Judge Blocks USCIS Freeze on 39 Countries' Applications, Orders Processing of Hundreds of Thousands
Updated
Updated · American Immigration Council | · Jun 8
Judge Blocks USCIS Freeze on 39 Countries' Applications, Orders Processing of Hundreds of Thousands
3 articles · Updated · American Immigration Council | · Jun 8
Summary
A Rhode Island federal judge immediately halted USCIS policies that had left hundreds of thousands of immigration applications from 39 countries unprocessed since December 2025.
In a 135-page ruling, Judge John McConnell said USCIS lacked legal authority to stop adjudicating cases, acted arbitrarily, and relied on unlawful nationality-based discrimination and anti-immigrant animus.
The order also struck down three related measures: treating nationality as a negative factor, re-reviewing approvals for people from the 39 countries, and an indefinite halt on USCIS asylum decisions.
State Department visa pauses for 75 countries and Trump's separate 39-country entry ban remain in place, so the ruling is limited to USCIS benefit processing.
The Trump administration can seek an emergency stay from the First Circuit or the Supreme Court; without one, USCIS must resume equal processing standards across nationalities.
The 39-nation immigration hold is voided. What's next for thousands of applicants now stuck in a massive processing backlog?
With immigration policies disrupting the World Cup, can the U.S. still be a reliable host for major international events?
Landmark 2026 Ruling Overturns USCIS Freeze on 39-Nation Immigrant Applications: What It Means Now and Next
Overview
On June 5, 2026, a Rhode Island federal judge issued a pivotal order that vacated key policies behind the USCIS freeze on immigration adjudications, which had affected nationals from 39 countries targeted by President Trump's travel ban. This ruling, clarified on June 12, 2026, directs USCIS on how to implement the changes, offering immediate relief to those whose applications were stalled. The court found the Trump-era policies lacked legal authority and were discriminatory, highlighting their severe impact on immigrants’ lives. This decision marks a significant step toward fairer immigration processes and sets a strong precedent against arbitrary, nationality-based restrictions.