A federal court vacated USCIS’s freeze on work permits, green cards, and other benefit requests for applicants from thirty-nine countries designated as “high risk” by the government, as well as foreign nationals with documentation issued or endorsed by the Palestinian Authority. On June 5, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island ruled in Dorcas International Institute v. USCIS that four USCIS policies violated the Administrative Procedure Act and were arbitrary and capricious. The decision clears the way for USCIS to resume adjudication of stalled applications, though the government may appeal or seek a stay.
What changed
In Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island v. USCIS, Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr., of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, found that each policy—the global asylum hold policy, the adjudication benefits hold policy, the comprehensive re-review policy, and the “country-specific factors” policy—violated the Administrative Procedure Act and conflicted with existing law.
The court specifically vacated:
- Benefits Hold Policy: This policy froze the processing of green card, work permit, and citizenship applications for people from the travel ban countries.
- Global Asylum Hold: This policy paused all asylum decisions regardless of country of origin.
- Comprehensive Re-Review: This policy required officers to re-examine previously approved benefit requests for individuals from travel ban countries and consider revocation of those approvals.
- Country-Specific Negative Factor: This policy directed officers to treat an applicant’s country of origin (country of birth or country of citizenship) as a significant negative factor if the country was subject to the travel ban.
He additionally found that the policies were arbitrary and capricious because USCIS did not provide a reasoned explanation for enacting the policies, did not account for reliance interests in enacting the policies, and provided a pretextual reason for enacting the policies.
Why it matters
This decision directly affects practitioners representing nationals from the 39 travel-ban countries. Any applications or petitions filed with USCIS that have been paused because of these policies should move forward. If USCIS implements the court order without delay, you can expect pending employment-based I-485 applications, EB green cards, work permit renewals, and other benefit requests to resume processing.
In addition, USCIS can no longer consider an applicant’s country of origin as a negative factor when deciding cases that allow for agency discretion. This removes a major procedural obstacle that had infected adjudications for months.
However, the timeline for USCIS to resume adjudications remains uncertain, as the government may appeal the decision or seek a stay. The government has discretion to appeal this decision and is expected to do so. It could also ask the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to issue a stay of this district court decision while the appeal is litigated. If the government wins a stay at the appellate level, the USCIS pause could remain in effect indefinitely while litigation proceeds.
Way forward
- For practitioners representing affected clients: Monitor https://www.uscis.gov for any policy guidance or operational updates clarifying USCIS’s response to the court order. Do not assume immediate processing; watch for a formal notice.
- For pending employment-based cases: Prepare updated evidence and documents in case files are reopened for adjudication. Do not let files go stale.
- For asylum and other benefit applications: Confirm with USCIS Service Centers or via case tracking whether your client’s application has been lifted from hold status. If still paused, request escalation citing the June 5 court decision.
- Plan for appellate developments: The government’s response—whether appeal, stay motion, or compliance—should be expected within weeks. Be ready to advise clients of changes if a stay is granted.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The source material is a news summary by Ogletree Deakins, not USCIS itself. Immigration and nationality law is complex, and the intersection of administrative law, federal procedure, and appellate strategy requires a licensed attorney. Please consult an immigration attorney licensed in your jurisdiction to advise on your specific case or application. Additionally, policies and court rulings can change without notice, and any stay or reversal on appeal could alter the practical effect of this decision. Verify all information against the court record and official USCIS guidance before making filing decisions.