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 Grants EAJA Fees For Winning Remand to the BIA
Joining other circuits, the Third Circuit applied the rationale in Shalala and concluded that a petitioner who wins remand to the BIA is a prevailing party for EAJA purposes regardless of whether the person ultimately prevails in immigration proceedings. (Johnson v. Gonzales, 7/25/05)
CA3 Holds BIA’s Findings Were Unsupported by the Record
The court found that the BIA’s basis for rejecting Petitioner’s claim was unsupported by the record and that the BIA impermissibly focused on general unrest in Colombia and the fact that Petitioner’s parents and brothers remained in Colombia unharmed. (Vente Vente v. Gonzales, 7/22/05)
CA6 Addresses REAL ID “Transitional Rule Cases” Provision and New INS §242(a)(2)(D) (Updated 11/7/05)
CA6 found that §106(d) of the REAL ID Act places transitional rule cases under the judicial review rules applicable to removal. §106(a), which added new INA §242(a)(2)(D), expands the court's direct review of removal orders over legal and constitutional questions. (Elia v. Gonzales, 7/22/05)
U.S. Courts Memo on Retention and Disposition of Passports
Administrative Office of the United States Courts memorandum on the revised process for the transfer of foreign passports and associated notices to ICE field offices.
BIA Says Time To Prove GMC For Cancellation Ends with Final Administrative Decision
The BIA held that the 10-year period during which good moral character must be established for cancellation purposes ends with the date of entry of a final administrative decision by the IJ or BIA. (Matter of Ortega-Cabrera, 7/21/05)
CA1 Upholds IJ’s Adverse Credibility Determination in Albanian Claim
The court agreed with the IJ that the Albanian asylum applicant was not credible, failed to link the claimed attacks to his political beliefs, and presented corroborating evidence that undermined his claim. (Kasneci v. Gonzales, 7/21/05)
CA1 Remands Cambodian Withholding Claim for Past Persecution Determination
The court remanded the case for further consideration of Petitioner’s past persecution claim, noting that Petitioner received both explicit and implicit death threats, and that a threat to life could amount to persecution. (Un v. Gonzales, 7/21/05)
CA1 on Aggravated Felony Bar to §212(c) Relief
The court held that Petitioner, whose application for §212(c) was delayed for years due to an erroneous agency legal interpretation, such that he had served more than 5 years by the time he could proceed, is barred from relief. (Pereira v. Gonzales, 7/21/05)
Text of the Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act of 2005 (S. 1438)
Text of the Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act of 2005 (S. 1438), co-sponsored by Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and introduced on 7/20/05.
Congressional Section-By-Section Analysis of S. 1438
A congressional section-by-section analysis of the Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act co-sponsored by Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ).
Congressional Summary of S. 1438
A congressional summary of the Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act co-sponsored by Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ).
CA6 Questions IJ’s Objectivity in Adverse Credibility Ruling
Raising concerns about the IJ’s objectivity, the Court found that the alleged inconsistencies and deficiencies found by the IJ and BIA “come nowhere close” to supporting the conclusion that Petitioner’s persecution claim was false. (Mece v. Gonzales, 7/20/05)
CA10 Dismisses Petition Due to Lack of Jurisdiction
The court dismissed the petition for lack of appellate jurisdiction because the Immigration Judge denied relief on discretionary grounds. (Ekasinta v. Gonzales, 7/19/05)
CA7 Says IJ’s Asylum Denial “Completely Disregarded” Test For Lack of Corroborating Evidence
The Court found that IJ erred in denying the asylum claim for lack of corroboration and for not adequately considering Petitioner’s explanations for missing documents, including the outbreak of civil war in Cote d’Ivoire and a misdirected DHL package. (Soumahoro v. Gonzales, 7/19/05)
Rep. Tancredo’s Section-by-Section Summary of REAL GUEST Act of 2005 (H.R. 3333)
On 7/18/05, Rep. Tancredo (R-CO) unveiled a counterproposal to the various CIR bills currently under discussion, titled the “Rewarding Employers that Abide by the Law and Guaranteeing Uniform Enforcement to Stop Terrorism (REAL GUEST) Act of 2005."
CA3 Addresses REAL ID’s Impact on Pending Habeas Appeals
The court held that habeas appeals pending on 5/11/05 may be reviewed as petitions for review and declined to transfer the case notwithstanding the fact that the IJ hearing was conducted in another circuit because the case had been briefed and argued. (Bonhometre v. Gonzales, 7/15/05)
CA11 Lacks Jurisdiction Over NACARA AOS Denial
The Eleventh Circuit held that the “clear language” of NACARA §202(f) barred it from reviewing a BIA decision reversing the IJ’s decision to grant Petitioner’s adjustment of status application. (Ortega v. Gonzales, 7/15/05)
Government Modifies Position on Application of Renteria-Gonzales in Fifth Circuit Cases Involving Vacated Convictions
In its opposition to an en banc rehearing petition, the government stated it wished to apply Matter of Pickering, not Renteria-Gonzalez, to the vacated conviction and terminate removal proceedings. Thus, CA5 denied the petition as moot. (Discipio v. Ashcroft, 7/13/05)
CA7 Addresses New INA §242(a)(2)(D) Added by Real ID
Pursuant to new INA §242(a)(2)(D), added by the REAL ID Act, the court reviewed the merits of Petitioner’s due process challenges to his removal proceedings and his equal protection challenge to different treatment of state and federal drug possession offenses. (Ramos v. Gonzales, 7/12/05)
CA7 Overturns BIA’s Denial of Motion to Reopen Asylum Application Based on Conversion to Jehovah’s Witness Faith
CA7 held that the BIA erred in denying a motion to reopen and requiring more proof of religious conversion when she already had provided an affidavit and an explanation of why official confirmation of her conversion could not be submitted in time. (Fessehaye v. Gonzales, 7/8/05)
ICE Announces Personnel Changes
An email circulated to ICE personnel announces the appointment of Acting Chief of Staff, Acting Director of the Office of Policy and Planning, Acting Director of Detention & Removal, and Acting Director of Intelligence, as well as other personnel appointments.
CA4 Says Involuntary Manslaughter is Not a Crime of Violence
Applying the Supreme Court’s rationale in Leocal v. Ashcroft, CA4 found that involuntary manslaughter is not a crime of violence because “it does not intrinsically involve a substantial risk that force will be applied ‘as a means to an end.’” (Bejarano-Urrutia v. Gonzales, 7/5/05)
CA5 Affirms Matter of Roldan and Hernandez-Avalos
The court affirmed that state court guilty pleas to marijuana possession offenses are aggravated felony convictions for immigration purposes even if the person subsequently received deferred adjudication. (Salazar-Regino et al. v. Gonzales, 6/30/05)
CA11 Upholds IJ’s Findings on Fear for Albanian Asylum Seeker
CA11 found that a 2-3 hour detention, with no physical harmed, as well as the extortion attempts, did not rise to the level of persecution. It also found that Petitioner had not shown that he would be targeted on account of a protected ground. (Kroi v. Gonzales, 6/29/05)
CA5 Addresses New INA Section 242(a)(2)(D) in Administrative Removal Case
The court held that new INA section 242(a)(2)(D) permitted review of Petitioner’s equal protection challenge to DHS’ discretion to place a non-LPR with an aggravated felony conviction in either IJ removal proceedings or administrative removal proceedings (Flores-Ledezma v. Gonzales, 6/27/05)