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
CA7 Comments on Role of IJ in Overturning Adverse Credibility Determination
CA7, noting that an IJ is not merely a fact finder and adjudicator, but also has an obligation to establish the record, found that all five reasons cited by the IJ for finding Petitioner not credible were unsupported by substantial evidence. (Tabaku v. Gonzales, 9/29/05)
CA8 Finds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review One-Year Filing Deadline for Asylum Application
The Court found that the statutory language plainly excludes jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determinations that Petitioner’s application was not filed within one year and that he failed to meet the changed or extraordinary circumstances exception. (Al-Jojo v. Gonzales, 9/27/05)
CA11 Says it Has Jurisdiction to Review Continuance Denial
CA11 found the discretionary bar to judicial review at INA §242(a)(2)(B)(ii) did not apply “[b]ecause denials of motions to continue are not statutorily-proscribed discretionary acts ‘specified under this subsection’ to the Attorney General.” (Zafar et al. v. US Attorney General, 9/27/05).
CA2 Rejects Adverse Credibility in Chinese Asylum Claim
The court found that Petitioner’s testimony about his wife’s forced abortion was not, as the IJ claimed, “scant of details,” and that the IJ’s finding that Petitioner’s documents were fabricated was not supported by the evidence. (Chen v. Gonzales, 9/23/05)
CA9 Upholds Regulation Preventing Arriving Aliens from Renewing AOS Applications in Removal Proceedings
The court found that the regulation, which bars arriving aliens from renewing a previously denied adjustment application in removal proceedings only, was not inconsistent with INA §245(a). (Jia-Jin Jiang v. Gonzales, 9/23/05)
CA5 Finds REAL ID Act Eliminates Habeas Corpus Jurisdiction
The court withdrew and amended its prior decision, finding that habeas appeals pending in circuit court on REAL ID’s effective date are properly converted into petitions for review despite Congress’ silence on this issue. (Rosales v. BICE, 9/21/05)
CA7 Finds IJ’s Adverse Credibility Determination Was Supported by Substantial Evidence
The Court found that the inconsistencies and implausibilities in Petitioner’s story, pointed out by the IJ, went to the heart of the claim and were sufficient to support an adverse credibility finding. (Hussain v. Gonzales, 9/20/05)
CA9 Critical of Own Precedent Decisions & Says REAL ID Act Will Help Clarify Matters in Future Asylum Cases
CA9 held that Petitioner’s testimony was not inconsistent, implausibleor evasive. It expressed concern over its rules that obscure clear standards and stated its relief that the REAL ID Act would clarify the grounds for an adverse credibility determination. (Jibril v. Gonzales, 9/19/05)
CA7 Says Ethnic Chinese Indonesian With Permanent Residency in Singapore Is Firmly Resettled
Stating that the most important issue in firm resettlement is whether the stopover country made an offer of permanent residency, the court found that Petitioner was ineligible for asylum since Singapore offered permanent residency. (Firmansjah v. Gonzales, 9/16/05)
CA1 Finds No Well-Founded Fear for Chinese Asylum Applicant
The court found that Petitioner failed to exhaust his claim of past persecution and could not establish a well-founded fear of future persecution because he admitted that he could return to China without fear. (Xu v. Gonzales, 9/16/05)
CA1 Affirms Habeas Jurisdiction Over Detention Challenges
Based on plain language and legislative history, the court held that the jurisdiction-stripping and transfer provisions of the REAL ID Act did not apply to Petitioner’s habeas petition challenging his continued detention. (Hernandez v. Gonzales, 9/16/05)
CA6 Upholds IJ’s Asylum Denial Due to Use of Fraudulent Article and IJ’s Finding that Application Was “Frivolous”
The Court held that Petitioner’s submission of the fraudulent newspaper article in support of a key element in his asylum claim was sufficient support for the IJ’s adverse credibility finding. (Selami v. Gonzales, 9/16/05)
CA7 Holds BIA’s “Very Significant Mistake” As Grounds to Overrule Credibility Determination
The Court overturned the credibility determination, finding that the BIA’s“very significant mistake” that applicant was from eastern, not southern, Uganda, suggested that it was not aware of the most basic facts of the case. (Ssali v. Gonzales, 9/14/05)
DHS Expands Expedited Removal Authority Along Southwest Border
DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff announced on 9/14/05 the expansion of Expedited Removal authority from three to nine U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Border Patrol Sectors, implementing this policy across the entire southwest border.
CA10 Finds Jurisdiction to Review Non-Discretionary Determinations Regarding Cancellation Eligibility
The court held that INA § 242(a)(2)(B) does not bar review of non-discretionary statutory determinations for cancellation eligibility, and that the calculation of absence from the U.S. is such a non-discretionary determination. (Valdiva v. Gonzales, 9/13/05)
CA2 Rejects International Law Argument in §212(h) Case
The court found that international law does not require “compassionate hearings” under INA §212(h) for LPRs whose criminal conduct pre-dated IIRIRA's enactment. (Guaylupo-Moya v. Gonzales, 9/12/05)
CA2 Rules Definitively That Imputed Political Opinion Is a Ground for Asylum
The court, in reversing the IJ’s denial of asylum, found that the IJ erred in failing to consider that a political opinion was imputed to Petitioner by Chinese authorities. (Gao v. Gonzales, 9/9/05)
CA7 Finds Landowning Class of Cattle Farmers in Colombia Constitutes a Particular Social Group
The Court found that Petitioners belonged to the particular social group of the educated, landowning class of cattle farmers. The Court found that they suffered past persecution including the murder of a family member, death threats and extortion. (Tapiero de Orejuela v. Gonzales, 9/8/05)
CA3 Strikes Down Regulation Barring “Arriving Aliens” From Adjusting In Proceedings
The court joined the First Circuit in holding that 8 CFR §1245.1(c)(8) is invalid, reasoning that the regulation is based on an impermissible construction of INA §245(a), which authorizes parolees to adjust status. (Zheng v. Gonzales, 9/8/05)
CA10 Holds Past FGM Constitutes Persecution and Adopts BIA’s Acosta Definition of Particular Social Group
In remanding the asylum claim by Senegalese woman, the court held that past FGM constitutes persecution and adopted the BIA’s definition of particular social group set forth in Acosta and remanded to the BIA to frame Petitioner’s particular social group. (Niang v. Gonzales, 9/8/05)
CA11 Agrees that Colombian Family Had No Credible Fear of FARC
The Court found that Petitioners failed to show it was more likely than not that the FARC would harm them because of Petitioner father’s political activities. (Garcia-Reina v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 9/8/05)
CA3 Holds Timely Filed MTR Tolls Voluntary Departure
Where Petitioner filed a motion to reopen prior to the expiration of the voluntary departure period granted under current INA §240B(d), the court held that “tolling applies during the period of time that the BIA deliberates.” (Kanivets v. Ashcroft, 9/7/05)
CA2 Says Prima Facie Showing Not Requred for Certain CAT MTRs
The court found that the CAT regulations on motions to reopen do not require applicants to establish a prima facie CAT case if their case was pending on or after March 22, 1999. (Guo v. Gonzales, 9/7/05)
CA9 Reverses IJ & Criticizes Her Predisposition to Discredit Testimony of Asylum-Seekers
The Court held that substantial evidence did not support the IJ’s negative credibility determination. It noted that it had reversed this IJ’s credibility determination in several previous cases and instructed the BIA to remand the case to a different IJ. (Smolniakova v. Gonzales, 9/7/05)
CA1 Treats Habeas Appeal Pending on 5/11/05 as a Petition for Review
The court found that a habeas appeal pending in circuit court on 5/11/05 should be treated as a petition for review, reasoning that such a case is still “pending” in district court within the meaning of the REAL ID Act. (Ishak v. Gonzales, 9/6/05)