Judge Allows DHS, DOJ to Move Forward with Immigrant Asylum Fees

A Baltimore federal judge is allowing the Trump administration to impose new fees on immigrants claiming asylum in the US.

Inconsistencies between Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice policies that led to a pause on the fees last year no longer exist, District Court Judge Stephanie Gallagher found in an opinion Monday.

A $100 fee for each asylum claim and another $100 charge for each year a claim is pending were part of a GOP tax and spending bill passed last year. The charges were part of a slate of new costs for immigrants enacted through the law, which steered tens of billions to President Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign.

US Citizenship and Immigration Services, housed in DHS, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review, the DOJ subagency that runs immigration courts, each adjudicate asylum claims and issued separate policies last year implementing the fees. Gallagher blocked the fees in an October order that found the agencies had likely acted arbitrarily and capriciously in issuing inconsistent policies. Those policies, for example, didn’t uniformly apply the fees based on the length of time an application claim was pending.

The Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project sued over the fees, arguing the agencies improperly applied them retroactively and issued fee policies that were inconsistent and created confusion among immigrants. When the lawsuit was filed, some asylum applicants had received deportation orders even though there was no mechanism to pay the fee through EOIR.

EOIR issued a new policy memo last month that required payment of the annual asylum fee for individuals with claims pending for one year between July 5 and Sept. 30. It also stated that fees won’t become due until after a deadline set by an immigration judge.

USCIS fee policies were still blocked by the previous stay order. The government filed a motion to lift the stay last month, arguing that the agencies’ interpretation of asylum fees were now in alignment.

Gallagher rejected arguments from ASAP that the January memo was arbitrary and capricious because it fails to ensure applicants get adequate notice of fee requirements and fails to match USCIS fee notice rules.

ASAP also argued that the EOIR memo encouraged immigration judges to unlawfully suggest that failure to pay the asylum fee would lead to denial of withholding of removal claims—which require immigrants show a higher risk of harm—or Convention Against Torture protection. Gallagher found those arguments speculative because there was no present evidence of an immigration judge denying those protections over the asylum fee.

Plaintiffs are represented by ASAP and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP. USCIS and EOIR are represented by the DOJ.

The case is Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, D. Md., No. 1:25-cv-03299, order issued 2/2/26.