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
DHS and DOJ IFR Regarding Civil Penalties for Certain Immigration-Related Violations
DHS and DOJ released an interim final rule (IFR) updating procedures for DHS to issue fines for noncitizens who do not depart during the voluntary departure period or after a final removal order, or are apprehended while “improperly” entering the U.S. Comments are due 7/28/25. (90 FR 27439, 6/27/25)
DHS and DOJ Announce Updated Process for Immigration-Related Fines
DHS announced a joint interim final rule with DOJ updating procedures for DHS to issue fines for certain immigration-related violations. The new rule will eliminate a 30-day notice period, allow DHS to send fines by regular mail, and move the appeals process from DOJ to DHS, among other changes.
EOIR Policy Memo Regarding Civil Penalties for Certain Immigration-Related Violations
EOIR Acting Director released a policy memo to provide guidance on DHS and DOJ’s interim final rule, “Imposition and Collection of Civil Penalties for Certain Immigration-Related Violations” as it relates to EOIR. Fines imposed under the rule will no longer be subject to appellate review by BIA.
SCOTUS Rules 30-day PFR Deadline Not Jurisdictional, Subject to Equitable Tolling
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that a BIA order denying deferral of removal in a withholding-only proceeding is not a final order of removal. The filing deadline to challenge a final order of removal is not a jurisdictional requirement and is subject to equitable tolling. (Riley v. Bondi, 6/26/25)
BIA Holds That Respondent’s Virginia Conviction for Indecent Exposure Was a CIMT
The BIA held that the respondent’s Virginia conviction for indecent exposure constituted a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) because the offense requires an “obscene display or exposure,” which necessarily involves a lewd intent. Matter of Mayorga Ipina, 29 I&N Dec. 110 (BIA 2025)
CA1 Upholds Denial of Cancellation Where Petitioners Failed to Show Requisite Hardship under INA §240A(b)(1)(D)
Upholding the agency’s denial of cancellation of removal, the court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction the petitioners’ challenge to the agency’s factual findings underlying its hardship ruling under INA §240A(b)(1)(D), and denied the remaining legal claims. (Xiquin Xirum v. Bondi, 6/25/25)
DHS Publishes Privacy Impact Assessment for the CBP Home App
CBP published a Privacy Impact Assessment to address privacy risks in the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of the information collected by the CBP Home app, which may include the collection of U.S. citizens’ and lawful permanent residents’ information.
CA6 Holds That Denaturalized Petitioner Is Not Removable for Crime Committed While a U.S. Citizen
The court held that the petitioner could not be removed under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i) based on his conviction for a crime of child abuse that occurred while he was a U.S. citizen, even though he was later denaturalized. (Gonzalez Castillo v. Bondi, 6/18/25)
CA4 Upholds Cancellation of Removal Denial After Finding EOIR Policy Was Not Binding
The court held that EOIR’s OPPM 17-04 on reserved grants of cancellation of removal was not binding and thus did not create any enforceable right, and that, alternatively, it would not have required a ruling in the petitioner’s case within five days. (Zalaya Orellana v. Bondi, 6/24/25)
CA11 Finds That Honduran Business Owners Targeted for Wealth Is Not a Cognizable PSG
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of asylum, finding that the petitioner’s proposed particular social group (PSG)—Honduran business owners who are “perceived as having wealth” and are “target[s] of threats and extortion by … criminal gangs”—was overly broad. (Ponce v. Att’y Gen., 6/23/25)
SCOTUS Allows DHS to Resume Third-Country Removals Without Advance Notice for Now
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a stay of a district court ruling barring DHS from sending noncitizens to countries where they are not nationals without advance notice as litigation continues. Justice Sotomayor issued a dissent. (Department of Homeland Security, et al. v. D.V.D., et al., 6/23/25)
CA2 Finds Petitioner Derived Citizenship from Mother’s Naturalization Where Paternity Was Not Established by Legitimation
The court held that the Salvadoran petitioner’s paternity was not “established by legitimation” under former INA §321, and thus found that the petitioner derived U.S. citizenship through his mother’s naturalization and was not removable. (Lainez v. Bondi, 6/23/25)
CA7 Upholds Asylum Denial After Finding Petitioner Could Reasonably Relocate within India
The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s conclusion that petitioner could reasonably relocate within India to avoid persecution, and thus that he was ineligible for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture (CAT) protection. (Singh v. Bondi, 6/23/25)
BIA Finds Respondent’s Speculative Eligibility for Adjustment Insufficient to Warrant Termination of Proceedings
The BIA held that termination of removal proceedings is not warranted to allow a respondent to seek adjustment of status under the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act based on speculation that USCIS will grant them parole under INA §212(d)(5)(A). Matter of Roque-Izada, 29 I&N Dec. 106 (BIA 2025)
BIA Finds IJ Erred in Concluding Respondent Would More Likely Than Not Be Tortured in Detention in Haiti
The BIA concluded that the IJ factually and legally erred in determining that the respondent established that he more likely than not would be tortured in detention in Haiti by or with the acquiescence of a public official upon his removal. Matter of S–S–, 29 I&N Dec. 136 (BIA 2025)
BIA Finds No Monetary Bond Would Be Sufficient to Ensure Applicant’s Appearance at Future Hearings Due to Flight Risk
The BIA held that the applicant’s extensive and lengthy history of immigration law violations showed that she posed a significant flight risk, such that no monetary bond would be sufficient to ensure her appearance at future immigration hearings. Matter of C–M–M–, 29 I&N Dec. 141 (BIA 2025)
Call for Examples – Affirmative I-589 “dismissed” by USCIS because applicant has a prior Expedited Removal Order (Form I-860)
AILA’s Asylum and Refugee Committee has received reports that some affirmative asylum applications are being dismissed by the Asylum Vetting Center on the basis of alleged expedited removal orders. The committee is currently gathering examples to better understand the scope and nature of this issue.
CA2 Holds That Clear Error Is Appropriate Standard of Review for Evaluating Hardship Determinations
The court held that clear error is the appropriate standard of review for evaluating hardship determinations, and upheld the agency’s finding that the petitioner failed to show the hardship required for cancellation of removal under INA §240A(b)(1)(D). (Toalombo Yanez v. Bondi, 6/13/25)
DOJ Files Lawsuit to Stop New York’s Protect Our Courts Act
DOJ filed suit against the state of New York to stop the Protect Our Courts Act, a 2020 state law that prohibits federal officers from conducting civil arrests in or around courthouses without a warrant signed by a judge. (United States v. New York, 6/12/25)
Practice Alert: EOIR Guidance to Immigration Judges on Dismissals and Other Adjudications
On May 30th, 2025, immigration judges nationwide received instructions on how to adjudicate the recent wave of dismissal requests from ICE OPLA. Read this practice alert for the text of the email and accompanying guidance.
BIA Vacates IJ’s Release on Bond Order After Finding Respondent Failed to Show She Was Not a Flight Risk
The BIA held that a grant of withholding of removal that is pending on appeal does not justify release on bond where the factors regarding flight risk weigh strongly against release on bond. Matter of E–Y–F–G–, 29 I&N Dec. 103 (BIA 2025)
CA9 Remands Asylum Claim Where BIA Failed to Consider Impact of Petitioner’s Past Experiences on Her Religious Practice
The court concluded that, in determining whether the Brazilian petitioner experienced harm rising to the level of persecution, neither the BIA nor the IJ considered the impact of petitioner’s past experiences on her ability to freely practice her religion. (De Souza Silva v. Bondi, 6/11/25)
CA9 Remands After BIA Failed to Explain Its Refusal to Consider Petitioner’s Ineffective Assistance Claim
Granting the petition for review, the court concluded that the BIA abused its discretion by failing to offer a reasoned explanation for its determination that it could not or should not review claims of ineffective assistance of counsel before a different tribunal. (Li v. Bondi, 6/10/25)
Take Action: Demand Congress to Protect Due Process and Stop the Administration from Undermining the Integrity of the Immigration Courts
The administration is targeting noncitizens at immigration courts and USCIS field offices through coordinated arrests that violate due process. Urge your Member of Congress to conduct oversight, investigate the interagency abuse, and protect the integrity of the immigration process.
DHS Announces Fine Forgiveness for Noncitizens Who “Self-Deport”
DHS announced that noncitizens who “self-deport” through the CBP Home App will receive forgiveness of any civil fines or penalties for failing to depart the U.S. Currently, individuals can be fined nearly $1,000 per day they do not depart after a final deportation order.