BOSTON (Diya TV) — A federal judge on Friday struck down several Trump administration immigration policies that paused asylum and immigration benefit decisions for people from many countries. He called the measures unlawful and discriminatory.
U.S. District Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr. issued a strong ruling against the administration. He stated that the policies left many immigrants stuck in legal uncertainty for months. As a result, thousands could not work, renew permits, or proceed with citizenship applications.
The policies started last year after an Afghan national faced charges for the shooting of two National Guard members in Washington. Officials later expanded immigration restrictions linked to national security concerns.
However, McConnell decided that the administration acted beyond its legal authority. He also claimed that officials used national security as a cover for anti-immigrant bias.
“The challenged policies placed the lives of countless individuals on hold solely by virtue of their countries of birth,” McConnell wrote in his 135-page decision.
The judge noted that immigrants from 39 countries across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East faced broad restrictions. According to the ruling, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) delayed or froze decisions related to asylum claims, work permits, green cards, and citizenship requests.
McConnell also criticized the administration for not providing proper legal reasoning behind the changes. He said the policies overlooked the impact on families and workers who depended on timely immigration decisions.
Furthermore, the judge dismissed the government’s argument that courts should defer to the executive branch on immigration issues.
“The Government effectively invites the Court to shut its eyes and ignore the strong evidence of anti-immigrant animus before it,” McConnell wrote. “That is an invitation that this Court will have to decline.”
The ruling marked a significant legal setback for the Trump administration’s broader immigration agenda. Over the years, the administration pushed for stricter entry standards and stronger vetting procedures for immigrants and travelers from several nations.
Still, immigration advocates welcomed Friday’s decision.
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, called the ruling an important defense of lawful immigration pathways. Her organization represented the plaintiffs in the case.
“We are pleased that the court recognized the devastating human consequences of these policies,” Perryman said in a statement. “Our communities deserve a fair process governed by law, not political targeting based in fear and discrimination.”
The ruling applies to pending USCIS cases involving immigrants from the affected countries. It does not impact asylum cases handled by immigration judges at the U.S. border.
Meanwhile, immigration lawyers said the decision could benefit thousands of people whose applications stalled without explanation.
Shev Dalal-Dheini, senior director of government relations at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, stated that the ruling ensures USCIS follows its legal responsibilities.
“It is an important legal victory to ensure that legal immigration pathways remain open,” she said.
Advocacy groups representing Afghan refugees and Iranian Americans also supported the decision. Shawn VanDiver, head of the Afghan resettlement coalition #AfghanEvac, mentioned that many immigrants faced serious hardships due to delayed applications.
He said some workers feared losing jobs because work permits remained stuck in processing. Others postponed travel, education, and home purchases while waiting for updates on their immigration status.
Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, said the court’s ruling sends a strong message that immigration policies cannot target individuals based on nationality.
“This ruling sets a powerful precedent,” Abdi stated.
However, the Department of Homeland Security criticized the decision.
DHS General Counsel James Percival argued that critics have repeatedly used claims of discrimination to block Trump-era immigration policies.
“The Left has been running the same gambit with so-called ‘animus’ claims since 2017,” Percival said in a statement. “It is sabotage dressed in legal clothing.”
The government previously argued that Congress gave the executive branch broad authority over immigration policy and national security decisions. Officials also said the guidance helped immigration officers make consistent decisions.
Despite those arguments, McConnell ruled that USCIS violated federal law by implementing policies without proper justification.
The administration may appeal the decision in the coming weeks. For now, though, immigration advocates say the ruling restores hope for thousands of immigrants stuck in months of legal limbo.
The government previously argued that Congress gave the executive branch broad authority over immigration policy and national security decisions. Officials also said the guidance helped immigration officers make consistent decisions.
Despite those arguments, McConnell ruled that USCIS violated federal law by implementing policies without proper justification.
The administration may appeal the decision in the coming weeks. For now, though, immigration advocates say the ruling restores hope for thousands of immigrants stuck in months of legal limbo.
