Judge Orders Trump to Resume Green Card and Asylum Processing After Ruling Freeze Left Immigrants in 'Indeterminate Legal Limbo'

A federal judge in Rhode Island has struck down a sweeping set of Trump administration policies that suspended immigration benefits for nationals from 39 countries, ruling that the freeze was unlawful and rooted in bias rather than genuine national security concerns. The 6 June ruling, issued by US District Chief Judge John J McConnell Jr, opens the door for hundreds of thousands of people with pending applications to have their cases resumed.

The 135-page ruling found that the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) had thrown 'countless immigrants living in the United States into indeterminate legal limbo,' leaving many without work authorisation, legal status, or any prospect of resolution — not because of anything they had done wrong, but solely by the happenstance of their birth.

What the Freeze Covered

The policies at the centre of the case were put in place in late 2025, shortly after an Afghan national allegedly shot two National Guard members in Washington, DC, fatally wounding US Army Specialist Sarah Beckstrom and severely injuring Air Force Staff Sergeant Andrew Wolfe. In the aftermath, the Trump administration suspended all asylum adjudications and required USCIS to treat nationality from any of the 39 designated high-risk countries as a 'significant negative factor' in any immigration benefit decision. Countries affected included Iran, Nigeria, Venezuela and Afghanistan, among others across Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.

The halt effectively froze green card applications, citizenship cases, work permits and naturalisation ceremonies for hundreds of thousands of people who had been waiting, in some cases for years, to have their cases decided. 'Over six months later, many of those individuals remain without work, without legal status, and without any meaningful ability to plan for their futures,' McConnell wrote.

How the Judge Dismissed the National Security Justification

McConnell was particularly pointed in dismissing the administration's national security justification. He found that USCIS had acted on 'pretextual concerns of national security that mask anti-immigrant sentiments that it is forbidden from letting influence its decision-making.' The judge also noted that the government had, in effect, applied the alleged actions of one individual to the entire populations of 39 countries.

He further wrote that the government 'effectively invites the Court to shut its eyes and ignore the strong evidence of anti-immigrant animus before it,' adding that doing so 'would require profound naiveté on the Court's part.' The ruling pointed to statements made by President Donald Trump himself, who said at a campaign rally that he was pausing migration 'from hellholes like Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia and many other countries.'

The judge argued that the immigrants caught in the freeze had done everything right. 'This case serves as a perfect example of immigrants doing just that,' McConnell wrote, referencing the oft-repeated instruction to follow the law and do things the right way — arguing USCIS had failed to hold itself to the same standard.

Reaction and What Comes Next

The ruling was welcomed by immigration advocacy groups. 'This is an enormous victory for hundreds of thousands of people who have been stuck in limbo for a significant period of time,' said Jorge Loweree, managing director of programmes and strategy at the American Immigration Council. Edna Yang, co-executive director of American Gateways and one of the plaintiffs in the case, said the ruling 'reinforces the integrity of our nation's immigration system.'

McConnell, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, has previously ruled against the Trump administration immigration policies. The Department of Homeland Security's general counsel James Percival dismissed the decision, calling it 'sabotage dressed in legal clothing' and accusing the left of 'running the same gambit with so-called animus claims since 2017.' The administration can appeal to the First Circuit, though that court has historically ruled against the Trump immigration agenda.

Concerns remain after DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin declined during a congressional hearing earlier that week to commit to complying with court orders that rule against the department. The decision sets a significant legal precedent on the limits of executive authority over immigration policy — clarifying that blanket nationality-based freezes enacted without statutory authority cannot stand regardless of national security framing. For the hundreds of thousands of people whose cases were put on hold, naturalisation ceremonies, long-suspended, will now be rescheduled and applications can finally move forward.