Law Office of Herland Walker Pierre

10/01/2026

On September 29, 2026, the Department of Justice announced new inflation-adjusted immigration filing fees for certain forms filed with the Immigration Courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals.

✅ The fee increases are required under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which requires certain immigration fees to be adjusted annually for inflation. For FY 2027, DOJ used a 3.4% inflation adjustment for the affected Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) fees.

✅ The updated FY 2027 fees include:

📌 Form I-485, Adjustment of Status: $1,590
📌 Form I-589, Initial Asylum Application: $100
📌 Annual Asylum Fee: $105
📌 Form I-601, Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility: $1,100
📌 Form I-821, Temporary Protected Status: $520

✅ These are EOIR-related fees for filings before the Immigration Courts or Board of Immigration Appeals. They are separate from other USCIS or DHS filing fees that may also apply in a particular immigration case.

✅ EOIR warns that filings submitted without the proper fee, proof of payment, or an applicable fee-waiver request may be rejected.

📌 The new FY 2027 EOIR fees apply to relevant filings made on or after October 1, 2026.

👇See the comments section to learn more

*****

‎If you need help or guidance with any U.S. immigration matters, especially with these major changes, please don’t hesitate to reach out. We’re always ready to assist you.
‎
‎☎️☎️+1 (508) 521- 9172☎️☎️
‎📨: [email protected]
‎

07/23/2026

Reinstatement of green cards restriction

‘The Trump administration is upholding the rule of law,’ an official said.

07/23/2026

The Trump administration is considering adding a $100,000 bond to green card applications for those seeking lawful permanent residence in the U.S. https://fox59.com/news/national-world/state-department-considering-100000-bonds-on-green-card-applicants/

07/10/2026

On July 6, 2026, U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley temporarily blocked the Trump administration from enforcing certain USCIS policies that paused immigration benefit applications and directed officials to consider an applicant’s nationality as a negative factor.

✅ The lawsuit was filed by 25 immigrants lawfully living in the United States, who allege that USCIS unlawfully delayed their pending applications for benefits, including work authorization and lawful permanent resident status, based on their countries of origin.

✅ The plaintiffs are citizens of Burma, Canada, Iran, Nigeria, Syria, Tanzania, and Venezuela. Many have held work authorization for years and include professionals such as a hospital pharmacist, registered nurse, cancer researcher, university professor, and engineers.

✅ Judge Marbley emphasized that the case is not about President Donald Trump’s authority to restrict entry into the United States through presidential proclamations.

✅ Instead, the court found that the dispute centers on whether USCIS had the legal authority to indefinitely pause immigration benefit applications for individuals already lawfully present in the United States.

✅ The judge also rejected the administration’s argument that the challenged policies were shielded from judicial review because they involved national security.

✅ The court ordered USCIS to take adjudicative action on the plaintiffs’ pending applications within an expedited timeframe, issue refunds to plaintiffs who paid premium processing fees for pending immigration benefit applications, and issue employment authorization documents within seven days of the order.

➡️ This follows an earlier ruling by a different federal judge, who held that the Trump administration unlawfully prevented certain applicants from 39 travel ban countries from receiving decisions on their immigration benefit applications.

📌 USCIS later announced that the court order blocking the policies that had paused immigration benefit processing for individuals from those 39 countries is now in effect and applies agency-wide.

📌 Need help with an immigration case?

📞 Contact the Law Offices of H.W Pierre to schedule a consultation and discuss your options.

See the comments section to learn more👇

‎******
‎If you need help or guidance with any U.S. immigration matters, especially with these major changes, please don’t hesitate to reach out. We’re always ready to assist you.
‎
‎☎️☎️+1 (508) 521 9172☎️☎️
‎📨: [email protected]
‎
‎

06/14/2026

On May 19, 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) issued a precedent decision in Matter of I-B-M-S-, 29 I&N Dec. 628 (BIA 2026), addressing motions to change venue in immigration court proceedings and the role of Immigration Judges.

✅ The BIA held that the closer in time a motion to change venue is filed to an individual hearing, the less likely it is that the requesting party will be able to establish good cause for the transfer.

📌 Individuals who move and need their cases transferred should act as early as possible.

📌 Waiting until an individual hearing is approaching may significantly reduce the likelihood that a venue change request will be granted.

✅ The BIA also emphasized that off-the-record discussions in immigration proceedings should be limited. When such discussions occur, Immigration Judges must place a true and complete summary of the discussion on the record.

✅ In addition, the BIA reaffirmed that Immigration Judges must remain neutral and impartial arbiters throughout proceedings, and that this duty of neutrality applies equally to both parties.

See the comments section to learn more👇

‎******
‎If you need help or guidance with any U.S. immigration matters, especially with these major changes, please don’t hesitate to reach out. We’re always ready to assist you.
‎
‎☎️☎️+1 (508) 521-9172☎️☎️
‎📨: [email protected]
‎
‎

06/14/2026

On June 11, 2026, Chief U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell Jr. sharply criticized the Trump administration for failing to immediately comply with his June 5 ruling that struck down USCIS policies suspending immigration processing for individuals from 39 countries.

✅ The judge emphasized that court orders take effect immediately and stated
“There is no excuse this time.”

✅ His June 5 decision vacated four USCIS policies, including:

📌 The benefits hold policy that paused adjudication of immigration applications
📌 The global asylum hold policy
📌 The re-review policy for previously approved cases
📌 The country-specific factors policy that treated nationality as a negative factor in adjudications

✅ In his latest order, Judge McConnell made clear that the challenged policies are no longer in effect and directed the government to promptly comply with the court’s ruling.

✅ He also required the administration to provide a status update regarding its compliance efforts.

See the comments section to learn more👇

‎******
‎If you need help or guidance with any U.S. immigration matters, especially with these major changes, please don’t hesitate to reach out. We’re always ready to assist you.
‎
‎☎️☎️+1 (508) 521 9172☎️☎️
‎📨: [email protected]
‎

06/06/2026

‎On June 5, 2026, a federal judge in Rhode Island struck down four USCIS policies that paused or delayed certain immigration benefit decisions for applicants from 39 travel ban countries.
‎
‎✅ The court declared four USCIS policies unlawful and vacated them:
‎
‎📌 The Benefits Hold Policy
‎📌 The Global Asylum Hold Policy
‎📌 The Comprehensive Re-Review Policy
‎📌 The Country-Specific Factors Policy
‎
‎✅ The ruling may allow affected applicants to receive decisions on pending immigration applications that were delayed or placed on hold.
‎
‎******
‎If you need help or guidance with any U.S. immigration matters, especially with these major changes, please don’t hesitate to reach out. We’re always ready to assist you.
‎
‎☎️☎️+1 (509) 521 9172☎️☎️
‎📨: [email protected]
‎

06/05/2026

Class counsel for Calderon Jimenez v. Mayorkas is continuing to follow up with the government regarding delayed requests to join in motions to reopen and dismiss under the Calderon settlement agreement with ICE counsel.

If you have cases where you submitted a request to join before March 1, 2026 and you would like class counsel to inquire with ICE counsel, please email class counsel at [email protected] with the following information:

• Names of the U.S.C. petitioner and the noncitizen beneficiary of the I-130

• A # of the beneficiary

• Date of the request

• Whether the request was made using the Calderon JMTR request email address, [email protected], or if not, how the request was made.

For more information about the Calderon class and the settlement agreement, please see the FAQ and a copy of the settlement agreement at https://www.aclum.org/calderon-settlement/.

Thank you!

Notice of approved settlement in Calderon case impacting New England area noncitizens who have final orders of removal and are married to U.S. citizens Summary by class counsel at ACLU of Massachusetts On January 16, 2025, a federal district court approved a proposed settlement in Calderon Jimenez v...

06/05/2026

The Trump administration prepares major clampdown on work permits for noncitizens.

A forthcoming DHS rule would sharply restrict EAD eligibility for people with humanitarian parole, non‑DACA deferred action, and final removal orders.

USCIS processed 978,308 applications in these categories in 2024.

The proposal would:
Cut eligibility, intensify vetting, and limit permits to one year
Tie renewals to employers using E‑Verify
End work authorization for most people with final removal orders
Disqualify applicants with arrests, convictions, or suspected gang/terror ties unless a compelling public interest applies

DHS says the goal is to deter unauthorized immigration and protect U.S. workers. Critics warn it will push migrants into informal labor markets.

Breakdown of FY 2024 applications:
792,130 parole
153,154 deferred action
33,024 removal orders