Attorney General Pam Bondi has issued a pair of immigration rulings aimed at making it more difficult for immigrant families fleeing persecution and victims of domestic abuse to qualify for asylum in the United States. The rulings mark the first time the attorney general has used her authority to review immigration appeals court rulings and set precedents for judges nationwide.
What changed
AG Bondi certified Matter of S-S-F-M-, and used that case to overrule the Garland decision in A-B- III, overrule Matter of A-R-C-G-, and put back in place as precedent Matter of A-B- I and II from 2018 and early 2021. In the Matter of A-B- line of cases, prior administrations had rejected the proposition that harm inflicted by nonstate actors—such as domestic partners or gang members—could form the basis for asylum. The Garland decision, A-B- III, rejected the broad language finding that harm caused by non-state actors would generally not be eligible for asylum.
In Matter of R-E-R-M- & J-D-R-M-, Bondi restores the 2019 Matter of L-E-A- ruling, which attempted to end asylum for families and children fleeing targeted violence. The net effect is the reinstatement of restrictive standards from the prior Trump administration.
Why it matters
The legal standard now applicable largely rejects domestic violence as grounds for asylum. Attorney General Bondi’s decision to return to A-B- and again overrule Matter of A-R-C-G- means that asylum claims will be harder to prove for survivors of gender-based violence.
For practitioners, this reshapes the framework you must use to argue domestic-violence and gang-violence asylum claims. Survivors may be deterred from even seeking asylum protections, believing that asylum officers and immigration judges will be predisposed to deny their claims based on the Attorney General’s decision. Immigration judges who previously relied on the 2021 Garland standard will now be bound by the 2018 and 2021 Sessions/Rosen standards instead. Taken together, Bondi’s rulings will effectively shutter some of the few remaining avenues for women and families fleeing persecution to find safety in the United States.
Way forward
-
Immediately review pending and upcoming domestic violence and gang violence asylum cases under the reinstated Matter of A-B- I and II standards to identify whether your existing legal theories remain viable or require recalibration.
-
For clients already in removal proceedings, assess whether reopening of denial motions or appeals are still possible under the new standard, and consider what additional evidence might satisfy the narrower framework.
-
Document and preserve evidence of government unwillingness or inability to protect your client from the private actor—this remains the pathway, albeit narrower, for asylum eligibility.
-
Monitor federal court challenges to these precedent decisions; the Ninth Circuit and other courts may provide persuasive alternative grounds or challenge the Attorney General’s reasoning on constitutional or statutory grounds.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Fola Form, Inc. is a software company, not a law firm. Immigration law is complex and changes frequently. You should consult with a licensed immigration attorney about your specific situation before taking any action. Attorney General Pam Bondi has issued a pair of immigration rulings dated September 2, 2025; verify all policy statements against the primary source linked above and the full text of Matter of S-S-F-M- and Matter of R-E-R-M- & J-D-R-M- as published by the Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review.