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 Holds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Motion to Reopen Based on Exceptional Circumstances
The court dismissed the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction, finding that the petitioner—who alleged that confusion about his hearing date constituted an exceptional situation—had failed to administratively exhaust the claims he raised in his petition. (Cuevas-Nuno v. Barr, 8/7/20)
EOIR Announces Three New Appellate Immigration Judges
EOIR announced the appointment of Michael P. Baird, Sunita B. Mahtabfar, and Sirce E. Owen as appellate immigration judges in EOIR's Board of Immigration Appeals. Notice includes the judges' biographical information.
EOIR To Resume Hearings in Non-Detained Cases at the Omaha Immigration Court
EOIR announced it will resume non-detained individual (merits) hearings and master calendar dockets involving relatively small numbers of respondents at the Omaha Immigration Court on August 10, 2020. The option to file by email at this court will end on October 10, 2020.
EOIR to Relocate the Seattle Immigration Court
EOIR announced that the Seattle Immigration Court will close on 8/13/20 to prepare for relocation. Detained hearings are expected to resume at the new location on 8/17/20; non-detained hearings remain postponed. Notice includes the court's new location, hours of operation, and contact information.
CA9 Says “Obstruction of Justice” Under INA §101(a)(43)(S) Unambiguously Requires a Nexus to Ongoing or Pending Proceedings
Granting the petition for review, the court held that INA §101(a)(43)(S), which describes an aggravated felony offense relating to obstruction of justice, unambiguously requires a nexus to an ongoing or pending proceeding or investigation. (Valenzuela Gallardo v. Barr, 8/6/20)
NAIJ Files Lawsuit Challenging Unconstitutional Prior Restraint on the Speech of Immigration Judges
On 7/1/20, the Knight Institute filed a complaint on behalf of NAIJ challenging EOIR policies that impose a prior restraint on the speech of immigration judges. On 8/6/20, the court held that it lacked jurisdiction over NAIJ's claims and accordingly denied the motion for a preliminary injunction.
Sometimes You Just Have to Take ‘Em to Court
AILA First Vice President Jeremy McKinney describes his first foray into litigation, and what tools and resources can help AILA members litigate and win cases, writing that litigation “can benefit your clients, it can benefit the immigration bar, and ultimately, it can benefit everyone.“
CA1 Finds 98-Day Absence from United States Was Not “Brief, Casual, and Innocent” for Purposes of TPS
The court held that the BIA did not abuse its discretion in finding that the rescission of the petitioner’s removal order was incorrect, and that his 98-day absence from the United States barred him from Temporary Protected Status (TPS) relief. (Machado Sigaran v. Barr, 8/5/20)
BIA Issues Decision on Requirement to Notify Immigration Court of Correct Address
BIA ruled that reopening of proceedings to rescind removal based on improper notice is not warranted for an individual who was personally served with an NTA advising of requirement to notify the court of correct address and failed to do so. Matter of Nivelo Cardenas, 28 I&N Dec. 68 (BIA 2020)
How To: Take Cases to Immigration Court
AILA Immigration Courts Conference Chair Michael Vastine shares insights on how AILA members can prepare themselves for immigration court, offering insights into the need to be “uniformly prepared, comprehensively trained, and conditioned to assertively and persuasively defend.“
CA5 Says Petitioner’s Texas Conviction for Sexual Assault of a Child Was a “Crime of Child Abuse”
The court held that the petitioner’s conviction for sexual assault of a child under Texas Penal Code section 22.011(a)(2) was a categorical match to a “crime of child abuse” as defined by the BIA, rendering him removable under INA §237(a)(2)(E)(i). (Garcia v. Barr, 8/4/20)
CA10 Finds It Lacks Jurisdiction to Review BIA’s Discretionary Cancellation-of-Removal Hardship Decision
The court held that, under INA §242(a)(2)(B), it lacked jurisdiction over the petitioner’s claim that the BIA had misapplied its precedent in weighing the level of hardship that the petitioner’s U.S. citizen spouse would face upon his removal. (Galeano-Romero v. Barr, 8/4/20)
FOIA Request Seeks Information on Immigration Court Operations During COVID-19 Pandemic
AILA, the American Immigration Council, and the NIPNLG filed a FOIA request to obtain documents related to EOIR’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The FOIA request seeks expedited processing for information that is integral to understanding immigration court operations during the health crisis.
New FOIA Request Filed to Force Agency to Release Immigration Court Operations Information on COVID-19 Pandemic
AILA, the Council, and NIPNLG filed a FOIA request to obtain documents related to EOIR’s response to COVID-19, noting that EOIR has repeatedly ignored requests for information and seeking expedited release of documents that are integral to understanding EOIR’s operations during the pandemic.
Ethical Considerations Related to Affirmatively Filing an Asylum Application for the Purpose of Applying for Cancellation of Removal and Adjustment
Learn more about the significant ethical questions posed by submitting an affirmative asylum application with the goal of submitting an application for cancellation of removal, including candor to the tribunal, fees, what constitutes a frivolous application, and much more.
CA5 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Albanian Citizen Who Received Death Threats from Members of Socialist Party
The court upheld the denial of asylum to the Albanian petitioner, who had been threatened and attacked by members of his country’s Socialist Party, finding no error in the BIA’s conclusion that the petitioner’s injuries did not amount to past persecution. (Gjetani v. Barr, 7/31/20)
CA8 Finds Petitioner Failed to Show He Would Likely Be Tortured in South Sudan Based on His Membership in an Ethnic Minority
The court held that the BIA had correctly found that petitioner, who was a member of an ethnic minority, must show more than a pattern of general ethnic violence in South Sudan to meet the likelihood of torture requirement under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). (Lasu v. Barr, 7/31/20)
CA8 Upholds Deferral of Removal Denial to Iraqi Petitioner with a Criminal Record
Upholding the BIA’s denial of deferral of removal, the court found that the Iraqi petitioner’s argument that he would likely be tortured upon return to Iraq because of his criminal convictions was based on a chain of assumptions and speculation. (Alzawed v. Barr, 7/31/20)
CA10 Finds Petitioner’s Colorado Drug Conviction Did Not Qualify as a Predicate for Removal
The court held that the Colorado statute under which the petitioner was convicted for possessing hydrocodone was broader than its federal counterpart, the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), and that no categorical match existed between the state statute and the CSA. (Johnson v. Barr, 7/31/20)
The Council and NILA Submit Supplemental Letter Brief on Fifth Circuit’s Jurisdiction to Hear Challenge to Denial of Adjustment of Status
The Council and the National Immigration Litigation Alliance (NILA) submitted a supplemental brief in Solorzano v. Nielson urging the fifth circuit to find that it has jurisdiction over a challenge to a denial of adjustment of status where applicant cannot be placed in removal proceedings.
ICE Final Rule on Changes Applicable to Surety Bond Companies
ICE final rule which requires surety companies seeking to overcome a bond breach determination to exhaust administrative remedies, and which sets forth “for cause” standards so that ICE may decline bonds from companies that do not cure their deficient performance. (85 FR 45968, 7/31/20)
BIA Finds IJ Improperly Drew Falsus in Uno Inference
Unpublished BIA decision finds IJ improperly drew falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus inference where sole false testimony related to whether respondent rather than his prior attorney signed his adjustment application. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Luwaga, 7/31/20)
BIA Finds Attorney Provided Ineffective Assistance by Missending Medical Examination
Unpublished BIA decision finds prior attorney provided ineffective assistance by mistakenly submitting medical examination to USCIS rather than immigration court. Special thanks to IRAC. (Matter of Samuels-Foster, 7/30/20)
Attorney General Rules on Categorical Approach to Determining Aggravated Felonies
Ruling on the application of the categorical approach to determining aggravated felonies and that respondent’s conviction for grand larceny in the second degree in NY was an aggravated felony, the AG vacated BIA’s decision in Matter of Reyes. Matter of Reyes, 28 I&N Dec. 52 (A.G. 2020)
CA3 Holds IJ Failed to Reconsider Discretionary Denial of Asylum After Sri Lankan Petitioner Was Granted Withholding
Granting the petition for review, the court held that the IJ abused his discretion by failing to reconsider pursuant to 8 CFR §1208.16(e) his discretionary denial of asylum to the Sri Lankan petitioner, who was subsequently granted withholding of removal. (Sathanthrasa v. Att’y Gen., 7/30/20)