USCIS Must Adjudicate Immigration Benefits

A federal court ruled that USCIS must adjudicate immigration benefits and not stonewall them. The ruling stated that four agency policies — which had frozen immigration benefit adjudications for nationals of 39 countries — were unlawful and must be vacated. For employers with foreign national employees whose cases have been stuck in limbo since late 2025, this ruling matters.

What Happened

In Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island, et al. v. USCIS, et al. (No. 26-cv-132-JJM-PAS), Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs — a coalition of nonprofits and labor unions representing thousands of immigrants from Afghanistan, Iran, Nigeria, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, and other designated “Travel Ban Countries.”

The court found that USCIS implemented four policies between November 2025 and January 2026 that violated both the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA):

• Global Asylum Hold Policy — an indefinite pause on all asylum and withholding of removal adjudications, regardless of nationality
• Benefits Hold Policy — a categorical freeze on final adjudications of green cards, work permits, and naturalization for nationals of 39 designated countries
• Comprehensive Re-Review Policy — a mandate to re-examine previously approved benefits for Travel Ban Country nationals who entered the U.S. on or after January 20, 2021
• Country-Specific Factors Policy — a directive requiring adjudicators to treat an applicant’s country of origin as a “significant negative factor” in discretionary cases

All four policies were declared unlawful and vacated nationwide.

Why the Court Ruled Against USCIS

The ruling rests on three distinct legal findings.

First, USCIS exceeded its statutory authority. The agency attempted to anchor these policies in Section 1182(f) of the INA — the presidential authority to suspend entry of noncitizens. The court rejected this, noting that Section 1182(f) governs entry at the border, not domestic adjudication of benefits for people already in the United States. The Presidential Proclamations (10949 and 10998) that established the Travel Ban list similarly addressed entry — they did not authorize any freeze on pending benefit applications.

Second, USCIS violated mandatory statutory duties. Federal law uses the word “shall” throughout the asylum, naturalization, and employment authorization frameworks. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(d)(5)(A), asylum adjudications shall be completed within 180 days absent exceptional circumstances. Naturalization regulations require a decision at or within 120 days of the examination. The court found USCIS cannot “withhold adjudications wholesale” when Congress has imposed nondiscretionary duties to decide cases.

Third, the agency’s reasoning failed APA standards. USCIS justified the 39-country hold primarily by citing two criminal incidents involving Afghan nationals. The court called this an “unjustified leap of logic” — the conduct of two individuals does not rationally justify freezing benefit adjudications for thousands of people from dozens of countries. The agency also failed to account for the serious reliance interests of immigrants who had filed paperwork, paid fees, submitted to biometrics, and attended interviews, only to have cases indefinitely stalled.

The court also applied the APA’s bad-faith exception, finding that derogatory public statements by senior officials about immigrants from the affected countries constituted evidence of anti-immigrant animus — not a legitimate national security rationale.

What This Means for Employers

If your company employs workers from any of the 39 Travel Ban Countries whose cases stalled after November 2025, the Dorcas ruling has direct implications:

• EAD renewals and work authorization cases that were held without final adjudication must now return to ordinary processing channels. USCIS can no longer apply a categorical nationality-based hold.
• Adjustment of status and green card applications frozen under the Benefits Hold Policy must be processed under the standard INA framework — without the country-of-origin negative presumption.
• Naturalization cases where oath ceremonies were canceled, or applications were left without decision past the 120-day regulatory window may now be actionable.
• Previously approved benefits cannot be subjected to the Comprehensive Re-Review regime. Any rescission of benefits must follow the individualized statutory procedures Congress prescribed — not a blanket re-review based on nationality and entry date.
• Discretionary decisions may no longer treat Travel Ban country origin as a weighted negative factor in immigrant visa-linked benefits, as the Country-Specific Factors Policy has been vacated.

The court’s vacatur is nationwide. USCIS cannot apply any of the four policies in the future.

What to Watch

The Dorcas ruling does not address the State Department’s separate January 21, 2026 pause on visa issuances at U.S. consulates for nationals of 75 specified countries. That policy is subject to its own litigation — CLINIC v. Rubio — and remains in effect pending that outcome. Employers with employees outside the U.S. seeking new visas should monitor that case separately.

USCIS has not publicly announced a timeline for resuming adjudications under the vacated policies. It is also possible the government will appeal. Employers should not assume immediate resumption of processing without confirmation.

Next Steps for Affected Employers

The practical impact of this ruling depends on whether your company can identify which pending cases were delayed specifically due to the now-vacated policies.

If you have employees from Travel Ban Countries with stalled EADs, pending green cards, delayed naturalizations, or reopened approved benefits, now is the time to review those files and determine whether targeted agency follow-up or litigation is appropriate.

If your company is affected by these developments, contact Gunn-Menefee Immigration Lawyers to discuss your options and next steps. Reach us at (502) 236-9900.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Case developments may have occurred after publication.