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
Steps and Timeline for Judicial Complaints
The Immigration Justice Campaign provides steps and timeline for judicial complaints.
Follow Litigation over Asylum Processing Interim Final Rule
Follow developments in the two separate cases challenging the Biden Administration’s interim final rule (IFR) on asylum processing in federal court. The IFR went into effect on May 31, 2022.
CA6 Grants Motion for Stay to Dominican Petitioner with Strong Showing of Irreparable Harm
Where the parties agreed that petitioner would likely be tortured if removed to the Dominican Republic, the court granted the motion for a stay, finding that his arguments presented a sufficient likelihood of success to weigh in favor of granting a stay. (Rondon Antonio v. Garland, 6/29/22)
CA9 Says That a Grant of TPS Does Not Constitute an Admission to the United States
The court held that petitioner’s receipt of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) was not an admission, and thus that he did not have seven years of continuous residence in the United States required for purposes of lawful permanent resident cancellation of removal. (Hernandez v. Garland, 6/28/22)
Interest Rate Paid on Cash Deposited To Secure ICE Immigration Bonds
ICE immigration bond interest rate for the period beginning July 1, 2022, and ending on September 30, 2022. (87 FR 40883, 7/8/22)
CA5 Finds Petitioner Forfeited Right to Notice by Failing to Provide Viable Mailing Address
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of the petitioner’s motion to reopen and rescind his in absentia removal order based on lack of notice, finding that by moving without providing an address where he could be reached, he had forfeited his right to notice. (Gudiel-Villatoro v. Garland, 7/8/22)
CA9 Says USCIS Did Not Err in Applying IIRAIRA’s Permanent Inadmissibility Bar to Petitioner’s Pre-IIRAIRA Reentry
The court held that the permanent inadmissibility bar of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) applied retroactively to the petitioner such that he was ineligible for adjustment of status. (Rivera Vega v. Garland, 7/8/22)
CA9 Remands Asylum Claim of Armenian Petitioner Where IJ’s Findings of Inconsistencies Were Not Supported by Record
Granting the petition for review of the denial of the Armenian petitioner’s asylum application, the court held that three out of four inconsistencies the BIA relied upon in upholding the IJ’s adverse credibility determination were not supported by the record. (Barseghyan v. Garland, 7/8/22)
CA7 Upholds BIA’s Reversal of CAT Relief as to Mexican Petitioner Threatened by Familia Michoacan Cartel
Where the BIA had vacated the IJ’s grant of deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and had ordered the petitioner removed to Mexico, the court held that the BIA had correctly stated and properly applied the clear error standard of review. (Brito v. Garland, 7/7/22)
CRS In Focus Report: Access to Counsel in Removal Proceedings and Legal Access Programs
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) provides an In Focus report on removal proceedings and access to counsel, including legal access programs.
Immigration and the Power of Storytelling
In this blog post, AILA member John Wheaton writes on the power of storytelling in bringing people together and creating community, encouraging his fellow attorneys to consider asking clients to share their stories and increase understanding of the immigrant experience.
Detainees at ICA-Farmville Reach Settlement with Government Regarding COVID-19 Protections
The parties reached a settlement under which the ICA-Farmville Detention Center will be allowed to detain a maximum of 180 people and accept transfers only of individuals who are vaccinated, asymptomatic, and test negative for COVID-19. (Santos Garcia, et al. v. Mayorkas, et al., 7/6/22)
CA5 Denies DHS’s Motion for Stay Pending Appeal of Its Updated Guidance on the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law
The court denied DHS’s motion for a stay pending appeal of the district court’s vacatur of its “Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law,” finding that DHS had failed to make a strong showing of likelihood of success on appeal. (Texas, et al. v. United States, et al., 7/6/22)
CA11 Holds That Petitioner’s Virginia Drug Trafficking Convictions Were Categorically CIMTs
The court held that the BIA did not err in concluding that the petitioner was removable because his Virginia drug trafficking convictions categorically constituted crimes involving moral turpitude (CIMTs) within the meaning of INA §237(a)(2)(A)(i)–(ii). (Daye v. Att’y Gen., 7/6/22)
CA6 Reverses Nationwide Preliminary Injunction Partially Blocking DHS’s Civil Immigration Enforcement Guidance
The court held that even if plaintiffs could clear justiciability hurdles, they were unlikely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the “Guidelines for the Enforcement of Civil Immigration Law” violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). (Arizona, et al. v. Biden, et al., 7/5/22)
CA9 Upholds Denial of Third Motion to Reopen Based on Allegedly New and Material Country Conditions Evidence in Bangladesh
The court denied the parties’ motion for judicial administrative closure, and denied the petition for review of the BIA’s denial of the petitioner’s third motion to reopen based on new evidence of the growing influence of Jihadist extremists in Bangladesh. (Sarkar, et al. v. Garland, 7/1/22)
DHS OIG Finds Violations of ICE Detention Standards at Folkston ICE Processing Center and Folkston Annex
DHS OIG found that while ICE’s Folkston detention facilities complied with several detainee standards, it did not meet standards for facility conditions, medical care, grievances, segregation, staff-detainee communications, and handling of detainee property.
CA3 Says It Has Jurisdiction Where DHS’s Expedited Removal Procedures Did Not Allow Petitioner to Challenge Legal Basis for Removal
The court held that it had jurisdiction to consider in the first instance the petitioner’s challenge to the agency’s determination that his Pennsylvania conviction for receiving stolen property was an aggravated felony, and then found that it was. (Barradas-Jacome v. Att’y Gen., 6/30/22)
CA4 Finds Venue Was Proper Because the IJ Had Completed Proceedings in Virginia
The court held that a petition for review may be filed in the Fourth Circuit in any case that was decided by an IJ sitting at an immigration adjudication center in Richmond or Falls Church, Virginia, but denied the petition for review on the merits. (Herrera-Alcala v. Garland, 6/30/22)
U.S. Supreme Court Affirms the Biden Administration’s Authority to End MPP
AILA welcomed the U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Biden v. Texas, which affirmed the Biden Administration’s authority to end the ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy, officially known as the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP).
BIA Finds an IJ May Rely on Impeachment Evidence
The BIA found that an IJ may rely on impeachment evidence as part of a credibility determination where the evidence is probative and its admission is not fundamentally unfair, and the witness is able to respond to that evidence. Matter of E-F-N-, 28 I&N Dec. 591 (BIA 2022)
CA5 Upholds Denial of Motion to Reopen to Chinese Christians in Indonesia Pursuant to INA §240(c)(7)(C)(ii)
Where the BIA had denied petitioners’ motion to reopen after finding they had not demonstrated changed country conditions in Indonesia, the court denied the petition for review, finding that petitioners’ claims were number-barred under INA §240(c)(7)(C)(ii). (Djie, et al. v. Garland, 6/29/22)
CA2 Says Dual National Need Only Show Persecution in Any Singular Country of Nationality to Be Considered a “Refugee”
The court granted the petition for review, holding that to qualify as a “refugee” under INA §101(a)(42)(A), a dual national asylum applicant need only show persecution in any singular country of nationality. (Zepeda-Lopez, et al. v. Garland, 6/28/22)
CA9 Says Cancellation of Removal Under NACARA §203 Is a Cancellation of Removal Under INA §240A
Denying the petition for review, the court held that a grant of special rule cancellation of removal under section 203 of the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) qualifies as a cancellation of removal under INA §240A. (Hernandez v. Garland, 6/27/22)
ICE 60-Day Notice and Request for Comments on Proposed Revisions to Form I-352
ICE 60-day notice and request for comments on proposed revisions to Form I-352, Immigration Bond. Comments are due 8/23/22. (87 FR 37882, 6/24/22)