Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island — First Circuit partially stays district court’s APA judgment

Case
Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island; Refugee Dream Center; Service Employees International Union; International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America; African Communities Together; Venezuelan Association of Massachusetts; Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans; American Gateways v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services; Joseph Edlow; Department of Homeland Security; Markwayne Mullin
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Judge
Montecalvo (Joe Biden, 2022); Aframe (Joe Biden, 2024); DUNLAP (Donald Trump, 2025)
Date Decided
August 14, 2026
Docket No.
26-1703
Topics
Administrative Procedure Act; immigration; stay pending appeal; USCIS
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Immigrant-service organizations, labor unions, and community groups brought Administrative Procedure Act claims challenging USCIS policies. The district court entered a Rule 54(b) partial final judgment for the plaintiffs on two APA claims on June 11, 2026.

The government sought an emergency stay pending appeal. It argued, among other things, that the challenged policies were not agency action, that any agency action was not final, and that the claims were unripe.

The Court’s Holding

The First Circuit granted a stay only as to the district court’s stay of the Comprehensive Re-Review Policy. That policy directs USCIS personnel to conduct a comprehensive re-review of approved benefit requests for aliens from certain countries who entered the United States on or after January 20, 2021.

The court denied a stay as to the district court’s stays of the other two policies. Applying the stay-pending-appeal framework, the court concluded that the government had not carried its burden to justify broader stay relief.

Key Takeaways

  • The Comprehensive Re-Review Policy may remain in effect while the appeal proceeds.
  • The district court’s stays of the other two policies remain in place.
  • The order resolves only interim stay relief, not the merits of the APA appeal.

Why It Matters

The order preserves the government’s ability to conduct the specified comprehensive re-reviews during the appeal, while leaving in force the district court’s relief against two other challenged USCIS policies. It also underscores that an appellant seeking a stay bears the burden of establishing entitlement to that extraordinary interim remedy.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top