EOIR Issues New Guidance on Pretermission of Asylum Applications Without Legal Basis

On April 15, 2025, the Office of the Director of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) issued a policy memorandum providing guidance on the legal standards applicable to the pretermission—that is, dismissal without a hearing—of asylum applications that do not meet minimum legal requirements.

This memorandum aims to improve efficiency in managing the nearly 4 million pending cases in immigration courts, reminding judges that they have the authority to promptly resolve cases lacking a viable legal avenue for relief or protection from removal.

Also Read: “U.S. Supreme Court Authorizes Use of Historic Law for Fast-Track Deportations”

What Does This New Policy Entail?

EOIR maintains that immigration judges can dismiss asylum claims without a hearing when they lack legal merit, as long as there are no factual disputes. This interpretation is based on current regulations such as 8 CFR § 1240.11(c)(3), which only require hearings to resolve contested facts—not when the deficiency is purely legal.

Legal Context and Background

Although the issue was previously addressed in the 1989 case Matter of Fefe, the regulations in effect at that time are no longer valid, and other relevant decisions have been vacated, creating uncertainty among judges on how to handle legally weak applications. This new memo is intended to clarify that confusion.

The document notes that there are legal precedents supporting this practice, including:

• Valencia v. Garland (2023) – Application rejected for late filing.
• Zhu v. Gonzales (2007) – Application dismissed for lacking a legal connection to a protected group.
• Matter of J-G-P- (2019) – Case denied due to a disqualifying criminal conviction.

What Does This Mean for Applicants?

Asylum seekers have the legal responsibility to demonstrate that they meet the criteria for protection. If they fail to present sufficient evidence from the outset, their application could be denied without a formal hearing, as long as no facts are in dispute. This measure seeks to avoid prolonged and unnecessary proceedings in cases that do not meet minimum requirements.

Key Considerations

• Judges retain the right to exercise independent judgment in each case.
• The policy does not impose an automatic requirement to dismiss, but it does authorize judges to do so when appropriate.
• The memo emphasizes that it is a regulatory interpretation and does not create enforceable legal rights for the parties.

Conclusion

This new EOIR directive aims to streamline immigration proceedings and reduce court backlogs by clarifying that asylum claims lacking legal merit can be rejected without a hearing. While it represents a significant shift in case management, it preserves judicial discretion and due process, provided that established immigration law principles are applied.

From: https://assets.aila.org/files/38e896d1-7a29-4014-ad9f-7637a3e25580/25041116.pdf?1744404387 

For more information on these topics, visit Paralegal Clases’ social media pages and join our live sessions every Wednesday.

Instagram:   @Paralegalclases
Facebook:   Instituto Paralegal de las Américas
Youtube:   Instituto Paralegal
Tiktok:   @Paralegalnews