Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in Fast Track Deportations

by

visa-3653492_1280On December 2, 2025, USCIS issued a policy memorandum placing a hold on numerous immigration benefit requests and ordering the re-examination of previously approved cases.

What the Memo Says: Key Provisions

  • Pending benefit requests frozen for many nationals. USCIS is pausing processing of all pending immigration benefit requests if the applicant’s country of birth or citizenship is one of the 19 countries listed in the June 2025 travel ban.
  • Affected Benefit Requests: The pause will affect pending Form I-485 (Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status), Form I-90 (Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card (Green Card)), Form N-470 (Application to Preserve Residence for Naturalization Purposes), Form I-751, (Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence), and Form I-131 (Application for Travel Documents, Parole Documents, and Arrival/Departure Records).
  • Re-review of approved benefits. Immigration benefits (green cards, status adjustments, travel documents, etc.) already approved may now be subject to re-review if the beneficiary entered the U.S. on or after January 20, 2021.
  • Asylum applications on pause — for everyone. All pending Forms I-589 (Asylum / Withholding of Removal applications) have been paused, regardless of nationality. The hold will remain in effect until lifted by the USCIS Director
  • Extensive list of potentially affected benefits. The freeze could impact I-485 adjustment-of-status applications, green-card renewals, travel documents, removal of conditional residence, preservation of residence for naturalization, and more. Employer-sponsored petitions may also face delays or uncertainty.

In short: thousands of pending and even approved immigration benefit cases could now be delayed or re-evaluated. The USCIS policy memorandum states that in light of recent threats to the American people:

Continue reading

by

judge-3008038_1280This week, the Justice Department announced that it has hired 36 new immigration judges — 11 permanent and 25 temporary — for the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), a key agency that handles immigration court proceedings in deportation cases.

What’s happening?

The hiring comes after several months of layoffs among immigration judges occurring earlier this year. In the past 10 months, EOIR fired more than 125 judges, causing delays in immigration court proceedings across the country.

The courts in Massachusetts and Illinois were among the most affected by these departures. The good news is these newly hired judges will begin serving across 16 states nationwide.

Who are the new judges?

  • The permanent hires largely come from federal‑government backgrounds: some from EOIR itself, some from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and others who previously trained agents or worked as asylum officers.
  • The temporary hires include military attorneys drawn from the Marines, Navy, Air Force, and Army.
  • These changes accompany a modification in DOJ policy that lowers the qualification requirements for temporary judges—prior immigration law experience is no longer mandatory.

Continue reading

by

prison-370112_1280Introducing sweeping changes, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has expanded its role by gaining law enforcement powers previously limited to agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Under a new final rule published today, USCIS will now recruit 1,811-classified special agents—fully empowered officers with authority—to investigate, arrest, and prosecute individuals violating U.S. immigration laws.

What’s Changed?

  • Law Enforcement Authority: The newly designated USCIS special agents are authorized to carry firearms, execute search and arrest warrants, make arrests, and use force—including in pursuit and potentially lethal situations—under standard federal law enforcement protocols.
  • Operational Autonomy: Previously, USCIS investigations—especially those involving criminal violations—were referred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
  • Enforcement Agency: Now, USCIS itself can manage law enforcement investigations from start to finish, including investigating civil and criminal violations within the jurisdiction of USCIS and ordering expedited removal when warranted.

Continue reading

by
Gavin_Newsom_by_Gage_Skidmore

Attribution: Gage Skidmore

On Friday July 11, 2025, a federal judge ruled that the government’s ongoing immigration raids in Southern California and its denial of legal counsel to detained immigrants likely violates the Constitution.

In so ruling, the court issued two temporary restraining orders (TROs) barring the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other federal agencies from continuing these actions in the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo. (Pedro Vasquez Perdomo v. Kristi Noem (2:25-cv-05605)

The first TRO prohibits immigration agents from stopping individuals without reasonable suspicion and bars law enforcement from relying solely on the following factors—alone or in combination—to form reasonable suspicion for a stop including (1) apparent race or ethnicity (2) speaking Spanish or English with an accent (3) presence in a particular location like a bus stop, car wash, day laborer pick up site, or agricultural site, or (4) the type of work the person does.

The second TRO orders DHS to provide access to counsel on weekdays, weekends, and holidays for those who are detained in B-18, the basement of a federal building in downtown Los Angeles located at 300 North Los Angeles Street.

It further requires immigration officials to develop guidance on how agents and officers should determine whether “reasonable suspicion” exists when conducting stops and to implement training for officers involved in immigration operations.

In addition to immigration officers, the TROs apply to the FBI and Justice Department, who are named in the lawsuit and are involved in immigration enforcement actions.

Continue reading

by

prison-370112_1280A new lawsuit filed by a man detained in San Diego, California, is challenging the controversial practice of courthouse arrests by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) taking place in recent months. The case could offer critical insight into the government’s approach in making these arrests. (A.M. v. Larose (3:25-cv-01412))

The man identified in court filings as A.M. is seeking asylum in the United States after being subjected to torture in his home country from his human rights advocacy. On June 3, he arrived for what he believed would be a routine immigration court hearing but was shocked to find that the judge had dismissed his case and ICE agents were waiting outside, ready to arrest him and take him to Otay Mesa’s Detention Facility to eventually be deported.

Unfortunately, A.M.’s case is not unique. In recent months, the Trump administration has enforced a controversial policy in immigration courts to expedite deportations by instructing judges to swiftly dismiss cases, subjecting individuals to expedited removal without giving them a meaningful opportunity to contest the government’s claims or consult attorneys.

This approach, detailed in a May 30 directive from the Executive Office for Immigration Review, encourages judges to grant oral motions to dismiss without the standard 10-day response period, effectively eliminating opportunities for individuals to contest their cases. Once dismissed, individuals are immediately eligible for expedited removal, making it possible for ICE officers to arrest them.

Continue reading