Federal judge halts asylum application fee

A federal judge in Maryland on Thursday temporarily paused the government’s rollout of a new annual asylum application fee, citing confusion and inconsistent policies between federal agencies.

Judge Stephanie Gallagher said two agencies, the US Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Executive Office for Immigration Review, acted “arbitrarily and capriciously” by issuing conflicting guidance on how and when asylum seekers must pay the $100 annual fee created under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Gallagher found that the lack of coordination between the two agencies had caused “significant confusion” and even led to some asylum seekers being ordered removed before any mechanism to pay the fee existed. She temporarily stayed both agencies’ policies, blocking enforcement of the annual fee nationwide, until they issue clear, uniform guidance.

“Defendants have not resolved the inconsistency between the two agencies’ policies,” Gallagher wrote, adding that the government’s conflicting rules created “irreparable harm” for asylum applicants.

The Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP) filed a lawsuit in federal court in Maryland accusing the government of unlawfully applying a new annual asylum fee to people who filed their cases before the law took effect.

As part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed on July 4, asylum applicants are required to pay the $100 fee each year their case remains pending.

Previous to the legislation, there was no fee required when applying for asylum.

The US Citizenship and Immigration Services began sending notices of the new fee on October 1, giving applicants a 30-day window to pay the fee —meaning the fee will start being due as early as October 31.

ASAP says the rollout has caused panic and confusion among asylum seekers. One member, a man from Russia who applied in 2022, told the group he’s been “very worried” because he hasn’t received any instructions from the government on how or when to pay, according to the lawsuit.

Additionally, some applicants do not have the financial means to pay the fee, plaintiffs say.

“They would have to choose between feeding their families or paying the fee,” Susan Pelletier, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said during Tuesday’s hearing.

The lawsuit includes stories of people who say they’ve been impacted by the fees. A woman from Honduras says she fears she’ll face deportation over a fee she can’t afford and has no way to pay.

Another asylum seeker from Nigeria says he only learned about the new rule from social media and worries missing a payment could jeopardize his case.

In response to ASAP’s lawsuit, the Executive Office for Immigration Review, or EOIR, has established a payment portal that allows asylum seekers to pay the annual asylum fee.

EOIR has also stated that it will provide notice to individuals who are subject to the new annual fee and credit any payments made through other existing systems.

ASAP argues that USCIS and EOIR are retroactively applying the new annual asylum fee and providing contradictory information — and even set conflicting deadlines. In at least one case, the lawsuit says an immigration judge rejected an asylum application and ordered a removal for nonpayment, despite there being no mechanism to pay the fee at the time.

During a hearing on Tuesday, Gallagher, an Obama appointee, pressed Department of Justice attorney Zareen Iqbal on whether the asylum application fee was being applied retroactively. Gallagher also noted that many applicants have already been waiting years for a decision on their cases.

Iqbal responded that the policy was not being applied retroactively, explaining that it was intended to help address the high volume of asylum cases that have been pending for years. She compared the fee to a property tax — a recurring payment meant to sustain the system rather than penalize past applicants.

The Justice Department acknowledged that some applicants have faced difficulties following the announcement of the new fee. Iqbal told the court she would reach out to the plaintiffs and USCIS to help resolve the issue.

The judge on Thursday said she would quickly entertain a motion to lift the stay on the fee once agencies enacted “uniform policies providing asylum applicants with fair notice of the applicable fee deadline, the mechanism for payment, and the adverse consequences.”