The Trump administration is seeking to cancel thousands of pending asylum cases nationwide by arguing that applicants can be deported to third countries willing to accept them. Internal government data shows a sharp rise in court motions seeking to dismiss asylum claims without full hearings on their merits.
Nationwide Push Targets Pending Asylum Cases
The Trump administration has intensified a nationwide campaign to terminate asylum cases currently pending in U.S. immigration courts. According to internal government data reviewed by CBS News, immigration authorities have filed thousands of motions seeking dismissal of asylum claims before evaluating their merits.
The initiative includes immigration courts across major jurisdictions, including Atlanta, New York, Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and several sites across Texas. Immigration courts operate under the Department of Justice, with Immigration and Customs Enforcement attorneys representing the government in removal proceedings.
Strategy Relies on Third-Country Deportations
The administration’s approach centers on motions known as “pretermit” requests, which ask immigration judges to end asylum cases without a merits hearing. ICE attorneys argue that certain asylum-seekers can be removed to countries other than their own under existing deportation agreements.
Court filings indicate that proposed destination countries include Guatemala, Honduras, Ecuador, and Uganda. If granted, these motions effectively eliminate asylum claims and authorize deportation to third countries, unless successfully appealed.
As of early December, ICE attorneys had filed more than 8,000 of such motions nationwide, signaling a broad expansion of this tactic.
Legal Foundation and Current Decisions
The measure is based on the Immigration Law, which provides that asylum may be denied if the applicant can find a safe third country to which to apply, thus making a third-country arrangement a ground for denying asylum eligibility. In late October, the Board of Immigration Appeals provided guidance to immigration judges to adjudicate third-country petitions for deportation first, then adjudicate asylum claims.
The case also places the burden on asylum applicants to show whether they would face persecution in the proposed third country, a shift that immigration lawyers argue reverses long-standing procedure.
Issues Conceived Concerning Lawyers
Immigration lawyers claim that these motions were often filed close to a hearing date, making it expedient to address potential risks abroad. Immigration lawyers claim these motions are part of cases involving requests related to political, religious, or personal security.
Some legal advocates argue that this approach reduces their access to the asylum system and forces them to withdraw their applications rather than risk being relocated to a country with which they have had no prior connection.
The Future Ahead
A growing trend in third-country deportation motions is creating uncertainty for asylum seekers in immigration court proceedings. Matters will likely be contested in the courts, with the recent release of appellate guidance now in play.
For continued monitoring of developments affecting asylum policy, immigration court procedures, and third-country deportation practices visit ImmigrationQuestion.com, a meeting ground for individuals seeking clarity on U.S. immigration policy.
Get answers to your immigration questions from licensed immigration attorneys. For attorneys, use our innovative 3-in-1 case management software to improve your practice. Download our free app on Google Play Store and the Apple App Store.
Resources
**ImmigrationQuestion.com is a networking platform founded by Immigration Attorneys. It serves as a meeting ground for licensed immigration attorneys and people with immigration questions. It is not a law firm. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by USCIS or AILA. Attorneys on this platform are independent and have the discretion to offer a free consultation and/or set their fees under the law.
