a striker protesting his potential loss of employment, but as a political activist attempting to expose corruption by government officials and to protect workers’ interests. (Bu v. Gonzales, 6/15/07)
CA6 Finds IJ Jurisdiction Over Portability Determinations Under INA §204(j)
CA6 held that IJs have jurisdiction over I-140 portability determinations under INA §204(j), and that in the context of an adjustment application, the IJ can consider inadmissibility for misrepresentation, even if that ground was not charged in the NTA. (Matovski v. Gonzales, 6/15/07)
CA3 Finds BIA Erred in Applying Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Standard
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in denying the motion to reopen and used this case to “clarify the analytical framework for claims of ineffective assistance of counsel in removal proceedings.” (Fadiga v. Att’y Gen. of U.S., 6/15/07)
CA9 Rejects Polygraph Results and Medical Exam in MTR Indian Asylum Claim
CA9 held that polygraph evidence is not evidence that was previously unavailable within the meaning of 8 CFR §1003.2(c). The court also refused to consider a medical report regarding Petitioner’s scars for the same reason. (Goel v. Gonzales, 6/14/07)
CA2 on “Lawfully Admitted for Permanent Residence” in §212(c) Context
The court held that a person who obtains lawful permanent resident status by fraud or mistake has not been “lawfully admitted for permanent residence” for purposes of relief under former INA §212(c). (De La Rosa v. DHS, 6/13/07)
CA4 Finds Withholding Claim Cannot Be Based on Psychological Harm Alone
The court held that a withholding claim cannot rely solely on psychological harm, but must establish injury or a threat of injury to the applicant’s person or freedom. (Niang v. Gonzales, 6/12/07)
CA9 Rejects Negative Inference without Credibility Finding in Asylum Claim
The court found the IJ erred in relying on the negative inference drawn from Petitioner’s refusal to allow access to his Canadian immigration file. The court held that the IJ failed to make an express credibility determination, or to analyze Petitioner’s claim. (Singh v. Gonzales, 6/12/07)
CA7 Remands Chinese Claim for Ruling on Severity of Economic Sanctions
The court noted that the BIA is entitled to respond to normal country conditions but remanded the case for consideration of the financial penalties used when couples have two or more children and whether those amount to force. (Chen v. Gonzales, 6/11/07)
ICE Agent Affidavit in Support of Complaint Against Defendant Arrested Prior to Action Rags Raid
This document is an ICE Special Agent affidavit in support of a criminal complaint filed against an individual arrested prior to the Action Rags factory raid in Houston.
BIA Finds Parent with Two Chinese-Born Children May Qualify as a Refugee
The BIA held that a person who fathers or gives birth to two or more children in China may qualify as a refugee if established that the births are a violation of family planning policies that would give rise to a well-founded fear of persecution. Matter of J-H-S-, 24 I&N Dec. 196 (BIA 2007)
BIA Finds No Well-founded Fear for Chinese Parent with Second Child
The BIA held that the evidence did not demonstrate the Chinese has a national policy of requiring forced sterilization of a parent who returns with a second child born abroad or that local sanctions would rise to the level of persecution. Matter of J-W-S-, 24 I&N Dec. 185 (BIA 2007)
District Court Issues Amended Order in Proyecto San Pablo v. INS
On June 6, 2007, the District Court for the District of Arizona issued an amended order in the Proyecto San Pablo v. INS case.
CA2 Says INA §240A Precludes Cancellation of Removal for Those Granted INA §212(c) Relief
The court held that the plain language of INA §240A(a)(3) precludes a noncitizen with an aggravated felony conviction from receiving cancellation of removal, and that INA §240A(c)(6) bars simultaneous relief under both INA §212(c) and INA §240A. (Peralta-Traveras v. Attorney General, 6/6/07)
CA2 Upholds Negative Credibility Due to Similar I-589 in Different Case
The court held that an IJ may consider “inter-proceeding” similarities in asylum applications in making a credibility determination and found that the IJ was reasonable in relying on these similarities because of his rigorous approach. (Ye v. Gonzales, 6/6/07)