Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
Overview
Overview
A coalition of nonprofits sued the Trump administration over four newly enacted policies by USCIS which have halted all adjudications of asylum requests and immigration benefit and started a reconsideration of its past decisions granting immigration benefits.
The Issue
Issue
Whether USCIS's four new policies halting all asylum and immigration benefit adjudications and requiring reconsideration of previously granted benefits exceed USCIS's statutory authority under the INA and violate APA procedural requirements.
The Rules
Rule
Under the APA, agency actions must not be arbitrary and capricious and must follow notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures; the INA grants USCIS adjudication authority but does not authorize blanket suspension of adjudications or retroactive reconsideration of final decisions without due process.
The Application
Analysis
The nonprofit coalition challenges the four policies as exceeding USCIS's statutory authority and as arbitrary and capricious because they halt all adjudications without procedural safeguards and retroactively reconsider previously final immigration benefits affecting the plaintiffs' beneficiaries and operations.
The Conclusion
Conclusion
The case is active in the U.S. District Court for Rhode Island with no final ruling on the merits; preliminary relief motions may determine whether adjudications resume pending the court's decision on the policies' lawfulness.
Flag an issue
This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support