On Friday, a federal judge struck down a Trump administration policy enacted after the shooting of two National Guard members that made it harder for immigrants from dozens of countries to stay and enter the U.S. In a 135-page opinion, Chief U.S. District Judge John McConnell found that USCIS acted unlawfully by implementing broad restrictions without authorization from Congress or established regulations. The ruling impacts all pending cases at USCIS involving people from the travel ban countries, not just those included in the lawsuit.
What changed
The Trump administration policy halted the processing of immigration benefit applications for individuals from 39 countries, finding that the administration had exceeded its legal authority. Immigrants from 39 African, Asian, Latin American, and Middle Eastern countries have been “categorically barred” from receiving final decisions on their asylum, work permit, green card, and citizenship applications.
Judge McConnell found that USCIS could not withhold decisions across broad categories of asylum, work permit, green card, and citizenship applications based on an applicant’s country of origin. The court concluded that the policy unfairly targeted applicants based on their country of origin and violated federal immigration and administrative law.
The judge has ordered USCIS to resume the processing of immigration applications filed by people from the 39 countries, and invalidated a USCIS policy that required immigrants from countries on the travel ban list—who had already been approved for immigration benefits—to undergo a second review of their cases.
Why it matters
For immigration practitioners, this ruling requires immediate operational changes. The administration had paused asylum case processing and suspended immigration benefit applications for affected individuals subject to the travel ban for an undetermined period of time, leaving millions of immigrants across the United States facing uncertainty about their legal status.
You now must resume advising clients from the 39 affected countries on all USCIS-adjudicated benefits: asylum (for those physically present in the U.S.), employment authorization, green cards, and naturalization. The agency within the Homeland Security Department often grants asylum, but only for those already in the United States when they apply. Immigration judges grant asylum to those stopped at the border; the ruling does not affect them, nor do the policies that sparked the lawsuit. This distinction matters: the decision applies only to USCIS, not to border or immigration court proceedings.
USCIS had unlawfully froze parts of the immigration benefits process. The court found the freeze lacked reasonable legal justification and contradicted Congress’s mandate.
Way forward
-
Identify affected clients: Determine whether any pending or recently-denied applications involve nationals of the 39 countries covered by the policy. Cross-reference the country list with your current docket.
-
Resume adjudication assumption: Advise clients that USCIS must now process their applications on the merits. Do not assume additional delays based on country of origin.
-
Secondary review cases: If a client received a preliminary approval, then faced a “second review” requirement under the now-voided policy, alert them that this step has been invalidated. Follow up with USCIS to move the case forward.
-
Backlog navigation: USCIS will face a large adjudication backlog. Monitor your cases closely and follow up with the agency on priority dates and processing status.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Fola is software, not a law firm. Immigration law is complex and policies can change without notice. Consult a licensed immigration attorney regarding your specific situation. Always verify current policy against the primary source linked above and the official USCIS website.