Court Puts USCIS Hold Policies on Hold

If your green card, work permit, citizenship, or asylum case stalled because of where you were born, a recent federal court order may matter to you. A judge ordered U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to stop applying three internal policies that had put certain applications on hold. USCIS says it disagrees but will follow the order while the case continues on appeal.

This article explains, in plain terms, what the USCIS court order does, who it affects, and what you should — and should not — do right now. It is general information, not legal advice. Talk to an immigration attorney about your specific case.

What the court order says

According to a USCIS alert dated June 12, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island ordered USCIS to stop enforcing three policy documents:

• PM 602-0192 (USCIS policy memorandum, Dec. 2, 2025)
• PM 602-0194 (USCIS policy memorandum, effective Jan. 1, 2026)
• PA 2025-26 (USCIS Policy Manual update on discretion)

The court "vacated" these policies. In administrative law, vacating a policy means it should be treated as if it is not in effect. USCIS states the order is effective immediately and applies agency-wide. The case is Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island, et al. v. USCIS, et al., No. 26-cv-00132-JJM-PAS (D.R.I.) (court docket).

USCIS says it "strongly disagrees" with the ruling but will follow its terms pending possible further judicial review, and that it will issue updated instructions as the litigation develops (USCIS alert).

What these policies had done

USCIS ties the vacated policies to two presidential travel-ban proclamations: Proclamation 10949, signed June 4, 2025, and Proclamation 10998, signed December 16, 2025 — both titled around restricting the entry of foreign nationals on national security grounds. You can read the proclamations themselves in the Federal Register (Proclamation 10949; Proclamation 10998). Proclamation 10998 fully or partially suspended entry for nationals of 39 countries, effective January 1, 2026.

In practice, the policies tied to those proclamations had paused decisions on immigration applications based on a person's country of nationality (USCIS PM 602-0194). That meant some applicants from travel-ban countries saw their cases sit without a final decision, even though the proclamations themselves address entry into the United States — who can be admitted at the border or issued a visa abroad — not the processing of benefits for people already here.

That distinction is at the heart of the dispute, and it rests on settled law.

The legal background, briefly

The travel-ban proclamations are issued under Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f). That statute lets the President suspend or restrict the entry of foreign nationals when the President finds their entry would be detrimental to U.S. interests (8 U.S.C. § 1182(f)).

The Supreme Court has read this entry authority broadly. In Trump v. Hawaii (2018), the Court upheld a travel-ban proclamation as a valid use of Section 212(f), describing the statute as a "comprehensive delegation" that "exudes deference to the President" (Supreme Court opinion). But "entry" authority and "benefit adjudication" are not the same thing. As the Congressional Research Service summarizes the case law, while Section 1182(f) gives the President authority to suspend the entry of certain foreign nationals, "immigration officials may not rely upon that authority to suspend visa adjudications," and the authority "may not be used to supersede or conflict with other provisions of the INA" (CRS Legal Sidebar LSB10458). The Rhode Island court's order reflects that position: USCIS cannot use the proclamations as a reason to freeze the processing of benefits — like adjustment of status, work authorization, naturalization, or asylum — for people who are already in the country.

If you want to understand the practical stakes, that is the takeaway: a travel restriction at the border is one thing; an indefinite pause on a pending application filed inside the United States is another.

Who this may affect

The court documents describe plaintiffs as nonprofit organizations and labor unions representing many people who filed immigration applications. The order applies agency-wide rather than to a named list of individuals (USCIS alert).

You may be affected if all of the following are true:

• You have an application pending with USCIS (for example, a green card, work permit, naturalization, or affirmative asylum case), and
• Your case appears to have stalled with no decision, and
• You are a national of a country named in a travel-ban proclamation.

Because USCIS has not published a public list confirming exactly which case types and countries each policy touched, you should treat your own situation as something to verify directly — not assume. Confirm the specific case types and countries each policy covered against official USCIS guidance before relying on it.

What to do now

This is a fast-moving situation, and the order could change on appeal. A measured approach is best.

1. Check your case status. Use your USCIS online account or your receipt notice on the official USCIS website to see whether anything has moved.
2. Keep your address current. Update your address with USCIS so you do not miss a notice or a request for evidence if your case starts moving again.
3. Do not file duplicate applications or take drastic action based on headlines. A court order does not, by itself, approve your case — it changes how USCIS may handle it.
4. Be cautious about travel. The vacated policies concern benefit processing, not the underlying travel ban. Entry restrictions can still apply. Do not assume international travel is safe; confirm with an attorney first.
5. Gather your documents. If your case resumes, you want to respond quickly to any request for evidence.
6. Watch for official updates only. Rely on USCIS.gov and the court record, not social media summaries.

Why the situation could still change

The government has the right to appeal, and litigation like this often moves to a federal appeals court, where a ruling can be paused or reversed. That means the current relief may not be permanent. USCIS itself has said it will issue updated instructions as the case develops (USCIS alert). Treat today's status as the current state of play, not the final word.

This is exactly the kind of moment where timing matters and the rules can shift. If your case has been on hold, a consultation can help you understand your options before a deadline or a policy change catches you off guard.

How Carlos Maury Law can help

Our firm is a national practice founded by former U.S. Immigration Judges who now represent people in immigration proceedings and before USCIS. We are no longer on the bench and cannot influence any sitting judge or your pending case — but we know how these systems work from the inside, and we use that knowledge to advocate for our clients.

If your application has been paused and you are not sure what this court order means for you, call (213) 769-0050 or request a consultation to discuss your situation. Hablamos Español.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this court order approve my application?

No. The order stops USCIS from applying three specific hold policies; it does not decide any individual case. Your application still has to be adjudicated on its own merits. (USCIS alert)

Will USCIS start processing my case again right away?

USCIS says it will follow the order agency-wide and issue updated instructions as the litigation develops. Timing for any individual case is not guaranteed, so check your official case status for movement. (USCIS alert)

Does this mean the travel ban is gone?

No. The order addresses USCIS hold policies tied to the proclamations, not the proclamations themselves. The travel-ban proclamations were issued under the President's entry authority in Section 212(f) of the INA and remain a separate matter. (Federal Register; 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f))

Can this ruling be reversed?

Yes. The government can appeal, and a higher court can pause or overturn the order. That is why it is wise to act on current, official information rather than assume the relief is permanent.

Is it safe to travel internationally now?

Not necessarily. The court order concerns the processing of benefits, not the underlying entry restrictions. Travel can carry serious risk depending on your nationality and status. Speak with an immigration attorney before making travel plans.