Order restraining implementation of dangerous measures that would dismantle safeguards at the Board of Immigration Appeals
WASHINGTON, DC — Late last night, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued an order against Amica Immigrant Rights Center and others. v. Bureau of Immigration Appeals and others blocked a key part of the Trump-Vance administration’s new policy that would eliminate meaningful appellate review at the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).
Plaintiffs in the case include Amica Immigrant Rights Center, Brooklyn Defender Services, Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project, HIAS, and the National Immigrant Justice Center. Democracy Forward, American Immigration Council, and National Immigrant Justice Center are representing the plaintiffs.
The lawsuit and motion for preliminary relief challenges the February 6, 2026 Interim Final Rule (IFR) “Appeal Procedures before the Board of Immigration Appeals,” which was scheduled to become effective today, March 9, 2026. The IFR would impose sweeping changes that would strip noncitizens of their right to appeal judgments in immigration cases, which are currently blocked.
Reduces filing time for most appeals from 30 days to 10 days. Requires immediate dismissal of the appeal unless a majority of the BIA’s permanent members vote to accept the case for review within 10 days. Allowing termination decisions to be made before records are created or records are transmitted.
“At a time when immigrants’ due process rights are under attack, this ruling could prevent the BIA from reaching the brink of self-destruction,” said Emily Lover, senior attorney at the Amica Immigrant Rights Center. “We hope this decision is the first of many steps to ensure that immigration courts make decisions based on the law rather than predetermined outcomes.”
“Today’s ruling preserves an important tool for judicial review in deportation proceedings and reminds government agencies to follow proper procedures when seeking to make significant changes to regulations,” said Lucas Marquez, director of civil rights and law reform at Brooklyn Defender Services.
“This ruling preserves a fundamental and important protection for immigrants facing deportation: the ability to appeal,” said Laura St. John, legal director of the Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project. “As the administration continues to strive to deport as many people as quickly and frequently as possible without a fair court date, it is important that everyone has the opportunity to appeal. Without this decision, countless immigrants with legitimate claims would have been hastily deported to dangerous environments, ignoring due process for efficiency.”
“Today, the court reiterates the federal government’s fundamental responsibility to provide basic fairness and due process to all those whose rights it seeks to restrict,” said Stephen Brown, director of immigration law at HIAS. “We are grateful to the attorneys in this case and proud to work with our co-plaintiffs for a fair immigration system.”
“Today’s ruling is an important victory for an administration that seeks to dismantle our immigration system at all costs, betraying our nation’s shared values of due process and access to legal counsel,” said Mary Georgovich, senior litigation attorney at the National Immigration Justice Center. “Although imperfect, the Board of Immigration Appeals is a Congress-mandated body that reviews deportation orders when immigration courts make the wrong decision. Accepting the Trump administration’s reckless proposal to cut off immigrants from a fair opportunity to review bad decisions would put people back in harm’s way. , families would be unjustly separated, all of which would serve the purpose of racially discriminatory mass deportation. We are grateful that the court appears to understand this proposed rule for what it is and has ruled to uphold both due process and the rule of law. ”
“Today’s decision makes clear that the Trump-Vance administration cannot play games with the immigration appeals system to eliminate basic due process and expedited deportations,” said Erez Lubeni, senior counsel at Democracy Forward, which presented oral argument. “Once again, no matter how much this administration tries to hide the cruel and illegal acts behind its ‘immigration policies,’ federal courts have made clear that the government must follow the law and cannot take away people’s fundamental rights. This is another proof of the strength of litigation. We will continue to represent plaintiffs in court to defend their rights and hold this administration accountable.”
“This order protects an important safeguard in our immigration system: the ability to appeal court decisions,” said Suchita Mathur, senior litigation attorney at the American Immigration Council. “This rule would have resulted in countless people being rushed out of the country before their cases were properly reviewed. Today’s decision helps protect the fundamental fairness of immigration courts.”
The IFR was issued without the required notice-and-comment rulemaking period and fundamentally restructured appellate review in removal proceedings. This rule makes functionally meaningful consideration impossible in most cases by requiring immediate removal unless the full board acts within 10 days before the record is produced.
Democracy Forward’s legal team includes Erez Reuveni, Allyson Scher, Catherine Carroll, and Robin hurston. The American Immigration Council’s legal advisors include Michelle Lapointe and Suchi Mathur.
Read opinions here and order here.
