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 Upholds Cancellation Denial as to Mexican Father of U.S.-Citizen Children with Anxiety Disorders
The court upheld the denial of cancellation of removal based on no exceptional and extremely unusual hardship, finding that the petitioner’s children’s anxiety reflected stress commonly seen in removal proceedings and that financial harm could be mitigated. (Santos Mendoza v. Bondi, 8/14/25)
CA4 Upholds Asylum Denial as to Salvadoran Petitioner Based on Lack of Nexus
The court upheld the agency’s conclusion that petitioner had not been persecuted on the basis of membership in her immediate family, and found there was a lack of nexus between the home invasion she experienced and her status as a single Salvadoran woman. (Rivas de Nolasco v. Bondi, 8/14/25)
CA3 Finds BIA’s Incorrect Ruling on New Evidence Relevant to Reopening Was Harmless Error
The court held that although the BIA legally erred in concluding that the birth of the petitioner’s daughter was not new evidence that could justify reopening because it occurred a few weeks before the BIA issued its decision, its error was harmless. (Suchite-Salguero v. Att’y Gen., 8/14/25)
Featured Issue: Immigration Enforcement Under Trump 2.0
The Administration has ramped up immigration enforcement efforts, including arresting people attending hearings at immigration courts and appointments at USCIS and ICE field offices. Far from keeping us safe, indiscriminate enforcement harms our families, communities, and our nation as a whole.
CA4 Remands for New Removal Hearing Where BIA Erroneously Rejected Petitioner’s Ineffective Assistance Claim
The court held that the BIA erred in finding that petitioner failed to show counsel was ineffective, where counsel proposed a legal theory foreclosed by controlling precedent and omitted arguments with a strong chance of success, resulting in prejudice. (Guandique-de Romero v. Bondi, 8/13/25)
BIA Reverses IJ’s Grant of Cancellation as to Respondent with Convictions for Endangering Welfare of Child
The BIA held that the respondent’s convictions for endangering the welfare of a child, combined with his conduct as described in the charging document and the victim’s statement, showed that he did not warrant a favorable exercise of discretion. Matter of McDonald, 29 I&N Dec. 249 (BIA 2025)
BIA Holds New Jersey Conviction for Possession with Intent to Sell Fentanyl Was a Controlled Substance Offense under INA
The BIA held that section 2C:35-5(b)(4) of the New Jersey Statutes Annotated was divisible by controlled substance, and that the respondent’s record of conviction identified the relevant substance as fentanyl, a federally controlled substance. Matter of Frias Ulloa, 29 I&N Dec. 259 (BIA 2025)
CA7 Upholds Asylum Denial as to Nicaraguan Petitioner Who Supported Anti-Government Protests
The court held that substantial evidence supported BIA’s finding that petitioner, who feared state-sponsored retribution in Nicaragua for supporting anti-Sandinista protesters, failed to show a well-founded fear of future persecution or likelihood of torture. (Rivas-Jarquin v. Bondi, 8/11/25)
EOIR Policy Memorandum (PM 25-40) on Use of Generative AI in EOIR Proceedings
EOIR Acting Director released Policy Memorandum (PM) 25-40 on use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in EOIR proceedings. EOIR neither prohibits generative AI use in its proceedings nor requires disclosure of its use. Individual adjudicators or courts may adopt standing orders regarding AI.
BIA Holds That Respondent with Private Counsel Failed to Show He Was Unable to Pay Requisite Filing Fee
The BIA held that a nondetained noncitizen represented by counsel is presumed able to pay IJ and BIA filing fees, and that a fee waiver request from a nondetained adult noncitizen with zeros in all income blocks is presumptively invalid. Matter of Garcia Martinez, 29 I&N Dec. 169 (BIA 2025)
BIA Finds IJ Exceeded Authority in Assessing Whether Respondent Warranted Favorable Exercise of Discretion
The BIA held the IJ exceeded his authority to consider the circumstances of respondent’s conviction by making an adverse credibility finding as to respondent’s two child victims, in effect finding respondent factually innocent of the crime. Matter of Garcia-Flores, 29 I&N Dec. 230 (BIA 2025)
CA2 Holds That INA §209(b) Allows Only Noncitizens with Current Asylum Status to Adjust to LPR status
The court held that the plain text of INA §209(b) allows only noncitizens with current asylum status to adjust to lawful permanent resident (LPR) status, and concluded that petitioners could not adjust to LPR status because their asylum status had been terminated. (Wassily v. Bondi, 8/7/25)
CA7 Affirms CAT Denial as to Jamaican Petitioner Who Suffered from Severe Mental Illness
The court concluded that the BIA correctly held that the Jamaican petitioner, who suffered from severe mental illness, failed to establish specific intent to torture, and thus upheld the BIA’s denial of deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). (Fiddler v. Bondi, 8/7/25)
Practice Alert: ICE Updates Legal Position in Bond Proceedings
AILA members report a change in OPLA's legal position to designate people who entered without inspection ineligible for bond.
CA11 Holds BIA’s INA §240A(b)(1)(D) Hardship Determination Is Subject to Substantial Evidence Review
The court held that a court should review the BIA’s INA §240A(b)(1)(D) hardship determination for substantial evidence, and concluded that the BIA’s denial of cancellation of removal as to the Mexican petitioners was supported by substantial evidence. (Lopez-Martinez v. Att’y Gen., 8/6/25)
CA10 Finds BIA Did Not Err in Upholding IJ’s 15-Day Asylum Filing Deadline and Denial of Continuance
The court held that the BIA properly upheld the IJ’s imposition of a 15-day asylum filing deadline and denial of a continuance, found that the BIA did not deprive the petitioner of his right to counsel, and concluded that petitioner’s motion to reopen was moot. (Chavez-Govea v. Bondi, 8/5/25)
CA10 Finds BIA Erred in Holding Signature Was Required in Proof-of-Service Section of Notice-of-Appeal Form
The court found that the BIA erred in holding that the petitioners’ attorney was required to sign their notice-of-appeal form’s proof-of-service section, even though he filed electronically and checked a box confirming that no separate service was needed. (Cortez, et al. v. Bondi, 8/5/25)
CA4 Vacates BIA’s Conclusory Judgment That Salvadoran Petitioner’s PSG Was Circular
The court held that the BIA erred in rejecting the petitioner’s proposed particular social group (PSG)—“El Salvadoran women who are continually sexually abused and tortured by gang members…”—without conducting a fact-based, case-specific analysis. (Hernandez Guardado v. Bondi, 8/5/25)
DOJ Notice of Extension and Revision of Forms EOIR-42A and EOIR-42B
DOJ notice of extension and revision of Application for Cancellation of Removal for Certain Permanent Residents (Form EOIR-42A) and Application for Cancellation of Removal and Adjustment of Status for Certain Nonpermanent Residents (Form EOIR–42B). Comments are due 10/6/25. (90 FR 37564, 8/5/25)
CA2 Reaffirms That Conviction in New York for Second-Degree Sexual Abuse Constitutes “Sexual Abuse of a Minor” under the INA
The court reaffirmed its holding in Debique v. Garland that a conviction for second-degree sexual abuse in New York under NYPL §130.60(2) constitutes “sexual abuse of a minor” under INA §101(a)(43)(A) and is thus categorically an aggravated felony. (Garcia Pinach v. Bondi, 8/4/25)
CA7 Upholds Denial of Withholding and CAT Relief to Petitioner Who Feared Cartel Violence in Mexico
The court held that the record did not compel a conclusion that the petitioner, who feared for his life in Mexico due to cartel violence, proved that he was eligible for withholding of removal under the INA or protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). (P. A.-V. v. Bondi, 8/4/25)
CA8 Upholds Denial of Administrative Closure After Finding BIA Appropriately Considered Avetisyan Factors
The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in dismissing an administrative appeal of the IJ’s denial of petitioner’s motion for administrative closure, finding the BIA appropriately considered relevant factors under Matter of Avetisyan. (Sanchez-Banos v. Bondi, 8/1/25)
Policy Brief: ICE Arrests at Immigration Courts
AILA members reported widespread instances of ICE Enforcement and ERO agents appearing at immigration courts to detain individuals following the dismissal of their case. This brief summarizes the key takeaways from the reports of AILA members and the broader policy implications.
CA9 Holds That BIA Erred in Finding Romanian Petitioners’ Harm Did Not Cumulatively Rise to Level of Past Persecution
The court found that the record compelled the conclusion that the petitioners’ past experiences collectively rose to the level of persecution, and that the BIA erred when it determined that the Roma ethnicity is not a disfavored group in Romania. (Lapadat v. Bondi, 2/12/25, amended 7/31/25)
CA4 Upholds BIA’s Reversal of CAT Relief Based on Adverse Credibility and Insufficient Likelihood of Torture
The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s conclusion that the IJ committed clear error in finding that petitioner demonstrated a sufficient likelihood of torture to be eligible for protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). (Colorado Navarro v. Bondi, 7/31/25)