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
CA10 Holds Detention, Pro Se Status, and Limited Resources Were Not Extraordinary Circumstances Warranting Equitable Tolling
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of the motion to reopen as untimely, holding that the petitioner’s lack of counsel and limited resources while detained were not extraordinary circumstances warranting equitable tolling. (Bonilla-Espinoza v. Blanche, 6/1/26)
CA7 Holds Illinois Battery Conviction Against Family Members Is a Crime of Domestic Violence and Sanctions Counsel for AI-Hallucinated Briefs
The court held that the petitioner’s conviction in Illinois for battery against his mother and siblings was a crime of domestic violence barring cancellation of removal, and sanctioned counsel for signing and submitting briefs containing AI hallucinations. (Perez-Castillo v. Blanche, 6/1/26)
CA4 Holds That BIA Reversibly Erred by Treating Petitioner’s “Salvadoran Women” Social Group as Raised for the First Time on Appeal
The court held the BIA reversibly erred by treating petitioner’s “Salvadoran women” particular social group (PSG) as raised for the first time on appeal and declining to reach its merits, requiring remand, while denying her remaining asylum and CAT claims. (Alvarado-Paz v. Blanche, 6/1/26)
BIA Holds That Harm Suffered While a Minor Is Not Necessarily Persecution and Pattern or Practice Claims Require an Objective Showing
The BIA held that harm suffered while a minor does not necessarily constitute persecution, and a pattern or practice withholding claim still requires an objective showing of a clear probability of persecution and has no subjective component. Matter of I–U–V–, 29 I&N Dec. 816 (BIA 2026)
CA6 Holds Government’s Cross-Examination Satisfied Opportunity to Explain Missing Corroboration and Upholds Denial of Cancellation
The court held that cross-examination by government counsel gave the petitioner an adequate opportunity to explain his missing corroboration, and that he did not show the required hardship for cancellation of removal purposes. (Nwosu v. Blanche, 5/29/26)
CA8 Upholds Denial of Cancellation Under Where Petitioner’s U.S.-Citizen Children Would Retain Family Support
The court held the Guatemalan petitioner had no liberty interest in the discretionary relief of cancellation of removal and that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s finding of no exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to her U.S.-citizen children. (Lopez-Vasquez v. Blanche, 5/29/26)
CA1 Holds That BIA Abused Its Discretion in Denying Motion to Reopen Where Counsel Failed to File Brief and IJ Failed to Develop Record
The court held that the BIA abused its discretion in denying the motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance where it gave no explanation for finding noncompliance with Lozada and overlooked an argument that the IJ failed to develop the record. (Buckley v. Blanche, 5/29/26)
CA3 Holds It Has Jurisdiction to Review Withholding and CAT Denials Absent a Challenge to a Final Order of Removal
The court held it has jurisdiction under INA §242(a)(1) to review withholding and CAT denials absent a challenge to a final order of removal, denied the petitioner’s CAT claim as speculative, and left the withholding denial intact by an equally divided court. (Laureano v. Att’y Gen., 5/29/26)
EOIR Policy Memorandum (PM) on Cancellation of PMs 21-17, 21-19, 21-20, 21-21, and 21-22
EOIR Director Daren K. Margolin issued policy memorandum (PM) 26-05 cancelling PMs 21-17, 21-19, 21-20, 21-21, and 21-22, all of which cancelled earlier policy memoranda. However, this memorandum does not reinstate those earlier policy memoranda.
CA1 Upholds Cancellation Denial After Finding Medical and Mental Health Conditions Did Not Establish Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship
The court held that the agency did not err in denying cancellation where petitioner failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his two U.S. citizen daughters, one with anxiety and sleepwalking issues and the other with eye conditions. (Argueta Castillo v. Blanche, 5/27/26)
BIA Holds That Government’s Deference to Tribal Conflict-Resolution Mechanisms Does Not Show It Is Unable or Unwilling to Control Persecutors
The BIA held that although a government may generally defer to tribal mechanisms for resolving tribal conflict, doing so does not indicate the government is unable or unwilling to control persecutors within a tribe. Matter of A–H–D–, 29 I&N Dec. 642 (BIA 2026)
CA2 Remands Where BIA Failed to Make But-For Eligibility Determination Before Applying Material Support Bar
The court held that the BIA must determine whether a petitioner would be eligible for asylum or withholding of removal but for the material support bar, because USCIS will not consider granting a waiver absent such a determination. (Sufiyan v. Blanche, 3/12/26, amended 5/26/26)
EOIR Policy Memorandum (PM) 26-04 Canceling PM 20-16, PM 20-06, and DM 22-08
EOIR Director Daren Margolin issued policy memorandum (PM) 26-04 canceling PM 20-16, OCAHO Settlement Officer Program; PM 20-06, Section 7611 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2020, Public Law 116-92; and director’s memorandum (DM) 22-08, The Asylum Procedures Rule.
BIA Holds That “Mexican Men with Schizoaffective Disorder" Is Not a Cognizable PSG
The BIA held that the group "Mexican men with Schizoaffective Disorder," defined only by such diagnosis, is not cognizable as a particular social group (PSG) under the INA. Matter of L–A–D–, 29 I&N Dec. 634 (BIA 2026)
EOIR Announces Investiture of 77 Immigration Judges and 5 Temporary Immigration Judges
EOIR announced the swearing in of 77 immigration judges and 5 temporary immigration judges to serve in immigration courts across the United States. This is the largest class of new adjudicators in the agency's history.
BIA Holds That Respondent’s Pennsylvania Drug Conviction Was a Particularly Serious Crime Barring Asylum and Withholding
The BIA held that the respondent’s conviction for possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance was a particularly serious crime barring asylum and withholding, and affirmed the denial of CAT deferral absent public official acquiescence. Matter of G–L–C–, 29 I&N Dec. 717 (BIA 2026)
EOIR Notice of Revision of Form EOIR-56, Request to Join List of Immigration Pro Bono Legal Service Providers
EOIR notice of revision and extension of Form EOIR-56, Request to be Included on the List of Pro Bono Legal Service Providers for Individuals in Immigration Proceedings. EOIR describes changes as non-substantive. Comments are due 6/22/26. (91 FR 29511, 5/20/26)
Practice Alert: Hearings Appearing on ECAS Calendars Without Notices of Hearing
AILA members have reported across the country that hearings are appearing on their online court calendars without any notice being issued. The EOIR National Liaison Committee is encouraging all removal defense practitioners to check their online calendars for unexpected hearing changes.
Practice Alert: EOIR Targeting Pro Se Respondents for “Mega Master Calendar Hearings”
AILA members have continued to report the rise in "mega masters" at various courts around the country. These include 100+ respondents being scheduled in a single master calendar hearing, raising serious practical and due process concerns.
ICE NPRM to Increase the Fee for Removal In Absentia to $18,000
ICE notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to increase the fee for “aliens ordered removed in absentia” established in H.R. 1 from $5,130 to $18,000. It also states that ICE will adjust the fee for inflation each year. Comments are due 6/22/26. (91 FR 29380, 5/20/26)
BIA Holds Change of Venue Requests Made on Day of Individual Hearing Are Less Likely to Establish Good Cause Absent Extraordinary Circumstances
The BIA held that the closer in time a change of venue request is made to an individual hearing, the less likely a party can show good cause, and absent extraordinary circumstances, venue should not be changed on the day of a hearing. Matter of I–B–M–S–, et al., 29 I&N Dec. 628 (BIA 2026)
Practice Pointer: CBP Home’s “Intent to Depart” Function
This practice pointer explains how CBP Home’s “Intent to Depart” function works, outlines the user process, and highlights legal and strategic risks for practitioners advising clients considering app-based self-reporting and departure from the United States.
CA9 Upholds Denial of Asylum as to Sikh Mann Party Member from India
The court held that threats from masked men, two brief beatings, and a short detention of the Sikh Mann party member petitioner did not rise to the level of past persecution, and found he could avoid future persecution by relocating within India. (Singh v. Blanche, 12/1/25, amended 5/15/26)
Take Action: Support the Real Courts Rule of Law Act
The immigration court system is in crisis and Congress must pass urgent reform to maintain judicial independence, reduce the backlog, and ensure due process. Get involved now!
CA6 Holds That Cancellation Hardship Determinations Are to Be Reviewed under IIRAIRA Substantial Evidence Standard
The court held that cancellation-of-removal hardship determinations are to be reviewed under the IIRAIRA substantial evidence standard and that the Guatemalan petitioner did not establish exceptional and extremely unusual hardship. (Baltazar Us v. Blanche, 4/29/26)