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
CA9 Discusses Retroactivity of Cancellation of Removal Under INA §240A
CA9 held that Congress clearly intended to limit the availability of cancellation of removal under INA §240A to those who had not previously been granted relief under former §212(c). The court also held that §240A did not have a retroactive effect. (Maldonado-Galindo v. Gonzales, 8/3/06)
CA2 Finds Violation of Asylum Applicant’s Right to Confidentiality
The court held that the government violated 8 CFR §208.6 and rejected its post hoc rationale for the breach. The court also held that the adverse credibility finding, based on a consular report, was not supported by substantial evidence. (Lin v. Gonzales, 8/3/06)
CA1 on Burden of Showing Effect of Vacated Convictions
The court held that the BIA did not err in placing the burden on the petitioner to show that a conviction that was vacated after a final order of removal had been entered was vacated based on a procedural defect. (Rumierz v. Gonzales, 8/3/06)
President Bush on Comprehensive Immigration Reform in Texas
In an address on comprehensive immigration reform, President Bush discussed increased funding for border security, the end of "catch and release", worksite enforcement, documentation for temporary workers, and deportation.
BIA Holds Domestic Battery Not a CIMT or “Crime of Domestic Violence”
The BIA held that a conviction for domestic battery under the California Penal Code does not qualify categorically as a conviction for a “crime involving moral turpitude” under INA or, in Ninth Circuit removal proceedings, as a “crime of violence”. Matter of Sanudo, 23 I&N Dec. 968 (BIA 2006)
Outline for CBP Officer Basic Training Law Course
CBP student outline of the Officer Basic Training Law Course dated 8/1/06. Information discussed includes the Fourth Amendment, border searches, border crimes and violations, the role of a CBP officer, and more. Guidance obtained through the CBP FOIA Library.
CA3 Remands for Further Proceedings After Reversing In Absentia Removal Order Resulting from Slight Lateness
The court granted the petition for review after finding there was no failure to appear after petitioner arrived 15-20 minutes late and the in absentia order was entered in violation of petitioner’s right to due process. (Cabrera-Perez v. Gonzales, 8/1/06)
CA3 Finds “Fundamental Defect” in Reinstatement Proceedings
The court held that the INS’s failure to inform Appellant of his right to appeal his reinstatement order, combined with misleading language in the reinstatement notice was a fundamental defect which, if prejudicial, rendered the proceeding fundamentally unfair. (U.S. v. Charleswell, 8/1/06)
CA9 Holds Accessory After the Fact is Crime Involving Moral Turpitude
CA9 held that a conviction under California Penal Code §32, accessory after the fact, is a crime involving moral turpitude. Conviction requires a knowing, affirmative act to conceal a felony with the specific intent to hinder prosecution. (Navarro-Lopez v. Gonzales, 7/31/06)
TRAC Study on Immigration Judges and Requests for Asylum
Study from Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University focuses on the disparities between immigration judges, and between represented and unrepresented cases, in asylum decisionmaking.
BIA to Grant Fewer and Shorter Extensions of Initial Briefing Deadlines
Beginning 8/14/06, the BIA will grant fewer and shorter extensions of initial briefing deadlines in detainee cases.
CA7 Remands Asylum Claim For Lack of Analysis of in BIA Decision
The court found that, where the BIA’s one-sentence opinion assumed that Petitioner was credible but found that he had not met his burden of proof, the opinion lacked sufficient analysis to support the conclusion that the IJ and BIA’s errors were harmless. (Pramatarov v. Gonzales, 7/27/06)
CA2 Says Torture Does Not Include Deprivation of Property
The court reviewed the CAT regulations and found no indication that the definition of torture was intended to encompass destruction, thefts, expropriations, or other deprivations of property. (Jo v. Gonzales, 7/27/06)
CA3 Finds “Criminal Deportees” to Haiti Not a Particular Social Group
The court held that the BIA properly denied CAT protection because Petitioner did not demonstrate the specific intent element for torture and joined other circuits in finding that criminal deportees are not a social group. (Toussaint v. Atty. Gen. of U.S., 7/26/06)
Objection Letter to New BIA Extension Policy by CLINIC, AILF, CAIR, and NIP
Effective August 14, 2006, the BIA is reducing the time period granted for a briefing extension from 21 to 15 days for detained persons with cases before the BIA. CLINIC, AILF, the CAIR Coalition, and the National Immigration Project submitted a letter objecting to this new policy.
CA9 Finds Family Unity Is “Admitted in Any Status” for Cancellation Purposes
The court examined the plain meaning and legislative history of INA §240A, along with precedent, and concluded that acceptance into the Family Unity Program constituted “admitted in any status” for cancellation of removal purposes. (Garcia-Quintero v. Gonzales, 7/24/06)
CA11 BIA Erred in Denying Motion to Reopen Colombian Asylum Case
The court found that the evidence in the motion to reopen was unavailable at the time of Petitioner's previous hearing and called into question the credibility of a witness who was material to the IJ’s assessment of her claim. (Verano-Velasco v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 7/24/06)
CA8 Holds IJ Erred in Reopening Proceedings and Terminating Asylum
CA8 held that the IJ abused her discretion in reopening proceedings without explaining whether the documents in support of the motion were material and previously unavailable, and erred in terminating asylum based on documents that did not prove fraud. (Hailemichael v. Gonzales, 7/21/06)
AILA Position Paper on Civil Liberties Restoration Act
Many new policies since 9/11 have not enhanced our security and have eroded our civil liberties. AILA strongly supports the Civil Liberties Restoration Act, which seeks to roll back the most egregious post-9/11 policies and strike a balance between security needs and liberty interests.
AILA Backgrounder on Due Process, Civil Liberties, and Security
This updated AILA Backgrounder discusses the importance of upholding due process and civil liberties while enhancing our national security.
CA8 Holds Expedited Removal Proceedings Not Retroactive
The court held that the application of expedited removal procedures under INA §238(b) to Petitioner was not impermissibly retroactive. Petitioner’s failure to respond to the government’s NOI precluded court review of his due process claim. (Gonzalez v. Chertoff, 7/20/06)
CA2 Asks BIA to Clarify Standards for Economic Persecution
The court remanded for the BIA to clarify the standard it applied in determining that Petitioner’s treatment did not constitute economic persecution. (Mirzoyan v. Gonzales, 7/20/06)
CA3 Finds Refugee Who Adjusts to LPR Status Is Subject to Removal
The court concluded that the INA allows for a person who entered the country as a refugee and later adjusted his status to LPR to be placed in removal proceedings even though his refugee status was never terminated. (Romanishyn v. Atty. Gen. of U.S., 7/20/06)
CRS Issues Report Comparing Enforcement Provisions in H.R. 4437 and S.2611
Congressional Research Service report comparing enforcement provisions in H.R. 4437, S. 2611 and current law.
CA2 Overturns Adverse Credibility Finding in Forced Sterilization Case
The court held that the IJ’s finding that Petitioner failed to testify about his wife’s sterilization at his first asylum hearing did not support the IJ’s adverse credibility determination. (Kim v. Gonzales, 7/19/06)