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
DOJ Notice of Withdrawal of Proposed Rules
DOJ notice of withdrawal of two proposed rules (Motions To Reopen and Reconsider; Effect of Departure; Stay of Removal, and Good Cause for a Continuance in Immigration Proceedings), both published on November 27, 2020. (89 FR 107044, 12/31/24)
DHS/DOJ Interim Final Rule Delaying Effective Date of Security Bars and Processing Final Rule
DHS/DOJ interim final rule delaying the Security Bars and Processing Final Rule until 12/31/25. Comments are due by 1/27/25. (89 FR 105386, 12/27/24)
CA9 Finds That VAWA Petitioner Failed to Show Extraordinary Circumstances to Waive the Untimeliness of Her Motion to Reopen
The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in determining that the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) petitioner had failed to show the requisite extraordinary circumstances to waive the untimeliness of her motion to reopen. (Magana-Magana v. Bondi, 12/26/24, amended 2/19/25)
CA9 Finds That BIA Improperly Applied Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus Maxim to Discount Petitioner’s New Evidence
The court held that the BIA improperly applied the falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus maxim to discount the petitioner’s new evidence, explaining that the BIA must credit evidence supporting a motion to reopen unless the facts are “inherently unbelievable.” (Singh v. Garland, 12/24/24)
CA8 Holds That BIA Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Denying Petitioner’s Motion to Reconsider
The court found that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the petitioner’s motion to reconsider, finding that it expressly considered the emotional hardship that his two sons might experience due to being separated from their father. (Chacon-Ruiz v. Garland, 12/24/24)
CA9 Holds That Conviction for Possession of Stolen Vehicle in Washington Was an Aggravated Felony and Particularly Serious Crime
The court held that the petitioner’s conviction for possession of a stolen vehicle in Washington was an aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(G) and a particularly serious crime that rendered him ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal. (Chmukh v. Garland, 12/23/24)
CA6 Upholds Cancellation Denial Where Petitioner Failed to Show His Young Sons Would Suffer Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship
The court held that the Mexican petitioner had not shown that his qualifying relatives—namely, his young U.S. citizen sons—would suffer hardship that was substantially different from or greater than that which normally results from a loved one’s removal. (Moctezuma-Reyes v. Garland, 12/23/24)
CA7 Upholds BIA’s and IJ’s Finding That Threats Against Guatemalan Petitioner Were Motivated by Personal Animosity
The court upheld the denial of the Guatemalan petitioner’s claims for asylum and related relief, finding that the agency’s conclusion that the petitioner had not experienced harm on account of a protected ground was supported by substantial evidence. (Mateo-Mateo, et al. v. Garland, 12/23/24)
How to Request Removal of Your GPS Monitor
This guide is intended as a practical resource for pro se individuals (people without lawyers) and is not a substitute for legal advice from an experienced lawyer. This guide will explain how to ask ICE to remove your GPS monitor (ankle monitor, wrist monitor, or SmartLINK app).
Practice Alert: Leveraging Local Liaison - Local ICE Contact Information and Local AILA ICE Liaison Information
AILA’s local ICE Liaisons have shared their contact information and local ICE contact information with AILA National’s ICE Liaison Committee. The contact information is organized by chapter.
Practice Alert: What Happens If the Government Shuts Down
House Republicans continue to try and avoid a government shutdown, hours before the late Friday deadline, after their second funding proposal was defeated Thursday night. Use this page to know what might happen if the government does shut down.
GAO Report: Actions Needed to Improve Tracking of Noncitizens' Hearing Appearances in Immigration Courts
GAO issued a report highlighting DOJ's failure to reliably track noncitizens' attendance at immigration hearings and recommends improvements to EOIR's system for better data accuracy and informed decision-making on in absentia removal rates.
Partners Provide Key Takeaways from J.O.P. v. DHS Settlement Agreement
Partners created a one-pager with five key takeaways from the J.O.P. v. DHS settlement agreement, including a reminder that USCIS must receive the prospective class member's I-589 by February 24, 2025.
CA1 Remands After Finding BIA Improperly Rejected Petitioner’s Unopposed Remand Request
The court held that the BIA improperly denied the petitioner’s unopposed remand motion both by arbitrarily deviating from a standard course of practice and by improperly engaging in factfinding in violation of 8 CFR §1003.1(d)(3). (Badose v. Garland, 9/20/24, amended 12/19/24)
EOIR Memo on Asylum EAD Clock in Immigration Proceedings
Chief Immigration Judge Sheila McNulty issued Operating Policies and Procedures Memorandum (OPPM) 25-01 providing directives on the proper handling of the Asylum Employment Authorization Document (EAD) Clock in immigration court proceedings and within the immigration courts.
CA5 Upholds Denial of Cancellation After Finding Hardships to Petitioner’s Son Would Not Be Exceptional and Extremely Unusual
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of petitioner’s cancellation application, finding that the emotional, psychological, medical, and financial hardships that his U.S. citizen son might suffer were “common and normal” consequences of an ordinary removal. (Cuenca-Arroyo v. Garland, 12/18/24)
DHS Final Rule on Application of Certain Mandatory Bars in Fear Screenings
DHS final rule amending its regulations to allow asylum officers to consider the potential application of certain bars to asylum and statutory withholding of removal during credible fear and reasonable fear screenings. Rule is effective 1/17/25. (89 FR 103370, 12/18/24)
CA4 Holds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Consider Petitioner’s Waiver of Inadmissibility under INA §212(h)
The court held it was not permitted to review the BIA’s denial of petitioner’s inadmissibility waiver application, concluding that the BIA need not make an extreme hardship finding to deny an inadmissibility waiver application on discretionary grounds. (Salomon-Guillen v. Garland, 12/18/24)
CA5 Finds Petitioner’s NOH Gave Sufficient Notice under Recent Supreme Court Precedent
The court granted the government’s petition for rehearing in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Campos-Chaves v. Garland, and found that the Notice of Hearing (NOH) had provided the petitioner with the notice required under INA §240(a)(2)(A). (Luna v. Garland, 12/17/24)
USCIS Provides Updated Instructions for Submitting Certain Applications in Immigration Court and for Providing Biometrics and Biographic Information
USCIS updated its instructions for submitting certain applications in immigration court and for providing biometrics and biometric information to USCIS, noting that the instructions provide that I-589 applicants will no longer need to mail USCIS information to complete their biometrics collection.
BIA Holds That Circumstance-Specific Approach Applies to INA §101(a)(43)(D)’s $10,000 Threshold for Money Laundering Offenses
The BIA held that, in assessing whether an offense constitutes a money laundering aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(D), the circumstance-specific approach applies to the requirement that the “amount of the funds exceeded $10,000.” Matter of Dominguez Reyes, 28 I&N Dec. 878 (BIA 2024)
CA1 Finds Multiple Inconsistencies and Omissions in Record Supported IJ’s Adverse Credibility Determination as to Congolese Petitioner
The court held that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s denial of asylum, where the BIA had expressly discussed four inconsistencies and omissions in comparing petitioner’s declaration, application, documentary evidence, and testimony before the IJ. (Mondzali Bopaka v. Garland, 12/13/24)
CA8 Holds That Conviction for Third-Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct in Minnesota Is Not Categorically a Rape Aggravated Felony
The court held that a conviction for third-degree criminal sexual conduct in Minnesota was not categorically an aggravated felony, and noted “deference to the Board … is now a relic of the past” due to the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision. (Quito-Guachichulca v. Garland, 12/9/24)
AILA Submits Statement for Senate Hearing on Mass Deportations
AILA submits a statement for the record for the 12/10/24 Senate hearing on mass deportation, "How Mass Deportations Will Separate American Families, Harm Our Armed Forces, and Devastate Our Economy."
CA1 Finds BIA Erred in Concluding Salvadoran Petitioner’s Asylum Claim Was Untimely
The court found that the BIA erred in rejecting the Salvadoran petitioner’s contention that he had satisfied the changed circumstances exception to the one-year deadline for filing an asylum application based on the development of his mental health issues. (Escobar Larin v. Garland, 12/5/24)