On June 5, 2026, Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. of the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island vacated USCIS policies that had frozen immigration benefits for nationals of thirty-nine countries since late last year. The court held that all four challenged policies are unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act, declared them invalid, and set them aside. This is a nationwide vacatur, not a preliminary injunction limited to named plaintiffs—a significant remedy for practitioners and clients in affected categories.
What changed
The December 2, 2025 memorandum (PM-602-0192) imposed the initial adjudication hold tied to the nineteen-country list and placed a nationwide hold on asylum applications. The January 1, 2026 memorandum (PM-602-0194) expanded the hold to cover all thirty-nine Travel Ban Countries. Immigrants from 39 African, Asian, Latin American, and Middle Eastern countries have been “categorically barred” from receiving final decisions on, among other things, their asylum, work permit, green card and citizenship applications.
The court held that USCIS exceeded its authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act when it paused adjudications of many immigration benefits for nationals of designated countries. USCIS directed personnel to place a hold on asylum and withholding-of-removal adjudications while conducting broader reviews. The court found the policy inconsistent with governing immigration law and administrative requirements and vacated it.
USCIS directed officers to re-review previously approved benefit requests involving nationals of covered countries who entered the United States on or after January 20, 2021. The policy created uncertainty for individuals who had already received approvals and believed their cases had been resolved. The court found USCIS lacked authority for the policy and vacated it.
USCIS revised its Policy Manual to instruct adjudicators to consider country-specific concerns associated with travel-ban countries as significant negative discretionary factors. The court found this policy unlawful and vacated it.
On the merits, the court found that USCIS claimed statutory and regulatory authority it does not possess, failed to provide the reasoned explanation the law requires, ignored the reliance interests of applicants, and justified the policies with national security concerns that the court characterized as pretextual.
Why it matters
For practitioners and clients, this ruling immediately changes the landscape:
-
Adjudication must resume: Applicants who had filed properly, paid their fees, completed biometrics, and attended interviews were left waiting for months with no decision, and in many cases lost work authorization, jobs, and legal status while their cases sat frozen. The vacatur means USCIS must now render decisions on these frozen cases.
-
Nationwide scope: Unlike the earlier preliminary injunction wins in other districts, which have generally limited relief to the named plaintiffs in those cases, the remedy here is vacatur of the underlying policies themselves. That carries far broader effect. All practitioners representing clients from the 39 affected countries can rely on this decision.
-
Legal foundation restored: The court pointed to the mandatory statutory and regulatory language governing asylum and withholding adjudications, noting that USCIS is not free to adjudicate some cases while indefinitely holding a subset of others based on country of birth.
-
Discretionary factors eliminated: The court struck the Policy Manual revision that instructed adjudicators to treat travel-ban country origin as a negative discretionary factor. Adjudicators can no longer rely on that instruction.
-
Appeal likely: DHS is expected to appeal and very possibly to seek a stay. Until the dust settles, the status of pending cases for affected applicants could shift again, potentially more than once.
Way forward
-
Pull your inventory: Identify all pending cases for clients from the 39 travel-ban countries (asylum, I-485, I-140, I-765, I-131, N-400, I-539, withholding-of-removal, etc.). Flag cases that were on hold since November–December 2025.
-
Check case status: Log into myUSCIS or EOIR systems to verify whether the case has already moved off hold and is being scheduled for an interview, decision, or next step.
-
Contact USCIS: For cases that remain stalled, file a case inquiry or service request with the National Customer Service Center requesting adjudication, citing the June 5, 2026 court order in Dorcas International v. USCIS.
-
Prepare for acceleration: Cases that were fully developed (interviews completed, biometrics current, documents submitted) may be adjudicated on an expedited schedule. Have your clients ready for decisions and post-decision steps (oath, travel document issuance, work authorization card production, etc.).
Disclaimer
This article is written by Fola Editorial, a software company, not a law firm. Nothing in this article is legal advice. Do not rely on it as a substitute for advice from a licensed immigration attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction. Verify all information against the primary court opinion and the official USCIS Policy Memoranda cited. Immigration policy and court orders can change or be stayed on appeal without notice. Always consult a qualified immigration attorney before advising a client or taking action based on this or any policy update.