Federal Court Orders USCIS to Resume Processing Stalled Applications: What the Dorcas Decision Means for You
If USCIS has been sitting on your application — a green card, an employment authorization card, a naturalization petition — there is a significant federal court ruling you need to know about.
On June 5, 2026, Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island issued a 135-page decision in Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island, et al. v. USCIS, et al., striking down four USCIS policies that had effectively frozen thousands of immigration benefit applications across the country. On June 11, 2026, the court entered final judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and issued a second order clarifying the scope of its ruling — declaring the challenged policies unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act and ordering the government to provide a status update on implementation within 24 hours.
USCIS disagrees with the ruling but has stated it will comply while it pursues an appeal. That means, right now, there is an open window for applications that have been held up by these policies to move forward.
Here is what happened, what it means, and what you should do.
What Were These Policies?
Starting in late 2025, USCIS implemented a series of internal policy directives — not passed by Congress, not subject to public comment — that brought adjudications to a halt for large categories of applicants. The court struck down four of them:
1. The Benefits Hold Policy
This policy indefinitely suspended USCIS's adjudication of immigration benefit applications for people from countries covered by President Trump's travel ban. That includes applications for adjustment of status (green cards), employment authorization documents (EADs), naturalization, advance parole travel documents, and other immigration benefits. If you or a family member is from one of the travel-ban-designated countries and has been waiting months with no movement on an application, this policy is almost certainly why.
2. The Global Asylum Hold Policy
Beginning in December 2025, USCIS paused adjudication of asylum applications — not just for people from certain countries, but for applicants worldwide. This pause applied regardless of nationality and affected tens of thousands of pending cases.
3. The Comprehensive Re-Review Policy
This policy directed USCIS officers to go back and re-examine previously approved immigration benefits for individuals from the travel-ban countries who had entered the United States on or after January 20, 2021. In other words, USCIS was not just freezing new applications — it was looking for ways to revisit and potentially revoke benefits that had already been granted.
4. The Country-Specific Factors Policy
This policy amended USCIS's internal policy manual to require adjudicators to treat an applicant's nationality, when that nationality was tied to a travel-ban country, as a significant negative factor when exercising discretion. It effectively built a structural disadvantage into the adjudication process based on where someone was born.
What Did the Court Decide?
Chief Judge McConnell held that all four policies violate the Administrative Procedure Act — the federal law that governs how agencies like USCIS must act when making rules and decisions. Specifically, the court found the policies "contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious."
The court rejected the government's argument that these policies were simply discretionary agency decisions beyond the reach of judicial review. It held that USCIS cannot use internal policy memos to override the statutory framework that Congress built into the Immigration and Nationality Act. The agency cannot simply decide, by memo, to stop doing the job Congress told it to do.
The court also emphasized something important for applicants whose cases have been frozen: people structure their lives around immigration pathways. They leave jobs, enroll family members in schools, sign leases, make medical decisions — all based on the assumption that if they follow the rules and file the paperwork, the government will adjudicate their case. The court found that USCIS failed to meaningfully account for those reliance interests before implementing these sweeping holds. That analysis matters, and it is likely to influence how courts evaluate future agency actions in this space.
On June 11, the court entered final judgment for the plaintiffs on their APA claims, vacated all four policies, and ordered the government to report on its implementation steps within 24 hours. The government filed that status report on June 12, outlining steps it is taking to come into compliance.
Who Does This Affect?
If any of the following apply to your situation, this ruling may directly affect a pending case:
You are from a country covered by the travel ban and have a pending adjustment of status application, EAD, naturalization petition, or other immigration benefit that has been sitting without adjudication
You have a pending asylum application that stalled after December 2025 with no apparent reason
You had a previously approved benefit and were notified that USCIS intended to re-review it
You have been waiting on a pending case and received no movement, no RFE, and no explanation
This ruling applies nationwide. It is not limited to Rhode Island.
What Is the Current Status?
This situation is moving quickly, and the honest answer is: it is not over.
USCIS filed an appeal to the First Circuit Court of Appeals on June 12, 2026, the day after final judgment was entered. The government may also seek a stay — which would pause the effect of the ruling while the appeal proceeds. If a stay is granted, the window that currently exists for stalled applications to move forward could close again.
For now, the policies are vacated, and USCIS has stated it will comply. But the legal fight is ongoing, and the First Circuit may be asked to weigh in soon.
This is precisely the kind of moment when having experienced legal counsel matters. Moving strategically — and quickly — can make a real difference.
What Should You Do Now?
If you have a pending case that may have been affected by one of these policies, contact an immigration attorney now. The compliance window may be narrow. Knowing whether your case falls within the scope of the ruling, and how to follow up with USCIS, requires someone who has read the decision and understands your individual facts.
If your case involves someone from a travel-ban country, or if you have a pending asylum application that went silent after December 2025, there is a strong argument that your application should now be adjudicated. But that does not happen automatically — you may need to take steps to move your case.
A Note on Why This Decision Matters Beyond the Four Policies
The Dorcas ruling is significant not only because of the specific policies it struck down, but because of what it says about the limits of agency power in immigration.
The court made clear that even in areas touching national security and foreign affairs, federal agencies do not have unlimited discretion. They must act within the authority Congress gave them. They must follow the APA. And courts retain the power to review and invalidate agency action that exceeds statutory authority — regardless of how an agency characterizes its own decisions.
For people whose immigration status has been disrupted over the past year — through visa revocations, delayed adjudications, or abrupt policy changes — this decision is a meaningful reminder that those actions are not beyond challenge. The law still applies. The courts are still open. And the outcome matters.
About Cameron Moore Law
Attorney Jenny Moore is an immigration lawyer based in Worcester, Massachusetts, serving clients throughout central Massachusetts and, for matters that do not require appearances at local field offices, nationwide. Attorney Moore is admitted to practice in the District of Massachusetts federal court, among other federal jurisdictions, and has experience litigating and navigating complex USCIS adjudication issues, including mandamus and APA federal lawsuits.
If you have a case that may have been affected by the Dorcas ruling or by recent USCIS policy changes, contact Cameron Moore Law to discuss your situation.
Cameron Moore Law, PLLC | PO Box 3428, Worcester, MA 01613 | (857) 600-0178 | info@cameronmoorelaw.com
This blog post is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this post does not create an attorney-client relationship. The law in this area is evolving rapidly — please consult a licensed immigration attorney regarding your individual situation and the current state of any appeal or stay.