A lawsuit filed Tuesday in Washington alleges the Trump administration violated U.S. law by providing Iran’s government with confidential information detailing the asylum applications for Iranians it planned to deport. The complaint, filed by the Iranian American Legal Defense Fund and public-interest counsel in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, raises questions about whether ICE and the State Department are complying with federal confidentiality rules that have protected asylum applicants for decades.
What changed
Public Citizen Litigation Group filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and other members of the Trump administration to stop the illegal sharing of confidential immigration files of Iranian asylum seekers with the Iranian government.
The administration began sharing information about the applications with Iran in March 2025. Since then, U.S. government officials have “periodically mailed or hand delivered immigration files of Iranians” in immigration custody to the Iranian government, according to the complaint. The information included details about asylum applications filed by people who say they were persecuted for converting to Christianity, for their sexuality or for participating in the Women, Life, Freedom protests against the Iranian government in 2022.
The detainees say they have been called into meetings with senior officials from the Iran Interest Section and officials already know information within their asylum claims, according to the complaint. The lawsuit is seeking to halt sharing information about asylum seekers with the Iranian government and appoint an independent monitor to prevent future disclosures.
Why it matters
Federal regulations passed in the late 1990s prohibit the government from sharing information that could reveal that the individual getting deported applied for asylum. The lawsuit rests on the theory that ICE cannot lawfully disclose asylum application details to the Iranian government—even when coordinating deportations—without violating these confidentiality rules.
For you as a practitioner, the stakes are acute. The lawsuit claims that information on hundreds of Iranian detainees seeking asylum, including information protected from disclosure, was shared. The disclosures allegedly include identifying information, familial relationships, political opinions, and the reasons they feared the Iranian government. If you are representing an Iranian asylum seeker in removal proceedings or considering filing for an Iranian client, you should assume their file may have been shared and be prepared to advise on the risks.
Additionally, if this lawsuit succeeds and the court issues a preliminary injunction, ICE and DOS will be barred from further disclosures and may be required to notify all affected individuals—which could support motions to reopen removal proceedings or applications for stays of removal.
Way forward
-
Ascertain client impact: If you represent an Iranian national in removal or asylum proceedings, determine whether they were detained by ICE after March 2025 and whether they may be among the “hundreds” whose files were allegedly shared. Public records requests to ICE and the Iranian Interest Section may help.
-
Monitor the litigation: Track developments in this case (U.S. District Court for D.C., Iranian American Legal Defense Fund v. Rubio et al., filed July 7, 2026). A preliminary injunction or class certification could materially affect your practice and your clients’ rights.
-
Preserve confidentiality arguments: In removal proceedings, preserve objections to any use of asylum application details in government communications or deportation coordination with Iran. Cite federal regulations prohibiting the government from sharing information that could reveal that the individual getting deported applied for asylum.
-
Demand notice and relief: If your client is a potential class member, be ready to move for notice under FRCP 23 once the case advances, and consider relief such as a stay of removal pending final judgment.
Disclaimer
This article is provided for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Folaform is a software platform, not a law firm. Do not rely on this article as a substitute for consultation with a licensed immigration attorney in your jurisdiction. The substance of immigration law and policy can change without notice. Always verify the current status of any cited rule, regulation, or litigation against primary sources—including the court docket, federal regulations at https://www.ecfr.gov, and the agencies’ official websites—before relying on it in practice.