A federal judge suspended a policy from the Trump administration that prevented detained immigrants from completing the biometric data requirement for their immigration applications with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), reinstating the previous procedure while litigation continues.
The order was issued on October 7 by Judge Amir H. Ali of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, in the case J.Z. et al. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security et al. Under the provisions of section 705 of the Administrative Procedure Act, the judge suspended the policy adopted in December 2025 and ordered the government to submit a compliance report by October 21, 2026.
The suspended policy, announced by USCIS in December 2025, stated that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) "will generally not take biometrics from detained foreigners" with pending applications before USCIS, unless their proceedings were underway in immigration courts.
This left those applying for permanent residency, T visas for survivors of human trafficking, U visas for victims of other serious crimes, special immigrant status for minors who are victims of abuse or neglect, and derivative asylum to reunite with a family member who has already been granted asylum without coverage.
Biometrics —fingerprints, photographs, and signatures— are an essential requirement for USCIS to process those applications. If the applicant does not attend their appointment, federal regulations state that the application "is considered abandoned and denied."
The problem is that the agency itself does not approve rescheduling due to detention or imprisonment, which effectively turned the policy into a de facto blockade.
For certain applicants, the situation was even more critical: completing background checks—which require biometrics—can automatically suspend a deportation order before USCIS resolves the application, as is the case with T visas.
Judge Ali concluded, in a preliminary assessment, that the policy was likely arbitrary and capricious. The DHS adopted it without explaining how it would prevent detainees from continuing their proceedings and without providing a rational justification for that consequence.
The only reason provided by the government—“to deter the filing of frivolous claims and to ensure operational consistency”—was rejected because the measure affected all applications regardless of merit.
The government itself had acknowledged in its writings to the court that "the collection of biometrics by USCIS for immigration applications is crucial."
The suspension is not limited to the plaintiffs in the case but restores the procedure for all detainees with pending applications before USCIS.
The judge granted the suspension but denied the additional preliminary protective measure that the plaintiffs had also requested, considering it unnecessary given the scope of what had already been ordered.
It is important to clarify what the order does not do: it does not grant residency, it does not order the release of any detainee, it does not automatically approve any applications, nor does it universally halt deportations. The main litigation continues.
The plaintiffs are represented by Democracy Forward, the National Immigration Project, and the National Immigrant Justice Center.
In a joint statement, they described the policy as "an impossible trap: requiring individuals to provide biometrics to request legal protections, refusing to collect them, and then denying their applications for not complying."
“Nobody should be forced to choose between deportation to danger and a legal process designed to fail,” concluded the representatives of the plaintiffs.
This ruling is part of a broader pattern of judicial litigation against the administration's immigration policies. In June, a court declared four immigration policies of Trump illegal based on the Administrative Procedure Act, and in September an appeals court rejected another immigration policy from the same administration.
Related videos:
Filed under: