If you or a loved one is in immigration court, this update is critically important.The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), through the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), has issued an Interim Final Rule (IFR) that fundamentally restructures how appeals are handled before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

Effective March 9, 2026, this rule transforms the BIA from a body that routinely reviewed Immigration Judge (IJ) decisions into one that selectively chooses which cases it will hear on the merits. For individuals in removal proceedings — and for the attorneys representing them — this is one of the most significant procedural changes in decades.  

1. What Is the BIA and Why Does It Matter?

The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) reviews decisions made by Immigration Judges.

If someone receives:

• A removal (deportation) order

• A denial of asylum

• A denial of cancellation of removal

• Or another unfavorable ruling

They traditionally had 30 days to file an appeal, and the BIA would review the case.That structure has now changed dramatically.

2. Core Structural Changes

Change 1: Appeals Are No Longer Automatically Reviewed

Historically, filing a timely Notice of Appeal guaranteed appellate review by the BIA. While not every appeal resulted in reversal, each case received substantive consideration under established appellate standards.That is no longer the case.

Under the new rule:

• Merits review is now discretionary.

• A majority vote of permanent Board members is required to accept a case for review.

• If the Board does not affirmatively elect to hear the case, the appeal is summarily dismissed.

In practical terms, summary dismissal is now the default outcome. This structural shift means many Immigration Judge decisions may become the final agency action without full appellate analysis.

Change 2 : Drastically Shortened Appeal Deadline  

The deadline to file a Notice of Appeal has been shortened from:

​​30 days → 10 days​

This compressed timeline significantly increases procedural risk, especially for:

• Detained respondents

• Individuals without counsel

• Cases requiring transcript review

• Complex asylum or relief-based claims

A missed deadline will result in the IJ decision becoming final, with limited recourse. For attorneys, this requires immediate post-hearing review protocols and strict calendaring systems. For respondents, it underscores the importance of consulting counsel immediately after receiving an IJ decision.

Change 3: Compressed Briefing and Elimination of Reply Briefs

For the limited number of cases accepted for merits review:

• Briefing will be simultaneous.

• The general deadline is 20 days.

• Reply briefs are no longer permitted.

• Extensions will be limited.

This eliminates the traditional structure in which appellants could respond to DHS arguments after reviewing the government’s brief. The result is a more rigid and compressed appellate process that demands precise, strategic briefing from the outset.

Change 4. Procedural Safeguards Have Been Reduced

The rule also removes or alters several procedural mechanisms that previously provided additional review safeguards, including:

• The longstanding requirement for Immigration Judges to review and certify their transcripts before appeal has been removed. 

• Restrictions on extensions and procedural flexibility.

• Regulatory revisions that streamline internal BIA review processes.

While DOJ claims these changes as efficiency measures designed to address backlog,  immigration attorneys believe they reduce layers of procedural protection in removal proceedings.

3. Is the DOJ’s “Efficiency” Justification Really About Efficiency?

In defending the new BIA rule, the Department of Justice states that the Board of Immigration Appeals “cannot—and does not need to—adjudicate every case on the merits with the tools at its disposal.” The rule goes further, describing the BIA as “simply a vessel for further delay.” Officials cite statistics showing that between 2023 and 2025, only 123 out of 55,065 appeals were sustained, arguing that full merits review is unnecessary and contributes to backlog.

But that reasoning deserves closer examination. Earlier in 2025, the DOJ reduced the number of permanent BIA members by nearly half, significantly limiting the Board’s capacity. Now, limited resources are being used to justify restricting appellate review even further.

More importantly, statistics alone do not capture the role of appellate review. For individuals navigating immigration court — often detained and facing removal — the BIA has long served as a safeguard against legal error. Appellate review helps ensure consistency, correct misapplications of law, and provide oversight of trial-level decisions.

Under the new rule, if the BIA does not affirmatively vote to hear a case, the Immigration Judge’s ruling quickly becomes the “final agency decision,” accelerating the path toward deportation. Efficiency is important in any system, but immigration cases determine whether someone may be separated from family or removed to potential danger. In that context, appellate review has historically served not as delay, but as protection against irreversible error.

4. Is This Change Here to Stay?

The DOJ issued this policy as an Interim Final Rule, which means it takes effect immediately — before the public comment process is completed.

Under federal rulemaking procedures, an Interim Final Rule allows an agency to implement a regulation first and invite public comments afterward. In this case, comments must be submitted within 30 days of publication through Regulations.gov. After reviewing those comments, the DOJ may revise the rule, keep it as written, or issue a modified final version. However, unless the rule is changed by the agency or blocked by a federal court, it remains in effect during that process.

This restructuring represents a significant and unprecedented shift in the immigration appellate system. Because of the procedural changes, the use of the interim rule mechanism, and the due process concerns raised by many practitioners, the rule is widely expected to face legal challenges.

Ultimately, whether this rule remains in its current form may depend on how federal courts respond in the coming months.

5. What This Means for Immigration Court Strategy

The Immigration Court hearing is now more critical than ever. Because appeals are no longer automatically reviewed by the Board of Immigration Appeals, every legal argument must be fully developed at the trial level. Evidence must be carefully prepared and properly submitted, and all issues must be clearly preserved for any potential appeal. There is far less opportunity to “fix” mistakes later. What happens in Immigration Court may effectively determine the final outcome.

Under the new system, the Notice of Appeal itself has also become a highly strategic document. The initial filing may influence whether the BIA elects to review the case at all. A vague or incomplete appeal increases the risk of summary dismissal. Strong appellate strategy must begin immediately after the Immigration Judge issues a decision — not days later.

At the same time, federal court appeals are likely to become more important. If cases are dismissed at the BIA screening stage, more individuals may need to file Petitions for Review in the U.S. Courts of Appeals, along with emergency stay motions to prevent removal. Federal immigration appeals are highly technical and procedurally demanding, requiring experienced appellate counsel and careful legal analysis.

6. Final thoughts  

The DOJ’s 2026 restructuring of the Board of Immigration Appeals marks one of the most significant procedural shifts in immigration appellate practice in decades.If you receive a removal order, do not assume you have 30 days to act. Confirm the 10-day appeal deadline immediately and consult experienced immigration appeal counsel without delay. Under the 2026 BIA appeal rules, timing and strategy are critical.

At the Law Offices of Sabrina Li, P.C., we closely monitor changes in immigration law and adjust our litigation strategy to protect our clients at every stage — from Immigration Court to the BIA to the federal courts.If you have questions about filing a BIA appeal, challenging a removal order, or understanding your immigration court options, our team is ready to assist. Please contact us at 213-375-8096 or email info@sabrinali.law to schedule a consultation.