A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration had adopted unlawful policies that barred people from 39 countries from receiving decisions on applications for asylum, work permits, green cards, and citizenship. Chief U.S. District Judge John McConnell in Rhode Island struck down the policies, saying they left people from dozens of African, Asian, Latin American, and Middle Eastern countries in “indeterminate legal limbo”.
What changed
USCIS adopted the policies as part of a ramped-up immigration crackdown after the November shooting of two National Guard members, which prosecutors say was carried out by an Afghan immigrant. The policies USCIS adopted placed a hold on processing immigration benefit applications from people from those 39 countries.
Judge McConnell found that USCIS adopted the policies without statutory and regulatory authority and based on “anti-immigrant sentiments that it is forbidden from letting influence its decision-making”. The court ruled that USCIS “claims statutory and regulatory authority that it does not possess; makes decisions without the reasoned explanations that it must provide; acts without regard for the reliance interests of applicants that it must consider; and justifies its actions with pretextual concerns of ‘national security’ that mask anti-immigrant sentiments”.
Why it matters
Immigrants from the affected countries had adhered to the legal processes that Congress had enacted and USCIS had adopted by regulation, yet had been “stuck waiting, for months on end, for benefit requests that USCIS refuses to adjudicate”. The policies left millions of immigrants without work authorization or legal status for over six months.
The broad ruling will impact all pending cases at USCIS involving people from the travel ban countries, not just those included in the lawsuit. The decision eliminates the adjudication freeze and requires USCIS to resume processing benefit applications on their merits for nationals of the 39 covered countries. Practitioners representing affected clients can now proceed with adjudication strategy without the categorical bar that previously existed.
Way forward
- Check country eligibility: Confirm whether your client’s country of origin is among the 39 affected nations. Countries subject to full travel bans included Afghanistan, Iran, Haiti, Somalia, Venezuela and Syria (see the court opinion for the complete list).
- Resume case strategy: Begin or resume adjudication work on pending asylum applications, I-485 adjustment cases, work permit renewals, and N-400 citizenship applications that were frozen under the policy.
- Track appeal prospects: Monitor whether the government files an appeal or seeks a stay of the injunction; the court’s reasoning on arbitrary-and-capricious review is strong, but the political environment may drive further litigation.
- Document client harm: For clients who suffered documented economic, educational, or medical delays due to the freeze, preserve evidence for potential relief arguments in your cases.
Disclaimer
This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. While we strive for accuracy, Fola Editorial is not a law firm. Consult a licensed immigration attorney for advice on your specific situation. Immigration policy and court decisions can change without notice. Verify all information against the primary court documents and official USCIS guidance. The court’s ruling does not address separate asylum adjudications conducted by immigration judges at the border, which remain outside USCIS’s jurisdiction.