Why court cases matter to your application
Much of immigration policy in 2026 is being decided twice: once by the agency and again by a judge. A rule can be announced, blocked the day before it starts, and revived months later on appeal. For applicants, that means the policy that applies to your case can depend on a court order issued last week.
This timeline covers the rulings from June through early November 2026 that affect how U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) handles cases. The first few entries are from June because later events build on them.
The timeline
| Date | Case and court | What happened | What it changes at USCIS |
|---|---|---|---|
| June 5 | Dorcas International Institute v. USCIS (D.R.I.) | Vacated the policies that put cases from certain countries on hold. | USCIS said it would treat the hold policies as not in effect. |
| June 8 | State of California v. Mullin (D. Mass.) | Vacated the $100,000 H-1B payment requirement. | Fee not collected once the appeals court refused a pause on July 24. |
| June 25 | Mullin v. Doe (Supreme Court) | Held that courts cannot review most challenges to TPS terminations. | Terminations for Haiti, Syria, Yemen, South Sudan, Burma, Somalia, and Ethiopia took effect in July and August. |
| June 30 | Trump v. Barbara (Supreme Court) | Held the 2025 birthright citizenship order unconstitutional. | New executive orders followed on August 6 and are being challenged. |
| July 21 | Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts v. USCIS (D. Mass.) | Paused rejection of asylum applications for nonpayment of the annual asylum fee. | USCIS may still collect the fee but may not reject applications on that basis. |
| July 24 | State of California v. Mullin (1st Cir.) | Denied the government’s request to pause the H-1B fee ruling. | USCIS confirmed it will not require the $100,000 payment. |
| August 3 | League of Women Voters v. USCIS (D. Md.) | Paused the ban on nonprofit voter registration at naturalization ceremonies. | USCIS restored the earlier policy on August 12 and made the change formal on August 31. |
| August 24 | Red Eagle Law v. Edlow (N.D. Cal.) | Enjoined two of the hold policy memoranda. | Second court order against the country based holds. |
| August 28 | Medani v. Trump (N.D. Cal.) | Temporarily vacated the hold on Diversity Visa adjustment cases. | USCIS ordered to resume deciding those cases. |
| September 10 | H-4 work permit case (C.D. Cal.) | Restored automatic work permit extensions, but only for the seven people who sued. | No change for other applicants. The rule became final on October 14. |
| September 14 | Presidents’ Alliance v. DHS (D. Mass.) | Blocked the rule ending duration of status for F, J, and I visa holders one day before it took effect. | Students keep duration of status and do not need to file extensions with USCIS. Government appealed on September 30. |
| September 28 | Sileiri Doe v. DHS (D. Mass.) | Ordered DHS to remedy harms from the April 2025 mass parole terminations. | Class members may ask USCIS to reopen or reconsider certain denials without a fee. |
| September 30 | Global Nurse Force v. Trump (N.D. Cal.) | Blocked the agency policies carrying out the $100,000 H-1B payment, including the 2027 extension. | Second order against the fee. Government appealed on October 9. |
| October 5 | Venezuela and Haiti TPS case (Supreme Court) | Vacated an appeals court ruling that had favored TPS holders and sent it back for reconsideration. | Reinforces the limits set in Mullin v. Doe. |
| October 5 | American Association of University Professors v. Mullin (D. Mass.) | Lawsuit filed against the adjustment of status memo and the policy allowing denials without a Request for Evidence. | No ruling yet. Both policies remain in effect. |
| October 5 | Association of American Universities v. DHS (D. Mass.) | Lawsuit filed against the August guidance restricting Curricular Practical Training. | No ruling yet. A hearing was set for November 6. |
| October 7 | J.Z. v. DHS (D.D.C.) | Paused the policy on biometrics for detained applicants. | Previous biometrics practice restored. |
What this means by group
TPS holders
The Supreme Court’s June decision is the single biggest shift of the year. Courts can no longer review most arguments against a TPS termination, which is why so many designations ended within weeks. The October 5 order in the Venezuela and Haiti case points the same direction. TPS holders should not count on a lawsuit to restore status and should look into other options now.
F-1 and J-1 students and their schools
Universities and higher education groups went to court twice this fall, and the results so far are mixed.
- Duration of status is protected for now. The rule that would have replaced it with fixed admission periods is blocked. Students continue under the current system, but the government has appealed.
- Curricular Practical Training is restricted for now. The August guidance narrowing CPT is still in effect while the court considers the challenge. Some schools have paused certain CPT approvals. Students should follow written guidance from their international student office.
H-1B employers and workers
Two court orders block the $100,000 payment, one court upheld it, and all three cases are on appeal. Employers filing now do not pay it. A separate proposed fee of $103,265 is not in effect.
Green card applicants
The lawsuit over the adjustment of status memo and the denial without Request for Evidence policy has not produced a ruling. Until it does, applicants should file complete applications and be ready to show why their case deserves approval.
H-4 spouses and other work permit holders
The September ruling helped only the seven people who sued. Everyone else should file renewals as early as allowed, because a pending renewal no longer extends work authorization.
People affected by the April 2025 parole terminations
If you were paroled in after using the CBP One app, your parole was ended by email in April 2025, and a later application was denied as a result, you may be able to ask USCIS to look again without paying a fee.
Applicants from countries subject to the hold policies
Three separate courts have ruled against the hold memoranda. USCIS has said it will follow those orders while it appeals.
Three things to remember
- A lawsuit being filed changes nothing by itself. A policy stays in effect until a court orders otherwise.
- Many of these orders are temporary. Appeals are pending in almost every case listed here.
- Some orders cover only the people who sued. Read the scope before assuming a ruling applies to you.
What to watch next
- A ruling on Curricular Practical Training following the November 6 hearing.
- The government’s response in the adjustment of status case, due December 7.
- Appeals court decisions on the H-1B fee and on duration of status.
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended solely for general informational and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship between the reader & Ahluwalia Law Offices, P.C. The legal information provided herein may not apply to your individual circumstances & is subject to change based on evolving immigration laws and policies.
Readers are strongly encouraged to consult directly with a qualified immigration attorney for guidance tailored to their specific situation. Our front desk staff is not authorized to interpret legal information or provide legal advice beyond what is explicitly stated in this blog. They are also not permitted to assess eligibility, review case details, or respond to case-specific inquiries.
Please note: Due to the high volume of inquiries and the sensitive nature of immigration matters, we cannot respond to questions or requests for legal analysis via phone or email unless a formal consultation has been scheduled. We appreciate your understanding and encourage you to book an appointment with one of our attorneys if you require personalized legal assistance.
