Hundreds of Cuban nationals possessing the I-220A form are finding themselves directly summoned to immigration court, bypassing an asylum officer interview. Many remain unaware that they had an existing Notice to Appear (NTA) since crossing the border.
This situation was highlighted by immigration attorney Liudmila Marcelo in an interview with Tania Costa for CiberCuba, where she explained the practical effects of the new federal rule 91 FR 47101, effective as of July 28, 2026.
Legal Complexities for I-220A Holders
Marcelo identifies two distinct scenarios that, while similar, carry vastly different legal ramifications. The first pertains to Cubans with I-220A who unknowingly had a pending NTA: "These Cubans with I-220A were without court dates, but having entered through the border, they had a hidden NTA," Marcelo explained.
In these instances, when the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) dispatches the NTA to a judge, the jurisdiction change is legally justified: "Once the judge receives the NTA, one that this individual is aware of since entry, the jurisdiction shifts from USCIS to the court," she clarified.
The Emerging Problem with the New Rule
Marcelo identifies a critical issue with the second group: individuals lacking any NTA who, under the new rule, are also sent to court without prior interviews.
"These people, without an NTA, who previously faced no imminent court proceedings and had the chance to defend their asylum claim before an officer, are now being told by USCIS that they won't be seen and must proceed to court," Marcelo stated.
She argues this represents a direct breach of the law: "That's where the violation lies. The administrative process is being completely undermined." Marcelo emphasizes that affirmative asylum — for those without active removal charges — should be resolved through USCIS interviews, not immigration judges.
Implications for Affirmative and Defensive Asylum
The new rule disrupts the essential distinction between affirmative and defensive asylum as outlined in section 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
Marcelo notes that this issue isn't new: "We have been observing this trend from USCIS for many months," and she has encountered numerous individuals who had no court dates but are now being assigned them.
This practice, previously applied unofficially, is now formalized under the latest federal regulation.
Specifics for Cubans with Parole
Marcelo also clarifies an important difference for Cubans with parole: those with the parole marked in the second box fall under court jurisdiction for residency, while those marked in the first box remain under USCIS jurisdiction.
The 91 FR 47101 rule initiates a 60-day public comment period, ending on September 28, 2026, and immigration lawyer organizations anticipate it will face legal challenges.
Meanwhile, Cubans with I-220A have reported significant rescheduling of hearings, with court dates initially set for 2028 and 2029 moved forward, leaving many unprepared to defend their cases.
For those eligible for other immigration pathways, such as Cuban parole, Marcelo advises consulting with an attorney to consider withdrawing any pending asylum applications before their case is transferred to court.
Understanding the Impact of Rule 91 FR 47101 on Cuban Immigrants
What is the significance of the I-220A form for Cuban immigrants?
The I-220A form indicates a conditional release from immigration custody. For many Cuban immigrants, it involves legal complexities, especially with the new rule potentially directing them to court without prior notice.
How does the new federal rule 91 FR 47101 affect asylum seekers?
The rule alters the asylum process by sending individuals to court without an asylum officer interview, affecting those who might otherwise qualify for affirmative asylum processes.
What should Cuban immigrants with parole do under the new rule?
Cuban immigrants with parole should check which jurisdiction applies to them. If eligible, they should consult an attorney to explore withdrawing pending asylum applications to avoid automatic court proceedings.