Federal Judge Halts Trump-Era Policy Blocking Detained Immigrants from Completing Biometrics with USCIS

A federal judge has intervened to pause a controversial policy from the Trump administration that prevented detained immigrants from fulfilling the biometric data requirement for their immigration applications with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). This ruling reestablishes the previous procedure while the legal battle continues.

On October 7, Judge Amir H. Ali of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia issued the order in the case J.Z. et al. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security et al. Citing section 705 of the Administrative Procedure Act, the judge suspended the policy implemented in December 2025 and required the government to submit a compliance report by October 21, 2026.

Initially announced by USCIS in December 2025, the suspended policy stated that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) "generally will not collect biometrics from detained non-citizens" with pending applications at USCIS unless their cases were before immigration courts.

This left a significant gap for those pursuing permanent residency, T visas for human trafficking survivors, U visas for victims of severe crimes, special immigrant juvenile status for minors facing abuse or abandonment, and derivative asylum for those reuniting with family members who were already granted asylum.

Biometrics—fingerprints, photographs, and signatures—are essential for USCIS to process these applications. If an applicant misses their appointment, federal regulations consider the application "abandoned and denied."

The policy effectively created a roadblock, as the agency itself does not allow rescheduling due to detention or incarceration, leaving applicants in a bind.

The situation was even more dire for some applicants: completing background checks, which require biometrics, could automatically stay a deportation order while USCIS processes the application, as is the case with T visas.

Judge Ali's preliminary assessment found the policy likely arbitrary and capricious, noting DHS adopted it without acknowledging it would hinder detained applicants from continuing their processes and without providing a rational justification for such an outcome.

The government's justification—"to deter frivolous claims and provide operational consistency"—was dismissed because it indiscriminately affected all applications regardless of their merit.

Even the government admitted in its court filings that "USCIS's collection of biometrics for immigration applications is crucial."

The suspension applies broadly, restoring the procedure for all detained individuals with pending USCIS applications, not just the plaintiffs in the case.

While the judge granted the suspension, he denied an additional preliminary injunction sought by the plaintiffs, deeming it unnecessary given the scope of the order already in place.

It is crucial to note what the order does not do: it does not grant residency, does not mandate the release of any detainee, does not automatically approve any application, nor universally halt deportations. The primary 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 apply for legal protections, refusing to collect them, and then denying their applications for non-compliance."

"No one should have to choose between deportation to danger and a legal process rigged to fail," the plaintiffs' representatives concluded.

This ruling is part of a larger trend of judicial challenges against the immigration policies of the Trump administration. In June, a court invalidated four of Trump's immigration policies, also citing the Administrative Procedure Act, and in September, an appellate court rejected another policy from the same administration.