Explainer · Litigation

What the Dorcas ruling means for Afghan allies.

A federal court struck down four USCIS policies that had frozen green cards, work permits, asylum decisions, and naturalization for Afghans and nationals of 38 other countries. The government is appealing. Here is what changed, what did not, and what to do now.

Last updated September 11, 2026

Latest

The case is now on appeal at the First Circuit (No. 26-1703), and on September 10, 2026 the government filed its opening brief. In August the appeals court paused one of the four policies, the Comprehensive Re-Review Policy, while the appeal proceeds; the other three remain vacated and cannot be enforced. The case is Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island v. USCIS (D.R.I. No. 1:26-cv-00132). Read AfghanEvac's statement on the stay denial.

Latest update · September 11, 2026

Where the case stands now.

The district court's win is on appeal, and two things have moved since it was entered: the First Circuit paused one piece of the ruling, and the government has now filed the brief laying out why it wants the whole thing reversed.

  • A partial stay is in effect. After the district court denied the government a pause on July 15, the government asked the First Circuit for one. On August 14, 2026, a three-judge panel granted that request only in part. It paused the vacatur of the Comprehensive Re-Review Policy, letting USCIS resume that policy during the appeal, and denied a stay as to the other three policies, which remain vacated.
  • The government's opening brief is in. On September 10, 2026, the government filed its opening brief and the appendix. It argues the policies are not reviewable because they are not final agency action and not ripe, that the Immigration and Nationality Act bars review of discretionary benefits decisions, and that the district court was wrong on the merits.
  • A mootness argument on the asylum hold. The government also told the court that the challenge to the Global Asylum Hold Policy is now moot, pointing to a March 25, 2026 memorandum by the USCIS Director lifting that hold, and asked to add that memo to the record.
  • What comes next. The plaintiffs' response brief is due in mid-October 2026, with the government's reply about three weeks after that. Oral argument and a decision would follow.

Case timeline

June 5, 2026 · District court
Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. (D.R.I.) grants the plaintiffs summary judgment in part and vacates all four USCIS policies as unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act.
June 11, 2026 · District court
The court enters partial final judgment for the plaintiffs, clearing the way for appeal.
June 2026 · Appeal filed
The government appeals to the First Circuit, docketed as No. 26-1703.
July 15, 2026 · District court
Chief Judge McConnell denies the government's motion to pause the ruling while it appeals.
August 14, 2026 · First Circuit
A panel grants the government a stay only in part, limited to the Comprehensive Re-Review Policy. That one policy may be enforced during the appeal; the other three stay vacated.
September 10, 2026 · First Circuit
The government files its opening brief and appendix, and moves to supplement the record to argue the Global Asylum Hold challenge is moot.

Litigation status drawn from the public CourtListener dockets for 1st Cir. No. 26-1703 and D.R.I. No. 1:26-cv-00132-JJM-PAS and the government's September 10, 2026 filings, reviewed September 11, 2026.

What the court struck down

Four USCIS policies, vacated.

Each of these policies used an applicant's nationality to stall or reopen their case. The court vacated all four. The badges show where each one stands while the appeal is pending.

Benefits Hold

USCIS froze adjudications on green cards, work permits, and naturalization applications based on the applicant's nationality.

Vacated · in effect

Global Asylum Hold

USCIS paused asylum decisions for people from designated countries, including Afghanistan.

Vacated · lifted by USCIS

Comprehensive Re-Review

USCIS reopened previously approved cases for nationals of covered countries who arrived after January 20, 2021.

Paused during appeal

Country-Specific Factors

USCIS instructed officers to treat an applicant's nationality as a significant negative factor in discretionary decisions.

Vacated · in effect

Why the court ruled against USCIS

The agency exceeded its authority.

The court found that USCIS violated the Administrative Procedure Act. It implemented these policies without sufficient legal justification and without weighing the reliance interests of people who had already been approved or who had built their lives here in good faith.

Set expectations

What this ruling does not do.

This is a real and important win, but it is narrow. The decision does not:

  • End the Afghanistan travel ban
  • Restart refugee admissions
  • Restore Enduring Welcome operations
  • Fix Special Immigrant Visa processing overseas

Those fights continue elsewhere, including in the other cases on our litigation tracker.

If you are an Afghan national in the U.S.

What to do now.

1

Most holds are lifted

With the Benefits Hold and the asylum hold vacated, USCIS has resumed adjudicating cases that were frozen. One policy, the re-review of already-approved cases, is back in effect during the appeal, so an approved case could be reopened.

2

Check your contact info

Verify that your current address and contact information are up to date with USCIS so you do not miss a notice.

3

Talk to a lawyer

Consult an immigration attorney about any pending application, especially cases that were reopened or paused.

For vetted legal help and other resources, see our Resources page. This explainer is information, not legal advice.

Go deeper

Read the record and track the case.

Read AfghanEvac's statements, follow the public dockets on CourtListener, and see where Dorcas fits among the lawsuits shaping Afghan relocation.

This explainer summarizes public court filings for informational purposes and is not legal advice. Case details are drawn from the dockets on CourtListener, a service of the Free Law Project. For guidance on your own case, consult a qualified immigration attorney.