Litigation Update: Harmful DOJ Rule Enjoined

By Admin

|

March 15, 2021

On March 10, 2021, Senior District Judge Susan Illston from the U.S. District Court of Northern District of California granted a preliminary injunction in the case Centro Legal de La Raza et al v. EOIR et al, challenging the harmful DOJ rule severely limiting sua sponte motions in immigration court proceedings and curtailing the use of administrative closure as docket management tool, among other harmful provisions.

ASISTA and our partners submitted an amicus brief in support of the Plaintiffs, Centro Legal de La Raza, Tahirih Justice Center, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, and RAICES, who were represented by Sidley Austin, LLP, Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus, and Lakin & Wille LLP. 

Our amicus demonstrated the impact that eliminating administrative closure would have on survivors. The Court found that the plaintiffs “are likely to succeed on their claim that the agencies did not engage in reasoned decision-making when formulating the Rule . . . including that the changes implemented by the Rule will foreclose noncitizens from seeking humanitarian relief to which they may be entitled and will result in the deportation of noncitizens who have meritorious claims for relief.”

The order directly cites our amicus brief, including the significant U visa wait times, and references how the briefs submitted “provide numerous specific real-life examples of how administrative closure has been used in cases to allow survivors of domestic violence and human trafficking, including children, to pursue claims for relief before USCIS and state court.

Judge Illston’s order enjoins EOIR from implementing or enforcing the rule pending final adjudication of the case, to take effect immediately. The impact of this order signifies that immigration judges and BIA members continue to have the authority to reopen proceedings sua sponte, and that the broad pre-January 15, 2021 regulatory language at 8 C.F.R. 1003.10(b) (held to permit administrative closure in Zuniga-Romero v. Barr and Meza-Morales v. Barr) remains in effect. 

We are grateful for the incredible work of our pro bono team at Morgan Lewis & Bockius, LLP on our amicus brief. In addition, we’re grateful to the plaintiffs and representatives in this litigation as well as the efforts of those involved in challenging this harmful rule in the D.C. District Court, including National Immigrant Justice Center, CLINIC, HAIS, Brooklyn Defender Service, FIRRP, and Democracy Forward.

Leave a Comment

Recent Posts

By Maria Lazzarino May 29, 2026
This Quick Reference Guide and Risk Assessment Worksheet is designed to accompany the longer Practice Advisory on Factors to Weigh When Considering a T visa. It provides a streamlined overview of key considerations and a practical tool for identifying potential risks, benefits, and client-specific concerns during case consultations.
By Maria Lazzarino May 28, 2026
Survivors hoping to earn U- or T-based adjustment of status must generally spend 3 years in U or T status and must be in valid U or T status when they apply to adjust. If a survivor falls out of status, they may be able to regain status by means of a nunc pro tunc extension of status application. This Practice Advisory describes how to submit a nunc pro tunc I-539 extension of status application and contains an annotated sample filing from a successful case. It warns that nunc pro tunc I-539s may not be filed if removal proceedings have commenced against the survivor.
By N/A N/A May 6, 2026
This Practice Alert summarizes USCIS’s new extreme vetting policies, including broad adjudication holds, re-review of previously approved cases, and heightened discretionary scrutiny, and explains their serious implications for immigrant survivors seeking safety and stability. It also provides practical guidance for practitioners on preparing clients for the impact of these measures and on developing case strategies and potential legal challenges. 
By Maria Lazzarino May 6, 2026
On January 23, 2026, the federal Trafficking Survivors’ Relief Act of 2026 (TSRA) became law. The TSRA provides a remedy for trafficking survivors to obtain relief from federal criminal records stemming directly from their exploitation. In enacting the TSRA, Congress acknowledged that trafficking survivors frequently acquire a criminal history as a result of their exploitation, which can be a barrier to employment, housing, education, and essential support services and make them more vulnerable to re-exploitation. This 2-pager describes the TSRA and its potential use by immigrant survivors of trafficking charged with or convicted of federal crimes.