Immigration judges nationwide have been instructed in a mandatory training to sharply limit the time given to vulnerable people in court, including abused and abandoned children and survivors of violent crime. The training, led by a senior appeals court judge, pressures adjudicators to deny or severely curtail continuances—the procedural tool that has historically allowed more time for legal representation, case preparation, and approval of pending visa and green card applications. If you represent clients in removal proceedings, this shift directly affects your case management strategy.
What changed
Hundreds of immigration judges recently participated in a presentation entitled “Motions to Continue: Efficiently Advancing Cases to Completion”, according to training materials obtained by The Guardian. The session, led by Board of Immigration Appeals judge Keith Hunsucker, who denied over 80% of asylum cases during his time on the bench, discouraged judges from giving people more than 10 days to find an attorney and pushed them to deny continuances even when more time would let immigrants receive visas or green cards they’ve already qualified for or been approved for.
The training specifically targeted special immigrant juvenile status for abused or neglected youth and U non-immigrant status for crime survivors, arguing delays caused by federal processing backlogs shouldn’t pause deportation proceedings. The training’s thrust was to tightly restrict continuances in favor of faster adjudications, even when granting more time would allow people to receive legal protections to remain in the US, such as a visa or green card they have qualified for or had approved and are simply awaiting.
Why it matters
This guidance fundamentally reshapes how you approach removal defense in clients with pending immigrant visa or green card applications. Under prior practice, immigration judges frequently granted continuances to allow time for USCIS approvals, visa number availability, or consular processing—all of which can take months or years. A deportation slams shut some of those pathways and yet is a much more likely outcome when continuances are denied and rulings are made abruptly.
The 10-day deadline for attorney retention is particularly problematic for practitioners. Many clients lack resources to identify and hire qualified immigration counsel within that window, especially if they must navigate language barriers or are detained. In March 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals applied those principles in Matter of Pinzon Rozo, involving a respondent with an approved petition for special immigrant juvenile classification who sought to keep removal proceedings on hold until a visa became available. The Board ruled that the immigration judge had erred by granting the continuance because the respondent’s priority date was not expected to become current for an uncertain and potentially lengthy period. An approved immigration petition did not justify an indefinite delay under the circumstances presented in that case—setting a precedent that judges are now being trained to follow aggressively.
Way forward
-
Reassess your timeline and motions practice. File motions to continue earlier and with more granular factual detail showing how a brief delay directly supports approval of a pending benefit. Build the record now with declarations and evidence of case progress.
-
Coordinate with USCIS more aggressively. Obtain approvals and priority-date updates in writing before removal hearings. If an immigrant visa petition or green card application is pending, get evidence of its current status to present to the judge—don’t rely on the judge understanding federal processing norms.
-
Prepare for push-back on all continuance requests. Expect judges to apply the “good cause” standard under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29 more stringently. Justice Department precedent in Matter of L-A-B-R- says judges considering a delay for a separate immigration benefit should focus primarily on whether that benefit is likely to be granted and whether it would materially affect the removal case—this is now the operational template.
-
Advise clients on parallel relief options. If removal proceedings begin while a green card application or U visa is pending, explore whether stays of removal exist, whether prosecutorial discretion applies, or whether bond release is possible. Do not assume a continuation will hold the line.
Disclaimer
Fola Form is a technology platform, not a law firm. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult a licensed immigration attorney regarding your specific situation and the application of this guidance to your case. Immigration policy and DOJ training priorities can change without notice; verify all information against the primary sources linked above and current precedent before filing.