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
CA6 Construes Motion for Stay of Removal as Motion to Stay Voluntary Departure Period
CA6 held that a motion for a stay of removal filed during the pendency of a petition for review will be construed to include a motion to stay voluntary departure provided the motion for a stay of removal is filed prior to the expiration of the VD period. (Macotaj v. Gonzales, 6/24/05)
CA1 Addresses Voluntary Departure Pending Judicial Review
The court found that it lacked the authority to reinstate an expired voluntary departure period, but may grant a motion to stay an unexpired voluntary departure period under the same test for adjudicating a stay of removal. (Bocova v. Gonzales, 6/24/05)
CA8 Upholds BIA’s and IJ’s Findings that Cameroonian’s Asylum Claims Lack Credibility
The Court found that the IJ’s and BIA’s reluctance to accept questionable proof of SDF membership and explanations offered by Petitioner was supported by substantial evidence. (Eta-Ndu v. Gonzales, 6/23/05)
CA2 Rejects Asylum Claim, Finds Improved Conditions in Kosovo
The court found that Petitioner’s fear of retribution for refusing to serve amounted to past persecution, but upheld the IJ’s finding that conditions had improved in Kosovo such that there was no reasonable fear of future persecution. (Islami v. Gonzales, 6/23/05)
ICE Memo: US District Court Transfer of Surrendered Foreign Passports
ICE memorandum discusses procedures for the transfer of surrendered foreign passports from the U.S District Court to ICE field offices.
EOIR Memo on Definitions and Use of Administrative Codes (Rescinded 10/5/17)
This memo was rescinded by OPPM 17-02 on 10/5/17. EOIR OPPM 05-07 updates the list of adjournment, call-up, and case identification codes. The list notes which codes exempt cases from case completion goals and aged case completion goals, and which codes stop the asylum clock.
CA2 Finds Chinese Asylum Applicant’s Testimony “Replete with Inconsistencies”
The court found that the IJ’s negative credibility determination was supported by substantial evidence due to Petitioner's inconsistent statements and denied the asylum claim based on forced sterilization. (Lin v. Ashcroft, 6/14/05)
CA6 Rules IJ’s Off-Record Conversation with Her Albanian Clerk Is a Due Process Violation, but Finds No Prejudice to Albanian Asylum Applicant
The Court upheld IJ’s negative credibility determination in Albanian asylum case, but also found that IJ abandoned role as a neutral arbiter due to her off-record conversation with her Albanian clerk, amounting to a due process violation. (Vasha v. Gonzales, 6/14/05)
CA3 Orders New Hearing Due to Abusive Nature of Original IJ
The court found that IJ's findings on credibility and the willingness of the government to protect Trokosi slaves were not supported by substantial evidence, and ordered a new hearing where the IJ engaged in brow beating and insensitive questioning. (Fiadjoe v. Gonzales, 6/14/05)
Testimony of Carlina Tapia-Ruano on Post 9/11 Civil Liberty Issues
Testimony of AILA’s First Vice President, Carlina Tapia-Ruano, before the House Judiciary Committee on post 9/11 civil liberty issues (PATRIOT ACT and Executive initiatives).
CA2 Vacates Denial of MTR In Absentia Proceedings
The court held that the IJ abused her discretion in construing Petitioner’s motion to reopen in absentia proceedings as triggering the procedural requirements of ineffective assistance of counsel claims. (Twum v. Gonzales, 6/8/05)
CA9 Instructs Attorneys to Give Court Notice of Reopened Proceedings
Where the BIA reopens proceedings while a petition for review is pending, the parties must notify the court, the Ninth Circuit advised. Reopening usurps the court’s jurisdiction by eliminating the final order which was the subject of the petition for review. (Timbreza v. Gonzales, 6/7/05)
BIA Says Unauthorized Use of Motor Vehicle Is an Aggravated Felony
The BIA ruled that unauthorized use of a motor vehicle is a crime of violence and is thus an aggravated felony, rendering an individual removable and ineligible for a waiver under former INA 212(c) if convicted. (Matter of Brieva-Perez, 6/7/05)
BIA Says AOS Is an "Admission" for Purposes of Removal Due to CIMT Conviction
The BIA held that a person convicted of a CIMT punishable by imprisonment for at least one year is removable if the crime was committed within 5 years of the first or any subsequent admission, which includes the date of adjustment to permanent resident status. (Matter of Shanu, 6/6/05)
CA3 Criticizes BIA for “Paucity of Analysis”
The court found that Petitioner had suffered past persecution by the Albanian police who inflicted multiple beatings that caused serious injuries, and remanded the case for findings on corroboration and changed conditions. (Voci v. Gonzales, 6/6/05)
CA9 Addresses REAL ID Judicial Review Provisions
Following the 5/11/05 enactment of the REAL ID Act, the court reviewed the merits of a petition for review filed by an individual with criminal convictions. (Fernandez-Ruiz v. Gonzales, 5/31/05)
CA9 Holds that a Child of a Parent Forcibly Sterilized Is Not Automatically Eligible for Asylum
Court held that a child is not automatically eligible for asylum because the child’s parent was forcibly sterilized. (Zhang v. Gonzales, 5/26/05)
CA5 Finds INA §242(f) Not Applicable to Stay Requests
The court joined six other circuits in rejecting the government’s position that INA § 242(f) governs stay requests. The court held that stay requests continue to be governed by the four-factor test applied to preliminary injunctions. (Tesfamichael v. Gonzales, 5/24/05)
CA7 Remands Withholding Claim for BIA to Determine if Forcible IUD Insertions Amount to Persecution
The Court overturned BIA’s ruling that Petitioner’s testimony lacked sufficient detail to meet her burden of proof for withholding of removal. The Court, however, remanded to the Board the issue of whether forcible IUD insertions amount to persecution. (Zheng v. Gonzalez, 5/24/05)
CA9 Finds Negligent Manslaughter is Not a Crime of Violence
Applying the Supreme Court's rationale in Leocal v. Ashcroft, CA9 found that a CA conviction for gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated was not a crime of violence because the statute does not require active use of force to inflict injury. (Lara-Cazares v. Gonzales, 5/23/05)
EOIR Memo on Security Guidelines in Detention Facilities
EOIR memorandum 05-04, titled Security Guidelines in Detention Facilities, with policies and procedures for all detention facilities including DHS and Bureau of Prison detention facilities, as well as state and county detention facilities.
INA § 242 As Amended by REAL ID Act
This document is an unofficial red-line version of INA § 242, which governs judicial review of orders of removal, as amended by the REAL ID Act.
CA3 Finds that Continuous Physical Presence Clock Can Restart
The court held that an individual who lawfully reentered the U.S. after committing a crime that renders him or her inadmissible may begin to accrue continuous physical presence for cancellation of removal. (Okeke v. Gonzales, 5/18/05)
CA8 Holds that Filing a Timely Motion to Reopen and Stay Request Tolls the Voluntary Departure Period
Where a person files a motion to reopen and request for a stay of removal or voluntary departure prior to the expiration of the voluntary departure period, the court held that the departure period is tolled while the BIA is adjudicating the motion. (Sidikhouya v. Gonzales, 5/17/05)
CA9 Reverses CAT Denial and Reiterates Test for Determining “Acquiescence” of a Public Official
CA9 rejected the Matter of S-V- test of acquiescence and reiterated that the test in CA9 is that Petitioners “need only prove that the government is aware of the third party’s tortuous conduct and does nothing to intervene to prevent it” for CAT claims. (Ochoa v. Gonzales, 5/16/05)