A federal district court in Washington issued an emergency injunction late on Feb. 26, 2026, blocking a Trump administration rule that would have eliminated…
A federal district court in Washington issued an emergency injunction late on Feb. 26, 2026, blocking a Trump administration rule that would have eliminated appellate review by the Board of Immigration Appeals for a broad category of immigration judge decisions [1]. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted the order the same day a coalition of immigration advocacy organizations filed their emergency challenge, halting implementation before the rule's March 9, 2026, effective date [1].
The Department of Justice published the rule as an Interim Final Rule through the Executive Office for Immigration Review, the agency that oversees the immigration court system [1]. The challengers, including the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, Brooklyn Defender Services, HIAS, the American Immigration Council, and the National Immigrant Justice Center, argued the rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act and constitutional due process guarantees [1]. By proceeding as an Interim Final Rule, the DOJ bypassed the standard notice-and-comment period that the APA ordinarily requires before a major regulatory change takes effect [1].
The substantive stakes are significant. The BIA functions as the sole administrative appellate body between immigration judges and the federal circuit courts, processing hundreds of thousands of appeals each year [1]. Stripping it of jurisdiction over large categories of cases would have compressed the procedural path available to noncitizens facing removal, routing disputes directly toward circuits already handling substantial immigration dockets or, more likely, foreclosing appeal altogether for many individuals [1]. Critics of the rule framed it as a structural move to accelerate removals by removing the primary internal check on immigration judge decisions [1].
The injunction preserves the status quo while the litigation proceeds. The court's order blocking the rule on the day of filing signals the challengers made a threshold showing on at least one of the four preliminary-injunction factors, most plausibly irreparable harm and likelihood of success on the merits [1]. The government will have the opportunity to respond, and the court is expected to schedule further briefing or a hearing on whether the injunction should remain in place through final resolution of the case [1].
The case, styled as Amica Center for Immigrant Rights v. EOIR, is being watched as a bellwether for how far executive agencies can move to restructure immigration adjudication through the Interim Final Rule mechanism without triggering APA notice-and-comment requirements [1].
—
**Meta Description:** A D.C. federal court blocked a Trump DOJ rule that would have ended Board of Immigration Appeals review for many cases, halting it before its March 9 effective date.
**Slug:** bia-interim-rule-injunction-dc-court
**Tags:** Legal News, Motion Ruling, Amica Center for Immigrant Rights v. EOIR (BIA Interim Final Rule), United States, District of Columbia, Washington, Immigration, Administrative Procedure Act, Due Process, Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, American Immigration Council
—
**Metadata:**
– subject: Amica Center for Immigrant Rights v. EOIR (BIA Interim Final Rule)
– subject_type: Motion Ruling
– date: 2026-02-26
– jurisdiction: federal
– country: United States
– region: District of Columbia
– city: Washington
– key_people: N/A
– key_organizations: Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, Brooklyn Defender Services, HIAS, American Immigration Council, National Immigrant Justice Center
– themes: Immigration, Administrative Procedure Act, Due Process
– significance: The ruling preserves the BIA's appellate function while the court weighs whether the DOJ's use of an Interim Final Rule to restructure immigration adjudication, without notice and comment, violates the APA and constitutional due process protections.
—
**References:**
[1] American Immigration Council. (2026, February 26). *Due Process and the Courts*. https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/about-immigration/due-process-and-courts/