Today, we filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts challenging a set of DHS and USCIS policies that have effectively shut down large parts of the lawful immigration system inside the United States.
The case is brought by 197 people who are lawfully present, fully eligible for the immigration benefits they applied for, and who did everything the law required of them. Their cases have now been frozen—indefinitely, without explanation, and without any individualized review.
Relying on a presidential proclamation and subsequent DHS and USCIS directives, the government has halted or delayed naturalization, green card adjudications and work authorization for thousands of applicants from 39 countries.
The agencies have also stopped the processing of all asylum cases.
USCIS has canceled interviews and oath ceremonies, placed cases into open-ended “security posture” holds, and instructed officers to treat nationality as a negative factor—even when there is no individualized concern of any kind.
The people affected are students, doctors, scientists, caregivers, engineers, asylum seekers, parents, and spouses. Many had already passed interviews or been approved and were waiting for final steps. Others have lost jobs, fallen out of status, or been unable to travel, reunite with family, or plan their lives. The harm is immediate and severe.
This case is not about individual immigration decisions, discretionary calls, or border enforcement. It does not involve consular processing or removal orders. It challenges systemic policies that suspend mandatory adjudication duties, replace individualized decision-making with nationality-based rules, and were issued without notice-and-comment rulemaking or any articulated standards.
At bottom, this case is about whether the executive branch can simply stop deciding immigration cases inside the United States—across the board and indefinitely—without statutory authority or lawful process.
People who apply for immigration benefits are entitled to decisions. That's what the law actually says.
We filed this case today to restore lawful adjudication, transparency, and accountability, and to ensure that the immigration system operates the way Congress designed it to operate: through individualized review, not categorical freezes.
