On April 30, 2026, a federal court in Massachusetts issued a significant ruling ordering the U.S. government to lift its blanket hold on certain USCIS immigration applications for approximately 200 plaintiffs from specific countries. The court found that two key USCIS policies, which have been responsible for freezing cases for months, are likely unlawful. While this marks an important legal victory, the decision currently applies only to the individuals involved in the case. Thousands of other applicants remain subject to these policies and may need to take additional steps to obtain relief.
Background on the USCIS Policies at Issue
Beginning in November 2025, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) implemented two policies affecting individuals from certain countries identified by the Trump administration as presenting national security or vetting concerns.
Quick Takeaways:
- A federal court ordered USCIS to resume processing applications for certain plaintiffs.
- The ruling challenges USCIS policies that froze cases based on nationality.
- Relief currently applies only to the individuals in the lawsuit.
- Others may need to take legal action to benefit from the decision.
- “Significant Negative Factor” (SNF) Policy
This policy allowed USCIS to treat a person’s country of origin as a negative factor when deciding immigration applications, including adjustment of status (green card applications) and work permits (EADs). In practical terms, this meant that nationality alone could count against an applicant, even if all other eligibility requirements were met. - “Adjudicative Hold” Policy
This policy paused (or “froze”) applications indefinitely for affected individuals, including work authorization, adjustment of status, and asylum applications. Many applicants received no updates and no timeline, leaving them unable to work or maintain status.
The affected countries by these USCIS policies are: Afghanistan, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Burkina Faso, Burma (Myanmar), Burundi, Chad, Congo-Brazzaville (Republic of the Congo), Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Dominica, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Gabon, The Gambia, Haiti, Iran, Laos, Libya, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, Palestinian Authority (those using P.A.-issued documents), Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Togo, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Venezuela, and Yemen, Zimbabwe.
What the Court Decided: USCIS to Resume Processing
On April 30, 2026, a federal court in Massachusetts ruled that these USCIS policies are likely unlawful and ordered the government to stop applying them, at least for certain individuals in the case. The court found that:
- USCIS likely does not have the authority to freeze applications indefinitely based on nationality
- Using nationality as a negative factor is likely inconsistent with immigration law
- The government did not follow proper rulemaking procedures before implementing these policies
- Applicants suffered real and immediate harm, including:
- Loss of work authorization
- Disruption of lawful status
- Financial and personal hardship
The decision signals the type of relief other litigants may be able to pursue through similar lawsuits. The court held that:
- USCIS must resume processing applications for certain plaintiffs
- USCIS must stop applying these policies to those individuals
- The court will determine whether additional plaintiffs are also entitled to relief
Only the individuals in the lawsuit are currently protected by this ruling. This means that, for most people, USCIS delays and holds may still be in place. However, the court’s reasoning strongly suggests that these policies are legally flawed across the board, not just for the individuals in the case.
Who May Still Be Affected by these USCIS Policies?
This decision is especially important for individuals whose immigration status or work authorization is at risk due to delayed USCIS processing.
You may be affected if you are:
- An F-1 student (including OPT or STEM OPT applicants) with a pending or expiring work permit
- An employment-based nonimmigrant visa holder (such as H-1B, L-1, or others) with a pending extension or change of status petition
- An employment-based immigrant petition applicant, including:
- Form I-140 petitions based on PERM labor certification
- Self-petitioned or employer-sponsored National Interest Waiver (NIW) cases
- EB-1A Extraordinary Ability petitions
- EB-1B Outstanding Professor or Researcher petitions
- An adjustment of status (green card) applicant waiting on USCIS action
- An asylum applicant with a pending case
Legal Options for Applicants Still Facing Delays
Individuals who are not covered by the current ruling may still have legal pathways to move their cases forward, as these delays are not just administrative. Many individuals are losing their jobs due to expired work permits, falling out of lawful status, becoming unable to travel, and facing significant financial hardship as a result of these prolonged processing issues.
Courts are actively reviewing these policies, and this recent decision provides a strong legal foundation for similar cases. This ruling is an important development, but it is not the final word. The government may appeal, as the decision currently applies only to specific individuals, and USCIS policies remain in place for others unless further court action is taken. We expect continued litigation and additional developments in the coming weeks and months.
Recommended Actions
Given the ongoing uncertainty and limited scope of the court’s ruling, individuals and employers should take proactive steps to assess risk and preserve available options:
| For Individuals | For Employers |
| Act promptly if your work authorization or status is at risk. | Identify employees who may be affected by USCIS processing delays. |
| Gather documentation showing harm, such as: Job loss or risk of termination Expiring status or benefits Financial hardship | Review Form I-9 compliance obligations for employees with expiring work authorization. |
| Consult with immigration counsel to evaluate alternative legal pathways. | Consider contingency planning for workforce disruptions. |
| Consider potential legal action, if appropriate, to ensure maintenance of status and work authorization. | Explore whether supporting affected employees in legal action is appropriate. |
How Klasko Can Help
Klasko Immigration Law Partners is actively monitoring this litigation and is prepared to represent individuals and employers who need to take legal action. Whether you are a STEM OPT applicant facing an expiring EAD, a student whose status is in jeopardy, or an adjustment of status applicant who has been waiting months for USCIS to act, we can evaluate your situation and help you pursue the relief the law provides.
If you have questions about how these developments may affect you, or if you are interested in exploring litigation options, please request a consultation with one of our immigration attorneys.
The material contained in this alert does not constitute direct legal advice and is for informational purposes only. An attorney-client relationship is not presumed or intended by receipt or review of this presentation. The information provided should never replace informed counsel when specific immigration-related guidance is needed.
© 2026 Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP. All rights reserved. Information may not be reproduced, displayed, modified, or distributed without the express prior written permission of Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP. For permission, contact info@klaskolaw.com.
