Case Law

Every state in the US that offers in-state tuition to undocumented immigrants is now facing a federal lawsuit. In September 2026, the Department of Justice filed its final four complaints — against Hawaii, the District of Columbia, Arkansas, and Utah — bringing the total to 25. For undocumented students and their families, the question is no longer whether this fight is coming to their state, but how soon a court might rule.

What if the government compares your asylum declaration to a dozen other applicants' stories — and you never get to question those people? The Board of Immigration Appeals answered that question on September 10, 2026, and the answer matters for anyone going through the asylum application process. In Matter of V-S-A-, the BIA reversed an immigration judge's grant of asylum and set clear rules for how "copycat declaration" evidence can be used against you in court.

You filed your complaint, waited for a hearing — and then a judge dismissed your entire case with no warning and no explanation. Alexander Gallo faced exactly that situation in a DC court. On September 10, 2026, a DC appeals court ruled that what happened to him was wrong, and the decision has real implications for anyone fighting a legal battle without a lawyer.

Arizona voters passed Proposition 314 in November 2024, giving the state new tools to police immigration — including a database check before anyone gets public benefits. A coalition of civil rights groups sued, saying the law was unconstitutional. In September 2026, the Arizona Court of Appeals disagreed and let the law stand.

You came to the US on an F-1 student visa, you're working as a graduate assistant, and then your university downgrades your academic standing — and suddenly your ability to stay in the country is at risk. That is exactly what happened to Ehiremen Bennard Eriakha, a doctoral student at the University of Mississippi. In September 2026, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of his lawsuit, leaving him without his graduate assistantship and facing serious questions about his F-1 status.

Oklahoma has required US citizenship to get a liquor license for years — blocking green card holders and other lawfully present immigrants from the industry. On September 8, 2026, the Oklahoma Attorney General ruled that requirement unconstitutional. For immigrants who were turned away, the legal landscape just changed.

Aida Vasquez was locked out of her Chicago condo with no warning — her bags packed, her passports still inside. She fought for months to get her belongings back and won a court order of protection. Then an appeals court took it all away.

A Mexican mother fled cartel threats, her brother-in-law was kidnapped, and an immigration judge believed every word she said. On September 8, 2026, the Seventh Circuit still denied her asylum — because her attorney's appeal brief was too thin to preserve the arguments. The case is a stark lesson in how procedural mistakes can end a case before the facts even get reviewed.

You are locked in a county jail waiting for your immigration hearing — not convicted of anything — and another detainee attacks you. You suffer permanent injuries. Can the jail be held responsible? In September 2026, the full Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals answered that question, and the answer is harder to reach than it was just five years ago.

A federal court in Washington, DC ruled in September 2026 that the State Department properly handled a FOIA request for a child's passport records — and sided with the government. The case started when a father asked for documents his ex-wife submitted to a U.S. consulate in China. It ended with a lesson about what FOIA can and cannot do for immigrants seeking government records.

Claudina Salguero-Arriaza escaped abuse in Guatemala, brought her two children to Nebraska, and won sole custody in court. But the judge refused to make the additional findings her kids needed to apply for a green card — and she had to appeal. In September 2026, Nebraska's appeals court told the lower court to try again.

Your immigration judge is human — and that human factor can override logic and cost you everything. Learn why conservative, cautious behavior in court isn't optional, and what happens when immigrants misread a notice.

Immigration judges in New York are using the Matter of H.A.A.V. precedent to dismiss asylum cases before a full hearing — and the legal foundation of this precedent may be flawed. Here's what every asylum seeker needs to know.

A federal appeals court refused to let the government keep running its expanded immigration-verification system while it appeals a ruling that shut the system down. The D.C. Circuit denied DHS's emergency stay request on September 4, 2026 — meaning the modified SAVE system, which linked Social Security records to immigration checks and could flag U.S.-born citizens, remains blocked. The full appeal is now on a fast track.

Wilberforce Okene spent years in US immigration court arguing that deporting him would devastate his sick wife and their household. The Fifth Circuit denied his petition in September 2026 — and used his case to raise the bar for everyone fighting deportation in the region. If you are in removal proceedings, this ruling changes how your hardship claim will be judged on appeal.