A federal judge has overturned Trump administration policies halting immigration benefits decisions for nationals of 39 countries. The judge ruled that the decision not to accept or respond to asylum seekers’ applications from 39 countries was unlawful. The ruling has immediate implications for pending cases and how you advise clients from affected nations on processing timelines and legal status.
What changed
On Friday, District Judge John McConnell condemned restrictions imposed in November 2025, following the Washington, DC shooting of two National Guard members. The policy prevented migrants from receiving decisions on asylum applications, work permits and citizenship, and left many of them in a legal limbo.
The judge wrote 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,” finding USCIS’s actions “contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious”.
The 39 countries are located predominantly in Africa, the Middle East and Asia. The policy effectively barred citizens from these nations from receiving final decisions on asylum cases, green cards, work approval and citizenship applications.
Why it matters
This ruling restores the legal obligation of USCIS to process pending cases. Over six months after the policy took effect, many individuals remained without work, without legal status, and without any meaningful ability to plan for their futures. Practitioners now have a court order supporting demand for adjudication on the merits, not indefinite administrative delay.
The judge’s reasoning—that USCIS exceeded its statutory authority and acted without rational basis—creates binding precedent in the district court. The judge took issue with the Trump administration’s claims that the restrictions were needed for national security, stating USCIS used “pretextual concerns of ‘national security’ that mask anti-immigrant sentiments”. This language may support motions in other cases where similar national-security justifications lack evidentiary support.
If you represent clients from the 39 affected countries with pending I-485, I-765, I-90, N-400, or asylum claims filed before November 2025, this ruling removes the administrative freeze blocking adjudication.
Way forward
- Review pending cases: Identify which clients are nationals of the 39 countries and have applications pending since November 2025. Cross-check their case status in myUSCIS.
- Request status updates: Contact USCIS Service Centers to confirm that adjudication will resume on frozen cases, and request expedited processing where delay has caused documented hardship (job loss, housing insecurity, educational delays).
- File motions if needed: If an application remains unadjudicated after two weeks, file a motion to expedite under the court order.
- Monitor DHS response: The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has not yet responded to the ruling. Watch for a potential appeal, interim guidance, or further policy action. Stay in touch with AILA for updates.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Fola is a software company, not a law firm. Always consult a licensed immigration attorney to advise on your specific case. Verify all information against the primary court opinion and the source URL linked above. Immigration policy and agency guidance can change without notice; check the USCIS website and EOIR databases regularly for updates.