Jason Dzubow

# Asylum Seekers

The Unjust Justification for Revoking Asylum Seekers’ Visas

The U.S. Department of State (DOS) plans to revoke up to 200,000 visitor visas for people who came to the United States and then applied for asylum. The move is largely symbolic, since the whole point of a visa is to allow someone to enter the country. Once they are here, the visa is no longer needed.

Revoking all these visas will be quite a production; so why would DOS go to the trouble if it has no real-world effect? Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau justified the revocation by claiming that people are “fed up with bogus asylum claims” and that asylum “isn’t supposed to be a loophole to circumvent immigration laws.” He cites one recent example–of Colombian national Humberto ‘Beto’ Coral–which supposedly “highlights such abuse.” Mr. Landau’s accusations against Mr. Coral are revealing; not for what they say about Mr. Coral, but instead, because they illustrate the Trump Administration’s ignorance of our asylum system, and its cavalier attitude towards the rule of law.

Read more

By Jason Dzubow
# Asylum Office# Asylum Seekers

More Sneaky Ways to Deny Asylum, Courtesy of the Asylum Office

When asylum seekers are permitted to present their applications for protection in the United States, their cases are often granted. That’s because the asylum law–as created by Congress–is fairly generous.

Our favorable humanitarian law conflicts with the Trump Administration’s goal of blocking people from obtaining asylum in the United States. Rather than attempting to amend the law, the Administration has implemented a series of procedural and administrative roadblocks to prevent applicants from having their cases evaluated on the merits.

Last week, USCIS issued some new rules for cases at the Asylum Office. The most noteworthy change relates to when evidence is due. Other new (or new-ish) rules concern rescheduling interviews and biometric appointments, and attorney attendance at interviews.

Read more

By Jason Dzubow
# Asylum Office# Asylum Seekers# BIA# Immigration Court

The Time to Pay the Asylum Fee Is Now

Last year, the One Big Beautiful Bill created a filing fee for asylum and an annual fee that asylum seekers must pay each year their application is pending. Unfortunately, the roll out of the fee payment system was a mess. It was impossible to pay the fee unless you first received a notice from USCIS or EOIR (the Executive Office for Immigration Review–the office that oversees our nation’s Immigration Courts), but some people were able to pay without receiving a notice. Other people were not able to pay even with the notice. Many people never received a notice at all. The fee was temporarily paused by a lawsuit, but then went back into effect. In short, the whole annual asylum fee (AAF) system is confusing. It’s also frightening, since failure to pay could result in your asylum case being denied.

For many asylum seekers, the window to pay the AAF closed before they could pay (or before they even knew they were required to pay). Recently, however, the window has reopened for some affirmative asylum seekers, and they have been able to pay the fee. Of course, this happened without an announcement from USCIS; we know about it only because some asylum seekers have reported that they are now able to pay the fee. We do not know how long the payment window will remain open, and so if you have not yet paid the AAF, the time to do that is now.

Read more

By Jason Dzubow
# Asylum Seekers# Detention# Immigration

No Fly Zone

By now, I’m sure you’ve heard reports about ICE detaining asylum seekers and other non-citizens at airports during domestic travel. According to one DHS official, “ICE is now making between 20 and 40 arrests per day at airports nationwide.” That’s up from “fewer than 10 airport arrests per day in May 2025.” However, since we don’t have data on the number of undocumented or otherwise vulnerable people who travel by air, it is difficult to know the likelihood that any one person will be detained. Nevertheless, given the uptick in arrests, most attorneys–including me–recommend that asylum seekers and certain other non-citizens avoid domestic air travel.

Today, we’ll talk about which travelers face a risk of detention, and whether there is anything you can do to protect yourself.

Read more

By Jason Dzubow
# Asylum Office# Asylum Seekers# Immigration Court

New Rule Aims to Send Affirmative Asylum Seekers to Court Without an Interview

Earlier this week, a new rule went into effect, which permits the Asylum Office to send certain affirmative asylum applicants to Immigration Court without an interview. The purported justification for the rule is “to reduce the backlog in the asylum system,” and–in the double-speak of USCIS–to “protect individuals who genuinely fear persecution and… help ensure that resources are directed to the timely adjudication of those claims instead of to those seeking to use the system as a loophole.”

I suppose denying cases without bothering to adjudicate them will save time. It will also reduce the backlog, at least the backlog at the Asylum Office. But shifting tens of thousands of cases to Immigration Court will increase the backlog there.

Here, we’ll take a look at what the rule says, how it might impact affirmative asylum seekers, and what you can do about it.

Read more

By Jason Dzubow
# Asylum Seekers# Immigration

On Top of Everything Else, Immigrants Are Being Targeted by Scammers

During the past year, immigration lawyers and non-profits have reported a sharp increase in scams targeting non-citizens. From the scammers’ perspective, there is a sad logic to this: It is easier to take advantage of vulnerable and desperate people, and these days, non-citizens are more vulnerable and desperate than ever.

The harm caused by these scams is not only financial. Immigrants can lose their opportunity to remain in the United States and face deportation as a result of the fraudulent schemes. Lawyers and non-profits are also harmed, as scammers are essentially stealing their identity in order to defraud non-citizens.

Fortunately, there are precautions people can take to protect themselves, and here, we will discuss some ideas about how to stay safe.

Read more

By Jason Dzubow
# Asylum Seekers# Human Rights# International

The Escalating Threat of Third Country Deportations

The Trump Administration has dramatically increased the practice of deporting non-citizens to third countries. As of May 2026, more than 21,000 people have been removed to at least 24 different countries. In many cases, the non-citizen has no connection to the third country and in some case, has never even been to that country. Upon arrival in the the third country, non-citizens can be subject to arbitrary detention, human rights abuses, and sometimes, return to their home country where they fear persecution.

Here, we’ll take a look at what the U.S. government is doing and who might be vulnerable to a third country deportation.

Read more

By Jason Dzubow
# Immigration Court

Surviving the New Mega-Master Calendar Hearings

The Trump Administration has been using all the tools in its vast toolkit to make life more difficult for immigrants. Their newest machination is the “mega” Master Calendar Hearing in Immigration Court, where up to 100 non-citizens (and their lawyers) are required to be present for a brief in-person hearing.

What is the purpose of these mega MCHs and why are they problematic? What should you do if you are waiting for your MCH in Immigration Court?

Read more

By Jason Dzubow
# Immigration Court

Incompetence and Laziness in Immigration Court

I recently appeared in court before a newly-appointed Immigration Judge. Unlike some of the new hires, this IJ had prior government experience in the immigration arena. He also previously served as a state court judge. You might think that someone with these qualifications would be well-suited for a job in Immigration Court. But if you thought that: (a) you obviously didn’t read the title of this article, which is weird; and (b) you would be wrong. The judge was unprepared for the case, he did not know the law, and he ignored direct orders from a higher court.

Read more

By Jason Dzubow