A federal judge on Friday struck down a Trump administration policy enacted after the shooting of two National Guard members that made it harder for immigrants from dozens of countries to stay and enter the U.S. In a ruling harshly criticizing the administration, U.S. District Chief Judge John McConnell Jr. said the policy “threw the lives of countless immigrants living in the United States into indeterminate legal limbo,” and accused the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services of ignoring the law.
What changed
The policies enacted after the National Guard shooting last year meant that 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.
In a lengthy 135-page court opinion, Chief U.S. District Judge John McConnell found that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) acted unlawfully by implementing broad restrictions without authorization from Congress or established regulations. The judge has ordered USCIS to resume the processing of immigration applications filed by people from the 39 countries who were affected by Trump’s travel ban, as well as asylum applications.
Judge McConnell also invalidated a USCIS policy that required immigrants from countries on the Trump administration’s travel ban list—who had already been approved for immigration benefits after entering the United States after 2021—to undergo a second review of their cases. The judge rejected the government’s argument that these additional screenings and country-based evaluations were necessary for national security, finding that the policy lacked sufficient legal justification.
Why it matters
If you represent a client from one of the 39 affected countries with a pending asylum, employment authorization, green card, or citizenship application at USCIS, this ruling is immediately actionable. The broad ruling would impact all pending cases at USCIS involving people from the travel ban countries, not just those included in the lawsuit.
This decision reverses a blanket hold that left applicants unable to work, adjust status, or obtain travel documents for months. You should now expect USCIS to adjudicate these cases on their legal merits—without the country-of-origin screening that previously blocked all decisions.
Note: The ruling does not affect asylum grants to those stopped at the border; immigration judges grant asylum to those stopped at the border. This decision applies only to affirmative asylum claims and other immigration benefits decided by USCIS.
Way forward
- Check your pending docket: Contact USCIS or your client’s assigned office to confirm receipt of the ruling and request an update on adjudication timeline for any cases affected by the freeze.
- File status inquiries or RFEs as needed: If your client’s case was stalled, consider submitting a case status inquiry referencing the court decision, or prepare to respond to any pending requests for evidence now that processing is resuming.
- If your client was denied based on the policy: Explore reopening or appeal options (via RFE, ADIT motion, or administrative appeal) if the case was decided while the unlawful hold was in effect.
- Document the injunction date: Keep a copy of the judgment for your file and any future appeal briefing. The decision date is June 5, 2026.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Fola is a software company, not a law firm. You should consult with a licensed immigration attorney to understand how this ruling applies to your specific case and circumstances. The information summarized here is drawn from the source article cited above; immigration policy can change without notice, and you should verify the current status of this ruling and any appeals against the primary source documents and with USCIS or the immigration court handling your case.