A federal court struck down an indefinite hold on asylum applications that the Trump administration placed in December 2025. On June 5, 2026, Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of the U.S.
District Court for Rhode Island ruled in *Dorcas International Institute v. USCIS* that the government lacked statutory authority to enforce the freeze, and the court vacated all four related policies. As of July 2026, the government's appeal remained pending, but the court denied a request to pause its ruling while the case proceeds. Before the ruling, the hold had affected asylum seekers nationwide as well as the green card and naturalization applications of people from 39 designated countries. Understanding what the hold was, who it touched, and what changed after the court decision matters if your case was paused or if you are filing now.
Table of Contents
- What the Hold Required and Who It Affected
- The Partial Lift and Continued Uncertainty
- The Federal Court Ruling Voids the Policies
- What Changed After the Ruling
- What to Do If Your Case Was Affected
- The Appeal and Remaining Uncertainty
- Frequently Asked Questions
What the Hold Required and Who It Affected
On December 2, 2025, uscis issued Policy Memorandum PM-602-0192, directing officers to place an indefinite adjudicative hold on all pending asylum applications (Form I-589) filed by nationals of 19 designated countries, including Afghanistan, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Venezuela, and Yemen. Two weeks later, on December 16, 2025, the list expanded to 39 countries total.
The hold covered not only pending asylum cases but also green card applications, work permits, and naturalization requests for nationals of those 39 countries. Asylum seekers from countries not on the list faced a different restriction: all pending asylum decisions were frozen nationwide regardless of the applicant's country of origin, though one exception applied—initial work permits (Form I-765) filed by first-time asylum applicants were processed normally.
The scope was sweeping. USCIS officers were instructed to take no action on thousands of pending cases with no announced timeline for when the freeze would lift. Applications that had been pending for months or years—some nearly ready for a final decision—sat in a queue with no progress.
The Partial Lift and Continued Uncertainty
On March 30, 2026, USCIS announced it would lift the adjudicative hold for asylum seekers from non-travel-ban countries described as "thoroughly screened." Officers were permitted to resume decisions in those cases. However, nationals of the 39 designated countries remained in a complete freeze. No timeline was given for when their cases would move forward. This partial lift created a two-track system: some asylum applicants saw progress while others remained entirely blocked.
Families and individuals from the frozen countries had no way to know when—or if—their cases would be decided. Work authorization remained unavailable for most of them, and green card holders who were nationals of those countries could not complete their naturalization process.
The Federal Court Ruling Voids the Policies
On June 5, 2026, the U.S. District Court for Rhode Island ruled in *Dorcas International Institute v. USCIS* that USCIS had violated the Administrative Procedure Act and lacked statutory authority to enforce the freeze. Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. vacated all four policies: the Global Asylum Hold, the Benefits Hold for nationals of 39 countries, the Comprehensive Re-Review Policy, and nationality-based adjudication restrictions.
In legal terms, "vacated" means the policies were struck down and became unenforceable. The ruling meant that USCIS officers could no longer cite these policy memos as justification for holding cases. Cases that had been frozen should have been eligible for processing again. On July 15, 2026, the federal court denied the government's request to pause the ruling while the government appeals to the First Circuit Court of Appeals. The vacated policies remain unenforceable as the appeal proceeds.
What Changed After the Ruling
Technically, the court ruling meant that USCIS could not legally maintain the hold on any cases. However, the practical impact depended on whether USCIS offices complied with the ruling, how quickly they identified affected cases, and whether appeals courts would intervene. Immigration cases do not automatically reopen; typically an applicant or their attorney must submit a motion to reopen or request that the case proceed.
If your case was on hold because of these policies, the ruling created the legal basis to ask USCIS to resume work on your application. Many immigration attorneys immediately began filing motions for applicants whose cases fell under the frozen categories. For cases that were already decided while the hold was in effect, the ruling did not automatically overturn those decisions, though it affected the legal foundation for how those decisions may have been made.
What to Do If Your Case Was Affected
If your asylum application, green card, or naturalization case was placed on hold between December 2025 and June 2026, the federal court ruling means the policy justifying that hold is no longer valid. Your options include:
- **Contact an immigration attorney** to review whether your case qualifies as affected and what step to take next. An attorney can file a motion to reopen or request immediate processing based on the court ruling.
- **Request an update** from USCIS directly through your online account or by contacting your local USCIS office, and mention that your case was held under the now-vacated policies.
- **Document the hold period** if your case was paused. Save any notices or correspondence stating the reason for the hold, as this helps prove your application falls under the struck-down policies.
- **Monitor the appeal** through immigration law tracking resources. The government's First Circuit appeal is ongoing, and if reversed, the ruling's scope could narrow.
The Appeal and Remaining Uncertainty
As of now, the government has appealed the Rhode Island district court ruling to the First Circuit Court of Appeals. That court could uphold the ruling, reverse it, or send it back for further proceedings. Until the appeals process concludes, the policy remains struck down and unenforceable, but applicants cannot assume it will never return or that all affected cases will be fully reopened without effort.
Immigration law cases often move slowly through appeals courts. The First Circuit may not issue a decision for many months. In the meantime, the safest approach is to work with an attorney to ensure your specific case is being processed and to protect your rights if the legal landscape shifts again.
Frequently Asked Questions
If my asylum case was put on hold, is it automatically reopened now?
No. The court ruling means the hold is illegal, but your case does not automatically reopen. You or your attorney typically need to file a motion to reopen or request that USCIS resume work on your case. An immigration attorney can advise whether your specific case qualifies.
What does "vacated" mean?
Vacated means the court struck down the policies, and USCIS can no longer legally enforce them. However, the government is appealing the ruling, so the final outcome is not yet decided.
I am a national of one of the 39 frozen countries. Can I file for asylum now?
Yes, you can file, but filing does not guarantee your case will be decided quickly. New cases filed after the June 2026 court ruling are not subject to the now-vacated hold, but USCIS still has discretion over processing times.
Can the government bring back the hold if it wins on appeal?
If the First Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the Rhode Island ruling, the government could potentially enforce the policies again. This is why monitoring the appeal is important for affected applicants.