Federal Court Orders USCIS to Resume Processing for Nationals of 39 Countries

June 19, 2026 | Breaking News | United States

A federal judge has struck down four Trump administration immigration policies that had frozen the processing of green cards, work permits, asylum applications, and citizenship requests for nationals of 39 countries — ordering the immediate nationwide resumption of adjudications.

The ruling, issued June 5, 2026 by Chief U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, is one of the most sweeping judicial rebukes of executive immigration policy in years. It has nationwide effect — meaning USCIS must restart processing for all affected applicants across the United States, not just those involved in the lawsuit.

Federal Court Orders USCIS to Resume Processing for Nationals of 39 Countries

What USCIS Had Been Doing — and Why the Court Said It Was Unlawful

Following a 2025 shooting that killed two National Guard members in Washington D.C., the Trump administration used the incident as justification to implement a series of processing holds at USCIS. Beginning in late 2025 and expanding on January 1, 2026, the agency placed a freeze on immigration benefit decisions for nationals of 39 countries on the expanded travel ban list.

The freeze applied to four categories of applications:

• Green card applications (adjustment of status)

• Employment Authorization Documents (work permits)

• Asylum applications

• Naturalization (U.S. citizenship) applications

Cases were not formally denied — they were simply paused indefinitely. Applicants who had paid substantial filing fees received no decisions and no timeline. Many had been waiting for months with valid legal status expiring in the interim.

The suspension threw countless immigrants living in the United States into indeterminate legal limbo, Judge McConnell found.

In his 135-page decision, the judge declared all four policies unlawful on multiple independent grounds. He found that USCIS lacked any statutory authority to impose indefinite holds on benefit adjudications — that laws governing applications specifically require the government to make decisions "in regular order." He also found the policies arbitrary and capricious, and that the agency had failed to provide legally required explanations for its actions.

The judge struck down three related policies, two of which were aimed at people from one of the 39 countries targeted with a ban on entry, and a third which imposed a blanket halt on asylum decisions at USCIS.

Which Countries Are Affected

The 39 countries are concentrated in Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, and Latin America. They include Iran, Nigeria, Venezuela, and Afghanistan, among others. The full list derives from the Trump administration's expanded travel ban, which was implemented by presidential proclamation in December 2025 and expanded the original 19-country ban.

Nationals of these countries who had pending applications inside the United States — meaning they were already living there legally and waiting for decisions — are directly affected by the ruling.

What the Ruling Means in Practice

The ruling applies to immigration benefits handled inside the United States, including asylum applications, employment authorization documents, adjustment of status applications for green cards, and naturalization applications. It does not automatically grant visas, green cards, asylum, or citizenship.

In practical terms: USCIS must now adjudicate cases that had been frozen. Applicants whose cases were on hold will see their files moved forward. However, officers will still apply standard individual vetting — the ruling removes the blanket nationality-based freeze, not the requirement to evaluate each case on its merits.

The decision could allow thousands of delayed applications to move forward, although the administration is expected to appeal.

On June 12, 2026, USCIS published a statement confirming it would follow the court order terms "pending possible further judicial review" — signaling that the government intends to pursue the case to higher courts. If the administration appeals and seeks a stay of the ruling, the freeze could be reimposed while the appeal is pending. That legal battle is likely to continue for months.

Why This Matters Beyond the 39 Countries

The ruling has implications beyond the specific nationalities named in the travel ban.

One of the four policies struck down was a global asylum hold — a blanket freeze on asylum decisions at USCIS that applied not only to nationals of the 39 countries but to asylum applicants broadly. The vacating of this policy potentially affects the processing of all pending asylum cases at USCIS, regardless of the applicant's nationality.

A second policy that was struck down directed USCIS officers to treat being from a travel ban country as a negative factor in any application requiring discretion — essentially building nationality-based discrimination into every case officer's decision-making framework. The elimination of this policy has structural significance for how USCIS handles discretionary decisions going forward.

The Bigger Picture: Courts vs. Executive Immigration Policy

This ruling is the latest in a series of federal court interventions in Trump administration immigration enforcement. Since January 2025, federal judges have blocked or modified numerous executive immigration policies — from deportation procedures to detention conditions to processing holds.

The pattern reflects a tension between executive action and statutory limits that has become one of the defining legal features of US immigration in 2025–2026. The administration has consistently argued broad national security authority for its immigration actions; courts have consistently found that this authority does not override specific statutory requirements.

The Dorcas International ruling is notable for the breadth of its reasoning. By finding the policies unlawful on multiple independent grounds — not just on a single procedural technicality — Judge McConnell made the ruling harder to reverse on appeal through a narrow argument.

What Affected Applicants Should Do Now

If you or someone you know had a pending USCIS application frozen under these policies, several steps are recommended:

Check your case status. USCIS case status is available at uscis.gov/casestatus. Cases that were on hold may show movement within the coming weeks as USCIS resumes processing.

Do not refile. Refiling a pending application resets the priority date and creates a new case. If your case was frozen, wait for USCIS to process the existing application.

Consult an immigration attorney. The ruling's effect on individual cases depends on the specific application type, filing date, and any other pending actions. An attorney can advise on whether any additional steps are needed.

Monitor the appeal. The administration is expected to appeal. If a stay is granted by a higher court, processing may be suspended again. Staying informed about the legal status of this ruling is important for anyone whose case is directly affected.

Key Facts

Ruling date	June 5, 2026
Court	U.S. District Court, District of Rhode Island
Judge	Chief Judge John J. McConnell Jr.
Case	Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island v. USCIS, No. 1:26-cv-00132
Scope	Nationwide — applies to all USCIS applicants, not just lawsuit plaintiffs
Effect	USCIS must immediately resume adjudications for all four frozen policy categories
Next step	Government expected to appeal; possible request for stay pending appeal

The Immigrants will continue to cover developments in this case as the government's appeal proceeds. If your application is affected, check uscis.gov for updates or consult a licensed immigration attorney.

About The Immigrants

The Immigrants is an independent publication covering the policies, systems, and decisions that shape the lives of people who move across borders. We write for the people living it — not for policymakers watching from a distance.

The Immigrants is independent and does not accept advertising or sponsored content. If this work is useful to you, share it with someone who needs it.

immigrants.live

Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law changes rapidly. Consult a licensed immigration attorney for guidance specific to your situation.

Sources: U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island (Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island v. USCIS, No. 1:26-cv-00132), American Immigration Council, Courthouse News Service, Ogletree Deakins, Boundless Immigration, USCIS official statements, Columbia ISSO.