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
CA3 Affirms Removability Based on Terrorist Activity of Former INLA Member
The court concluded that the criminal bar to review did not apply and affirmed the BIA’s conclusions that Petitioner was removable for engaging in terrorist activity under INA §237(a)(4)(B) and was ineligible for asylum, withholding, and deferral of removal. (McAllister v. Gonzales, 4/10/06)
CA2 Finds Changed Conditions in Pakistani Christian Case
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in refusing to reopen based on worsening country conditions and that an applicant may prevail on future persecution despite an adverse credibility determination as to past persecution. (Paul v. Gonzales, 4/6/06)
Michael Creppy to be Chief Administrative Hearing Officer
Chief Immigration Judge Michael Creppy will become Chief Administrative Hearing Officer at OCAHO on 4/24/06.
BIA Rules on Retroactivity of IIRIRA Unlawful Presence Ten-Year Bar
The BIA held that no period of an alien’s presence in the United States prior to 4/1/97 may be considered “unlawful presence” for purposes of determining whether the alien is inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. Section 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II). Matter of Raul-Rodarte, 23 I&N Dec. 902 (BIA 2006)
CBP Issues Fraud and Misrepresentation Threshold Guidance
CBP issued a memo to provide guidance to the field on what properly constitutes a sustainable charge of fraud or misrepresentation within the statute of 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the INA.
CA3 Rejects IJ’s Numerous Adverse Findings as Speculative in Asylum Claim from Cote d’Ivoire
The court held that substantial evidence did not support the IJ’s finding that the harm to Petitioner was not sufficiently severe to constitute persecution, and the IJ failed to apply the BIA’s three-part inquiry on corroboration. (Toure v. Gonzales, 4/5/06)
CA9 Requires Case-Specific Decision on Whether Sexual Abuse of a Minor AgFel Constitutes a Particularly Serious Crime
The court held that INA §242(a)(2)(B) did not preclude review of whether the BIA applied the proper legal standards in evaluating whether a crime was particularly serious so as to render Petitioner ineligible for withholding. (Afridi v. Gonzales, 4/4/06)
CA2 Vacates Conviction for Illegal Re-entry After Deportation
The court held that the IJ and BIA’s erroneous information on the availability of §212(c) was “a powerful deterrent from seeking judicial relief,” which deprived Petitioner of a realistic opportunity to obtain review. (U.S. v. Lopez, 4/4/06)
CA6 Finds IJ Violated Petitioner’s Due Process Rights by Relying on Hearsay Department of State Memoranda
The court found that the IJ’s reliance on two DOS memoranda to conclude that Petitioner’s documents were fraudulent violated Petitioner’s due process rights and vacated the IJ’s finding of a frivolous asylum claim. (Alexandrov v. Gonzales, 4/4/06)
CA8 Finds IJ Erred in Failing to Determine Whether Ethiopian Asylum-Seeker Suffered Past Persecution
CA8 noted that IJ’s denial of asylum was based solely on his holding that Petitioner did not have a subjectively genuine fear of future persecution, and that the IJ did not state specific cogent reasons for disbelieving Petitioner’s past persecution testimony. (Bushira v. Gonzales, 4/4/06)
CA9 Upholds Aggravated Felony Finding; Remands on §209(c) Waiver
CA9 held an Oregon conviction for 3d degree rape constitutes an aggravated felony. The IJ erred by applying the heightened Matter of Jean standard to the §209(c)application without determining if the conviction was for a “violent or dangerous” crime. (Rives-Gomez v. Gonzales, 4/3/06)
Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in Cases Raising Issue of Whether Drug Possession is An Aggravated Felony
On 4/3/06, the Court granted cert in two cases - a civil immigration case and a criminal sentencing case - addressing whether a state felony possession conviction can constitute an aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(B). (Lopez v. Gonzales; Toledo-Flores v. U.S.)
DHS/ICE Proposes to Exempt Portions of New Records System from Privacy Act Provisions
In this proposed rulemaking, DHS/ICE proposes to exempt portions of a new system of records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil and administrative enforcement requirements. (71 FR 16519, 4/3/06)
CA7 Holds BIA Did Not Abuse Its Discretion by Denying Motion to Reopen South African Asylum Case
CA7 upheld the BIA’s rulings that Petitioners failed to demonstrate due diligence in filing their motions to reopen and failed to show that conditions in South Africa had changed for persons of Indian ancestry between the time of the decision and the motion. (Patel v. Gonzales, 3/30/06)
CA8 Holds That Whether A Marriage Is Entered Into In “Good Faith” Is A Non-reviewable Discretionary Determination
CA8 concluded that because the IJ’s denial of a waiver of the joint petition requirement hinged on an adverse credibility determination, whether the marriage was entered in good faith was a discretionary determination under INA §216(c)(4) and not reviewable. (Suvorov v. Gonzales, 3/28/06)
CA5 Holds That A Timely Motion to Reopen Does Not Automatically Toll the Voluntary Departure Period (Updated 9/21/06)
The court held that the timely filing of a motion to reopen does not automatically toll the voluntary departure period. (Banda-Ortiz v. Gonzales, 3/28/06)
ICE Detention and Deportation Officer’s Field Manual
Following a FOIA request filed by AILA, ICE released a redacted version of the Detention and Deportation Officer’s Field Manual.
Section-by-Section Summary of the Chairman’s Mark, as Amended and Passed by the Judiciary Committee
AILA’s updated section-by-section summary of Chairman Specter’s Mark (the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006), as amended and passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee on 3/27/06.
CA1 Finds Stop-Time Rule Applies Retroactively
The court found that the stop-time rule under INA §240A(d)(1)(B) applied retroactively to Petitioner’s 1995 marriage fraud conviction to end the accrual of continuous physical presence for suspension. (Peralta v. Gonzales, 3/23/06)
Minutes of AILA USCIS Liaison Meeting March 23, 2006
USCIS discusses various liaison topics: H-1B eligibility, EB-2 and EB-3 educational equivalencies, I-90 biometrics, nunc pro tunc reinstatement for dependents, I-765 and I-131 extension, change of status (L-1B to L-1A), naturalization.
BIA Refuses Reopening on Forced Sterilization Claim
The BIA held that an alien seeking to reopen removal proceedings based on a claim that the birth of a second child in the U.S. will result in the alien’s forced sterilization in China cannot establish prima facie eligibility for relief. Matter of C-C-, 23 I&N Dec. 899 (BIA 2006)
BIA Rules on Cancellation of Removal and Continuous Physical Presence Requirement
The BIA held that the requirement that an applicant for cancellation of removal must demonstrate statutory eligibility for that relief prior to the service of a notice to appear applies only to the continuous physical presence requirement. Matter of Bautista Gomez, 23 I&N Dec. 893 (BIA 2006)
Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Retroactivity of Reinstatement Statute
The Court heard arguments in the first immigration case to come before the newly-constituted Roberts’ Court. The issue in the case is whether the current reinstatement provision applies to a person who reentered the United States illegally before the effective date of IIRIRA, April 1, 1997.
EOIR Responses to AILA's Liaison Questions (3/22/06)
Liaison issues addressed with EOIR included unanswered motions, the 1-800 telephone system, absentia orders, unfiled NTAs, e-payment of fees, circuit court remands, biometrics, briefing schedules, consumer protection, case completion guidelines, and motions to terminate under the Howard memo.
CA9 Upholds IJ’s Finding of No Past Persecution But Reverses Finding of No Well-Founded Fear of Future Persecution
The court upheld the finding that Petitioner had not suffered past persecution but found that her fear of future harm, based on increasingly severe threats made in Peru by Shining Path during a seven-month period six years ago, was well-founded. (Canales-Vargas v. Gonzales, 3/21/06)