United States: Federal District Court Vacates 40-Jurisdiction Adjudications Hold and Related Policies
June 5, 2026
Country / Territory
Share
At a glance
- A federal district court in Rhode Island has declared unlawful and vacated USCIS’s policy of withholding adjudications of immigration benefits applications filed on behalf of foreign nationals from the 40 countries and areas subject to the current travel ban.
- The court also vacated related USCIS policies, including the policy requiring adjudicators to treat a foreign national being from a travel ban country as a negative factor in the adjudication of discretionary benefits applications.
- The court’s ruling should have nationwide effect. The Trump Administration is expected to appeal the decision.
The issue
Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island issued an order today declaring unlawful and vacating four USCIS policies that require USCIS adjudicators to:
- suspend adjudications of immigration benefits applications filed on behalf of foreign nationals from the 40 countries and areas subject to the current travel ban;
- treat being from a travel ban country as a negative factor in the adjudication of benefits applications that require USCIS’s favorable exercise of discretion for approval;
- re-review immigration benefits requests approved on or after January 20, 2021 for cases involving foreign nationals from travel ban jurisdictions; and
- suspend adjudications of asylum applications.
The court found these policies violated the Administrative Procedure Act, and they were set aside on that basis.
The suit was brought by a coalition of nonprofit organizations and labor unions, but the decision is expected to have nationwide impact and apply to all pending cases, not just to the plaintiffs and the foreign nationals they represent. The government is expected to appeal the adverse decision, and may seek a stay of the ruling pending appeal.
The case is Dorcas Intl. Institute of Rhode Island v. USCIS, Case No. 1:26-cv-00132 (D.R.I., filed March 5, 2026).
Background
The policies at issue have been in place since late last year and were expanded in January after the travel ban was expanded to its current scope. The policies impacted almost all types of USCIS benefits requests – including employment-based nonimmigrant and immigrant petitions, extensions and changes of status, and applications for employment authorization documents (EADs), advance paroles, and adjustment of status – and applied to foreign nationals who were born in or are nationals of the following 40 jurisdictions currently subject to a full or partial travel ban:
Afghanistan, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burma (Myanmar), Burundi, Chad, Republic of Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Gabon, The Gambia, Haiti, Iran, Laos, Libya, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Togo, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia, and Zimbabwe, as well as foreign nationals with Palestinian Authority-issued or -endorsed travel documents.
What the court ruling means
Today’s court order means that being from a travel ban country should no longer subject foreign nationals to a USCIS adjudications hold or to review of previous USCIS approvals. In addition, being from a travel ban country should no longer be considered a negative factor in discretionary USCIS adjudications. However, the Trump Administration is expected to appeal the decision and may apply for an emergency stay. If a stay is granted or the decision reversed on appeal, USCIS could reinstate the policies.
Fragomen will continue to monitor litigation surrounding these policies and provide updates as warranted.
This alert is for informational purposes only. If you have any questions, please contact the immigration professional with whom you work at Fragomen.
