Your Right to an Interpreter in U.S. Immigration Court (2026)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited September 26, 2026). · 30 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

As of September 2026, U.S. immigration courts provide an interpreter at no cost if your English is not good enough to understand and take part in your hearing. That is what the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) Policy Manual says, and federal regulations require the interpreter to swear or affirm to interpret accurately.
USCIS interviews follow a different rule. At an affirmative asylum interview, and at field office interviews where USCIS does not provide interpretation, you bring your own interpreter. And a right to an interpreter is not a right to a lawyer: the government does not pay for a lawyer in immigration court.
This page explains when you have a right to a free interpreter, how to ask for one, what to do if you cannot follow the interpretation, how USCIS interviews differ, and where to find legitimate legal help. It is general information for families who speak Spanish or another language, not an assessment of anyone's case.
Do you have a right to a free interpreter in immigration court?
Yes, when you need one to understand and participate. Section 3.10 of the EOIR Policy Manual, the official practice guide for the immigration courts, says interpreters are provided "at government expense" to individuals whose command of English is inadequate to fully understand and participate in removal proceedings. It adds that the court tries to accommodate the language needs of all respondents and witnesses.

The court arranges an interpreter for the individual calendar hearing, where the case is decided, and, if necessary, for the master calendar hearing. When an immigration judge reviews a negative "credible fear" decision, 8 CFR 1003.42(c) says that if an interpreter is necessary, the court will provide one.
The courts use staff interpreters employed by the court, contract interpreters, and telephone interpretation services. 8 CFR 1003.22 and 8 CFR 1240.5 require anyone interpreting in a hearing to swear or affirm to interpret and translate accurately. Federal employees are exempt from that per-hearing oath; according to the Manual, staff interpreters take it when the Department of Justice hires them.
The interpreter works for the court. Their job is to interpret accurately what is said, not to advise you or argue your case.
Be aware that an interpreter can be waived. A February 2025 EOIR memorandum (PM 25-20) says many people, especially those with representation, may not need language services or may choose to waive them, particularly at a master calendar hearing, as long as the waiver is appropriate. Do not agree to go ahead without an interpreter unless you fully understand the English spoken at the hearing.
How to request an interpreter, and in which language
Section 3.14 of the EOIR Policy Manual explains how. At the master calendar hearing, the respondent should be ready to request an interpreter for themselves and for any witnesses who need one. The request can be made:
- Orally, at the master calendar hearing. The Manual asks parties to make the request there rather than afterward.
- In writing, by a motion with a cover page labeled "MOTION TO REQUEST AN INTERPRETER," following the court's filing requirements.
- In a written pleading, if you have a representative and the judge allows it.
The Manual says to request the interpreter no later than 30 days before the hearing where it will be needed. Every request must include:
- The name of the language, including any variations in spelling.
- The specific dialect, if applicable.
- The geographic areas where that dialect is spoken, if applicable.
- Any other languages the respondent or witness speaks fluently.
- Any other information needed to select an interpreter.
If your best language is an Indigenous language
Some people understand some Spanish but express themselves better in an Indigenous language, such as K'iche' (Quiché) or Q'anjob'al (Kanjobal) from Guatemala. If that describes you, ask the court for an interpreter in that language and name the region.
The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) addressed this problem in Matter of Tomas, 19 I&N Dec. 464 (BIA 1987). A Guatemalan family who spoke Kanjobal, and little or no Spanish, had their hearing through a Spanish interpreter with help from their 15-year-old daughter. The Board held that when a person cannot speak English fluently, a competent interpreter is essential for meaningful participation and for the fundamental fairness of the hearing, and it ordered a new hearing with a professional Kanjobal interpreter.
The Board also noted that there is a great difference between understanding a language and being able to fully translate thoughts from one language to another, and that a desire to avoid excessive continuances does not justify going forward when a person's right to testify may be cut short.
What to do if you cannot understand the interpreter
Say out loud, in front of the judge, that you do not understand. Explain whether the interpreter is speaking too fast, using a different variety of the language, or using words you do not recognize. According to the Policy Manual, hearings are recorded except for off-the-record discussions, and the statute requires a complete record of all testimony and evidence (8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(4)). What you say at the hearing goes on that recording; a problem nobody raised is much harder to show later.
Federal appeals courts review these problems case by case. In Perez-Lastor v. INS, 208 F.3d 773 (2000), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the hearing of a Guatemalan man who understood Spanish but communicated best in Quiché. The court held that he did not receive due process, because an incompetent translation kept him from presenting relevant evidence and led to a finding that he was not credible. It said an incorrect or incomplete translation is the functional equivalent of no translation.
That court identified three kinds of evidence of a bad interpretation:
- Words translated incorrectly.
- Answers that do not respond to the question.
- The witness saying they have trouble understanding what is said to them.
Winning such a claim is not automatic. In that circuit, besides showing the translation was incompetent, a person must show that a better translation would have made a difference in the outcome of the hearing. Other circuits apply their own precedents. The BIA has also said that not all of a hearing must be translated for it to be fair, but the person must be able to participate meaningfully in certain phases of their own hearing.
That is one reason not to rely on a relative to interpret in court. In Matter of Tomas, the Board said the task given to the family's daughter would have taxed the skill of a professional interpreter.
USCIS interviews: a different rule
USCIS (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) is a separate agency from the immigration courts, and at many of its interviews it is the applicant who must bring the interpreter. The rule depends on the type of interview:

| Proceeding | Who provides the interpreter? | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Hearings before an immigration judge | The court, at government expense, when the person needs one | EOIR Policy Manual, 3.10 |
| Immigration judge review of a credible fear decision | The court, if necessary | 8 CFR 1003.42(c) |
| Credible fear interview with an asylum officer | The officer arranges an interpreter if the person cannot proceed in English and the officer cannot proceed in a language the person understands | 8 CFR 208.30(d)(5) |
| Affirmative asylum interview at USCIS | The applicant must bring their own interpreter, at no expense to USCIS | 8 CFR 208.9(g)(1) |
| USCIS asylum interview for a person found to have a credible fear, if USCIS keeps the case (or an immigration judge sends it to USCIS after vacating a negative credible fear decision) | The asylum officer arranges the interpreter | 8 CFR 208.9(g)(2) and 8 CFR 208.2(a)(1)(ii) |
| USCIS field office interviews where the agency does not provide interpretation | The applicant brings the interpreter and both sign Form G-1256 before the officer | Policy Memorandum PM-602-0125.1 and Form G-1256 instructions |
| Naturalization history and government test | Usually oral and in English; in certain cases, such as when the applicant is exempt from the English requirement, it may be given in the applicant's language with an interpreter chosen by the applicant or USCIS | 8 CFR 312.2(c) and 8 CFR 312.4 |
Affirmative asylum interview
Under 8 CFR 208.9(g)(1), if you cannot proceed with the interview in English, you must bring a competent interpreter fluent in English and your language. The interpreter must be at least 18 years old and cannot be:
- Your attorney or representative of record.
- A witness testifying on your behalf.
- A representative or employee of your country's government (or, if you are stateless, of your country of last habitual residence).
Failing to bring an interpreter without good cause may be treated as a failure to appear for the interview. In its September 11, 2023 alert, USCIS explained that in that situation it may dismiss the asylum application or refer it to an immigration judge. The current regulation, 8 CFR 208.10, says failing to appear for a scheduled interview without prior authorization may result in dismissal of the application or waiver of the interview.
Since July 28, 2026, an interim final rule (91 FR 47101) lets an asylum officer refer an affirmative asylum application to an immigration judge without conducting an interview, based on a review of the record, when the person is barred from applying for or receiving asylum, does not merit asylum as a matter of discretion, or is not eligible on the merits of the claim. The rule requiring you to bring an interpreter to the interview, 8 CFR 208.9(g)(1), remains in effect.
Field office interviews and Form G-1256
In a January 2017 policy memorandum, USCIS set rules for interviews at its domestic field offices when the agency does not provide interpretation. Those rules do not apply to asylum, credible fear, reasonable fear, NACARA, or refugee interviews, or to interviews where USCIS provides the interpreter.
If you bring an interpreter to one of those interviews, bring Form G-1256, Declaration for Interpreted USCIS Interview. According to its instructions:
- The interpreter must be fluent in English and a language you understand, and be competent, impartial and unbiased. The officer decides whether the interpreter qualifies and may decline to use them.
- The interpreter must be at least 18 and not a witness in your case. For good cause, USCIS may, in its discretion, allow someone aged 14 to 17 or a witness.
- Your attorney or accredited representative cannot also serve as your interpreter.
- The interpreter must interpret accurately, literally and fully, and may learn your confidential information.
- Do not sign the form before the interview: you and the interpreter sign it in front of the officer.
If USCIS does not accept your interpreter, it will offer you the choice to continue with another acceptable interpreter, reschedule to find one, or voluntarily continue without an interpreter.
The naturalization test works differently: if USCIS disqualifies the interpreter you brought for a test given in your language, USCIS must provide another interpreter in a timely manner (8 CFR 312.4). The 2017 memo says that obligation applies only to those naturalization interviews.
An interpreter is not a lawyer: no free lawyer in immigration court
The law gives you the right to have a lawyer in immigration court, but not to have the government pay for one. 8 U.S.C. § 1362 says the person has the privilege of being represented "at no expense to the Government" by authorized counsel of their choosing. 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(4) repeats that rule and adds the right to examine the evidence against you, present evidence, and cross-examine the government's witnesses.
EOIR's Spanish-language self-help guide, ¿Necesita usted un abogado o representante legal? ("Do you need a lawyer or legal representative?"), says it plainly: the government will not provide you with a lawyer or accredited representative.
The judge still has duties to you. Under 8 CFR 1240.10(a), in a removal proceeding the judge must:
- Tell you of your right to representation at no expense to the government.
- Tell you about the free legal services available for that court and make sure you received the list of providers.
- Read you the factual allegations and charges in the Notice to Appear and explain them in non-technical language.
The Policy Manual adds that if you are unrepresented at the master calendar hearing, you may ask the judge to continue the case to another master calendar hearing so you have time to find a representative. If you come to the next hearing still without one, you will be expected to explain what you did to find one.
Where to find legitimate legal help
- EOIR's list of free providers. The List of Pro Bono Legal Service Providers includes nonprofit organizations and attorneys who have committed to at least 50 hours per year of free legal services before the immigration court where they are listed.
- Recognized organizations and accredited representatives. EOIR publishes its recognition and accreditation rosters, including a list by state.
- Self-help materials. EOIR publishes self-help materials and the Immigration Court Online Resource.
Be careful with anyone who offers to "fix" your case. Under 8 CFR 1292.1, you may be represented in immigration court by attorneys, EOIR-accredited representatives who work for a recognized organization (before the court, only fully accredited and registered ones), and a few very limited categories; a "notario público" is not on that list. Our guide to notario fraud explains how to check whether your representative is legitimate and how to report fraud.
What happened to Executive Order 13166?
Executive Order 13166, from 2000, directed federal agencies to improve access to their services for people with limited English proficiency. Executive Order 14224, signed March 1, 2025, designated English as the official language of the United States and revoked Order 13166.
Order 14224 itself says it does not require or direct any change in the services agencies provide, that agency heads should make the decisions they deem necessary to fulfill their agencies' mission and efficiently provide government services, and that agencies are not required to stop offering documents or services in other languages. It also directed the Attorney General to rescind guidance issued under Order 13166 and provide updated guidance.
In a July 14, 2025 memorandum to all federal agencies, the Attorney General said the Department of Justice will lead a coordinated effort to minimize non-essential multilingual services and to meet legal obligations through targeted measures where necessary. The memo announced that prior language-access guidance issued under Order 13166 would be rescinded and that the LEP.gov website would be temporarily suspended pending an internal review, and it encouraged agencies, while complying with applicable law, to consider which programs might be better operated in English only.
The interpreter rules on this page come from federal regulations and the EOIR Policy Manual, not from Order 13166. As of September 2026, the Manual still says interpreters are provided at government expense.
Before your hearing: a practical checklist
- Check your case information. EOIR's Automated Case Information System (ACIS) shows basic information using your alien registration number (A-number) and nationality. The system itself warns that it does not show every case or all information, and that the official documents are the ones the court sends you.
- Request the interpreter early, at the master calendar hearing or in writing, no later than 30 days before. Give the language, dialect and region.
- Request an interpreter for your witnesses too, if they do not speak English.
- Do not miss any hearing. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(A), if a person received the required written notice and does not attend, the judge must order removal in absentia when the government proves the notice was provided and the person is removable.
- Look for legitimate legal help as early as possible, using the EOIR lists above.
- If ICE comes to your door, read our guide on what to do if ICE comes to your door.
Find more guides in the Immigrant Rights section.
Disclaimer: This article provides general legal information about interpreters in U.S. immigration courts and USCIS interviews, based on federal regulations and EOIR and USCIS guidance in effect in September 2026. It is not legal advice. For your situation, consult an immigration attorney or an EOIR-accredited representative.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does immigration court give me a free interpreter?
Yes, if your English does not let you fully understand and participate. The EOIR Policy Manual says interpreters are provided at government expense in removal proceedings, for the individual calendar hearing and, if necessary, the master calendar hearing. An interpreter can be waived, particularly at a master calendar hearing; do not agree to go ahead without one unless you fully understand English.
How do I request an interpreter in immigration court?
Orally at the master calendar hearing, or in writing with a motion titled MOTION TO REQUEST AN INTERPRETER, no later than 30 days before the hearing where you need one. Give the language, the dialect, the region where it is spoken, and any other language you speak fluently.
Can I ask for an interpreter in an Indigenous language?
Yes, the request should name the language and dialect you need. In Matter of Tomas (1987), the Board of Immigration Appeals ordered a new hearing with a Kanjobal interpreter because the family could not present their case through a Spanish interpreter.
What do I do if I cannot understand the interpreter during the hearing?
Say so right away, in front of the judge, and explain the problem: speaking too fast, a different variety of the language, or words you do not recognize. The hearing is recorded except for off-the-record discussions, and what you say goes on the record.
Can a family member interpret for me in court?
The court arranges its own interpreters. In Matter of Tomas, the Board of Immigration Appeals found it inadequate for the family's 15-year-old daughter to interpret, and said understanding a language is not the same as being able to fully translate thoughts from one language to another.
Do I have to bring my own interpreter to a USCIS interview?
It depends on the interview. At an affirmative asylum interview, if you are not fluent in English, you must bring your own interpreter (8 CFR 208.9(g)(1)). At field office interviews where USCIS does not provide interpretation, you bring the interpreter and both of you sign Form G-1256 before the officer. At a credible fear interview, the asylum officer arranges an interpreter when needed.
Who cannot be my interpreter at an asylum interview?
Under 8 CFR 208.9(g)(1), the interpreter must be at least 18 and cannot be your attorney or representative of record, a witness testifying on your behalf, or a representative or employee of your country's government.
Does the government give me a free lawyer in immigration court?
No. The law (8 U.S.C. § 1362) lets you have a lawyer, but at no expense to the government. The judge must tell you about free legal services and make sure you received EOIR's list of providers, which is also at justice.gov/eoir/list-pro-bono-legal-service-providers.
Did the executive order making English the official language end the right to an interpreter?
Executive Order 14224, from March 2025, revoked Order 13166 on language access, but it says it does not require any change in agency services and leaves decisions to each agency head. In July 2025, an Attorney General memo announced an effort to minimize non-essential multilingual services. The interpreter rules in immigration court come from regulations and the EOIR Policy Manual, which as of September 2026 still says interpreters are provided at government expense.
Updates
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Code of Federal Regulations Title 8
§ 1003.22Interpreters.In force
Any person acting as an interpreter in a hearing shall swear or affirm to interpret and translate accurately, unless the interpreter is an employee of the United States Government, in which event no such oath or affirmation shall be required.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Malaj v. Gonzales (Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 2006, 199 F. App'x 453)“…the failure to swear in the interpreter in accordance with 8 C.F.R. § 1003.22 amounts to a due process violation. Fi…”
- Biao Zheng v. Eric Holder, Jr. (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2011, 423 F. App'x 699)“…he warranted equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.22(b)(4)(i); He, 501 F.3d at 1132 (changed…”
- Fedorov v. Bondi (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2025)“…nnot establish a due process claim based on a violation of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.22. See United States…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 1003.42Review of credible fear determinations.In force
(a) Referral. Jurisdiction for an immigration judge to review a negative credible fear determination by an asylum officer pursuant to section 235(b)(1)(B) of the Act shall commence with the filing by DHS of Form I-863, Notice of Referral to Immigration Judge, and a complete copy of the record of determination as defined in section 235(b)(1)(B)(iii)(II) of the Act with the immigration court. (b) Record of proceeding. The immigration court shall create a Record of Proceeding for a review of a negative fear determination. This record shall not be merged with any later proceeding involving the same alien. (c) Procedures and evidence. The immigration judge may receive into evidence any oral or written statement which is material and relevant to any issue in the review. The testimony of the alien shall be under oath or affirmation administered by the immigration judge. If an interpreter is necessary, one will be provided by the immigration court. The immigration judge shall determine whether the review shall be in person, or through telephonic or video connection (where available). The alien may consult with a person or persons of the alien's choosing prior to the review.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 37 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Castro v. United States Department of Homeland Security (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2016, 835 F.3d 422)“…as part of this review. 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1)(B)(iii)(III); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.42(d). Assuming the IJ concurs in the asyl…”
- Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam v. Usdhs (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2019, 917 F.3d 1097)“…al. See 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1)(B)(ii); 8 C.F.R. § 208.30(f); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.42(f). If the asylum officer finds no cred…”
- Vladimir Ivanovich Krasnopivtsev v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States of America (Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit 2004, 382 F.3d 832)“…atements made by the alien and other facts that are known. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.42 (c), (d); see Prokopenko v. Ashc…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 1240.10Hearing.In force
(a) Opening. In a removal proceeding, the immigration judge shall: (1) Advise the respondent of his or her right to representation, at no expense to the government, by counsel of his or her own choice authorized to practice in the proceedings and require the respondent to state then and there whether he or she desires representation; (2) Advise the respondent of the availability of pro bono legal services for the immigration court location at which the hearing will take place, and ascertain that the respondent has received a list of such pro bono legal service providers. (3) Ascertain that the respondent has received a copy of appeal rights.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 233 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Hoodho v. Holder (Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 2009, 558 F.3d 184)“…ion” of removability made by his attorney. Id. at 1 (citing 8 C.F.R. § 1240.10; In re Velasquez, 19 I. & N. Dec. 377…”
- Leslie v. Attorney General of US (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2010, 611 F.3d 171)“…the availability of free legal services, as required under 8 C.F.R. § 1240.10(a)(2)-(3), entitles him to a new remova…”
- Angov v. Holder (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2013, 788 F.3d 893)“…nd constitutional rights. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(4)(B); 8 C.F.R. § 1240.10 (a)(4); Cinapian v. Holder, 567 F.3…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 1240.5Interpreter.In force
Any person acting as an interpreter in a hearing before an immigration judge under this part shall be sworn to interpret and translate accurately, unless the interpreter is an employee of the United States Government, in which event no such oath shall be required.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Villatoro-Lopez v. Holder (Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 2011, 445 F. App'x 881)“…nterpreter at his final hearing, which he claimed violated 8 C.F.R. § 1240.5 and supported his argument that the he…”
- Antonio Gomez-Beltran v. William Barr (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2020)“…was properly sworn in during an earlier hearing. See 8 C.F.R. § 1240.5. Any purported deficiencies in th…”
- Edilberto Villatoro v. Eric Holder (Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 2011)“…interpreter at his final hearing, which he claimed violated 8 C.F.R. § 1240.5 and supported his argument that the hea…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 1292.1Representation of others.In forcecited in 4 of our articles
(a) A person entitled to representation may be represented by any of the following: (1) Attorneys in the United States. Any attorney as defined in § 1001.1(f) of this chapter and who, once the registration requirements in paragraph (f) of this section have taken effect, is registered to practice with the Executive Office for Immigration Review. (2) Law students and law graduates not yet admitted to the bar. A law student who is enrolled in an accredited U.S. law school, or a graduate of an accredited U.S.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 25 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Franco-Gonzales v. Holder (District Court, C.D. California 2011, 828 F. Supp. 2d 1133)“…and law graduates supervised by attorneys, as set forth in 8 C.F.R. § 1292.1 , may act as Qualified Representatives…”
- Gadda v. Ashcroft (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2004, 377 F.3d 934)“…ing, or otherwise restricting him in the practice of law.” 8 C.F.R. §§ 1292.1 (a)(1) & (e), 1001.1(f). Beyond merel…”
- Hernandez v. Mukasey (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2008)“…iduals in removal proceedings. 3 See 8 C.F.R. § 1292.1 (a)(3)(iv). In sum, non-attorney immigr…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can I Sue a Scammer? When a Lawyer Actually Helps After a Scam, Immigrant Rights in the U.S.: Know-Your-Rights Guides (2026), Notario Fraud in the U.S.: How to Spot It and Report It (2026)
§ 208.10Failure to appear at an interview before an asylum officer or failure to follow requirements for fingerprint processing.In force
Failure to appear for a scheduled interview without prior authorization may result in dismissal of the application or waiver of the right to an interview. Failure to comply with fingerprint processing requirements without good cause may result in dismissal of the application or waiver of the right to an adjudication by an asylum officer. Failure to appear shall be excused if the notice of the interview or fingerprint appointment was not mailed to the applicant's current address and such address had been provided to the USCIS by the applicant prior to the date of mailing in accordance with section 265 of the Act and regulations promulgated thereunder, unless the asylum officer determines that the applicant received reasonable notice of the interview or fingerprinting appointment. Failure to appear at the interview or fingerprint appointment will be excused if the applicant demonstrates that such failure was the result of exceptional circumstances.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 57 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Rene Carvajal-Munoz v. Immigration and Naturalization Service (Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 1984, 743 F.2d 562)“…request, it is for a period of one year. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.10 (e) (1984). Thereafter, the applicant i…”
- Jose Salvador Reyes-Arias v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit 1989, 866 F.2d 500)“…Miami, where he filed a request for asylum, Form I-589, see 8 CFR Sec. 208.10(a) (1983), alleging, among other things…”
- Nemrod Jose Arauz, A/K/A Arauz-Acuna v. Perry Rivkind, District Director, U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service, District Vi (Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 1988, 845 F.2d 271)“…r the record in the exclusion or deportation proceedings.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.10 (c). 7 Notwithstanding the…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 208.2Jurisdiction.In force
(a) Jurisdiction of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). (1) Except as provided in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, USCIS shall have initial jurisdiction over: (i) An asylum application filed by an alien physically present in the United States or seeking admission at a port-of-entry; and (ii) Interviews provided in accordance with section 235(b)(1)(B)(ii) of the Act to further consider the application for asylum of an alien, other than a stowaway or alien physically present in or arriving in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture in accordance with § 208.30(f) and retained by USCIS, or referred to USCIS by an immigration judge pursuant to 8 CFR 1003.42 and 1208.30 after the immigration judge has vacated a negative credible fear determination. Interviews to further consider applications for asylum under this paragraph (a)(1)(ii) are governed by the procedures provided for under § 208.9.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 146 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Sembiring v. Gonzales (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2007)“…ice was not received, “must include documentary evidence.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.2 (c)(3)(ii). A. Background…”
- Nreka v. United States Attorney General (Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 2005, 408 F.3d 1361)“…s concerning his eligibility for other forms of relief. See 8 C.F.R. § 208.2(c)(3)(i) (asylum-only procedures for VW…”
- Marincas v. Lewis (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1996, 92 F.3d 195)“…t has been placed in an exclusion or deportation hearing. 8 C.F.R. §§ 208.2 (b), 208.4(c). Consequently, asylum ap…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 208.30Credible fear determinations involving stowaways and applicants for admission found inadmissible pursuant to section 212(a)(6)(C) or 212(a)(7) of the Act.In force
(a) Jurisdiction. The provisions of this subpart B apply to aliens subject to sections 235(a)(2) and 235(b)(1) of the Act. Pursuant to section 235(b)(1)(B) of the Act, DHS has exclusive jurisdiction to make the determinations described in this subpart B. Except as otherwise provided in this subpart B, paragraphs (b) through (g) of this section are the exclusive procedures applicable to stowaways and applicants for admission who are found inadmissible pursuant to section 212(a)(6)(C) or 212(a)(7) of the Act and who receive fear interviews, determinations, and reviews under section 235(b)(1)(B) of the Act. Prior to January 1, 2030, an alien physically present in or arriving in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands is ineligible to apply for asylum and may only establish eligibility for withholding of removal pursuant to section 241(b)(3) of the Act or withholding or deferral of removal under the regulations issued pursuant to the Convention Against Torture's implementing legislation. (b) Process and authority.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 153 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam (Supreme Court of the United States 2020, 591 U.S. 103)“…ration” of an asylum claim in a standard removal hearing. 8 CFR §208.30(f). An asylum officer’s rejection of…”
- Castro v. United States Department of Homeland Security (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2016, 835 F.3d 422)“…tion [or torture].” 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1)(A)(ii) & (B)(ii); 8 C.F.R. § 208.30(d). The statute defines the term “credi…”
- Vijayakumar Thuraissigiam v. Usdhs (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2019, 917 F.3d 1097)“…interview with an asylum officer. Id. § 1225(b)(1)(A)(ii); 8 C.F.R. § 208.30. If that asylum officer determines that…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 208.9Procedure for interview before an asylum officer.In force
(a) Claims adjudicated. USCIS shall adjudicate the claim of each asylum applicant whose application is complete within the meaning of § 208.3(a)(2) or (c)(3), when applicable, and is within the jurisdiction of USCIS pursuant to § 208.2(a). In all cases, such proceedings shall be conducted in accordance with section 208 of the Act. (1) Timing of interview. For interviews on asylum applications within the jurisdiction of USCIS pursuant to § 208.2(a)(1)(ii), USCIS shall not schedule the interview to take place fewer than 21 days after the applicant has been served with a record of the positive credible fear determination pursuant to § 208.30(f), unless the applicant requests in writing that an interview be scheduled sooner.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 82 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Jarnail Singh v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2005, 403 F.3d 1081)“…officer shall have authority to administer *1088 oaths,” 8 C.F.R. § 208.9 (c), but not that the officer must ta…”
- Marincas v. Lewis (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 1996, 92 F.3d 195)“…ion for asylum is initially handled by an asylum officer. 8 C.F.R. § 208.9 (a). An immigration judge acquires jur…”
- Xue Lu v. Powell (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 2010, 621 F.3d 944)“…rse, 226 F.3d at 1002. [11] The plaintiffs’ claim under 8 C.F.R. § 208.9 was properly dismissed; it was not a cl…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 312.2Knowledge of history and government of the United States.In force
(a) General. No person shall be naturalized as a citizen of the United States upon his or her own application unless that person can demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals of the history, and of the principles and form of government, of the United States. A person who is exempt from the literacy requirement under § 312.1(b) (1) and (2) must still satisfy this requirement. (b) Exceptions. (1) The requirements of paragraph (a) of this section shall not apply to any person who is unable to demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the fundamentals of the history, and of the principles and form of government of the United States because of a medically determinable physical or mental impairment, that already has or is expected to last at least 12 months. The loss of any cognitive skills based on the direct effects of the illegal use of drugs will not be considered in determining whether an individual may be exempted.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2024
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Campos v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (District Court, S.D. Florida 1998, 70 F. Supp. 2d 1296)“…anics of the disability waiver exemption. See 8 C.F.R. § 312.2 (b)(2) (1998); see also IN…”
- Moya v. United States Department of Homeland Security (Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 2020, 975 F.3d 120)“…4 to be completed by a licensed doctor or psychologist. 8 C.F.R. § 312.2(b)(2). If the 5 applicant’s N-648 w…”
- Hamid v. Jaddou (District Court, S.D. New York 2024)“…cal condition as it relates to the disability exceptions.” 8 C.F.R. § 312.2(b)(2). Plaintiffs Saleh Dawlah Hamid…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 312.4Selection of interpreter.In force
An interpreter to be used under § 312.2 may be selected either by the applicant or by the Service. However, the Service reserves the right to disqualify an interpreter provided by the applicant in order to ensure the integrity of the examination. Where the Service disqualifies an interpreter, the Service must provide another interpreter for the applicant in a timely manner. If rescheduling of the interview is required, then a new date shall be set as soon as practicable so as not to delay unduly the adjudication of the application. The officer who disqualifies an interpreter shall make a written record of the reason(s) for disqualification as part of the record of the application.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
United States Code Title 8
§ 1229aRemoval proceedingsIn force
An immigration judge shall conduct proceedings for deciding the inadmissibility or deportability of an alien. An alien placed in proceedings under this section may be charged with any applicable ground of inadmissibility under section 1182(a) of this title or any applicable ground of deportability under section 1227(a) of this title. Unless otherwise specified in this chapter, a proceeding under this section shall be the sole and exclusive procedure for determining whether an alien may be admitted to the United States or, if the alien has been so admitted, removed from the United States. Nothing in this section shall affect proceedings conducted pursuant to section 1228 of this title. The immigration judge shall administer oaths, receive evidence, and interrogate, examine, and cross-examine the alien and any witnesses. The immigration judge may issue subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and presentation of evidence. The immigration judge shall have authority (under regulations prescribed by the Attorney General) to sanction by civil money penalty any action (or inaction) in contempt of the judge’s proper exercise of authority under this chapter.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 7,772 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Zadvydas v. Davis (Supreme Court of the United States 2001, 533 U.S. 678)“…res are given notice of their right to appeal the decision, 8 U. S. C. § 1229a(c)(4), may move the immigration judge t…”
- Demore v. Kim (Supreme Court of the United States 2003, 538 U.S. 510)“…ubmitted in the first instance to an immigration judge. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(a)(3). The Immigration Judge had not ye…”
- Saidou Dia v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States (Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2003, 353 F.3d 228)“…26 Similarly unpersuasive is Dia's citation to 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(4), which provides: If the immigrati…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 1362Right to counselIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
In any removal proceedings before an immigration judge and in any appeal proceedings before the Attorney General from any such removal proceedings, the person concerned shall have the privilege of being represented (at no expense to the Government) by such counsel, authorized to practice in such proceedings, as he shall choose.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 462 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Landon v. Plasencia (Supreme Court of the United States 1982, 459 U.S. 21)“…e was allowed to waive her right to representation, § 292, 8 U. S. C. § 1362 , [8] without a full understanding of…”
- Ardestani v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (Supreme Court of the United States 1991, 502 U.S. 129)“…by such counsel ... as he shall choose.” 66 Stat. 235 , 8 U. S. C. § 1362 . The INS argues that this provision is…”
- Aguilar v. United States Immigration & Customs Enforcement Division of the Department of Homeland Security (Court of Appeals for the First Circuit 2007, 510 F.3d 1)“…ized to practice in such proceedings, as he shall choose." 8 U.S.C. § 1362. 3 Although the petitione…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Family Member Detained by ICE in the U.S.: What to Do and Bond (2026)
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- EOIR Policy Manual, Part II, 3.10: Interpreters(justice.gov).gov
- EOIR Policy Manual, Part II, 3.14: Master Calendar Hearing(justice.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 1003.22 (Interpreters)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 1240.5 (Interpreter in removal proceedings)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 1003.42 (Review of credible fear determinations)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 1240.10 (Removal hearing)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 208.9 (USCIS asylum interview; interpreters)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 208.2 (Jurisdiction over asylum applications)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 208.30 (Credible fear interviews)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 312.2 (Naturalization history and government examination)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 312.4 (Selection of interpreter in naturalization)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 1292.1 (Representation of others)(ecfr.gov).gov
- 8 U.S.C. § 1362 (Right to counsel at no expense to the Government)(govinfo.gov).gov
- 8 U.S.C. § 1229a (Removal proceedings)(govinfo.gov).gov
- Matter of Tomas, 19 I&N Dec. 464 (BIA 1987)(justice.gov).gov
- Perez-Lastor v. INS, 208 F.3d 773 (9th Cir. 2000)(courtlistener.com)
- USCIS Form G-1256, Declaration for Interpreted USCIS Interview(uscis.gov).gov
- USCIS, Instructions for Form G-1256(uscis.gov).gov
- USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0125.1, The Role and Use of Interpreters in Domestic Field Office Interviews (January 17, 2017)(uscis.gov).gov
- USCIS alert (September 11, 2023): Affirmative Asylum Applicants Must Provide Interpreters(uscis.gov).gov
- Executive Order 14224, Designating English as the Official Language of the United States (90 FR 11363)(federalregister.gov).gov
- EOIR self-help guide (Spanish): ¿Necesita usted un abogado o representante legal? (January 2022)(justice.gov).gov
- EOIR, List of Pro Bono Legal Service Providers(justice.gov).gov
- EOIR, Recognition and Accreditation Roster Reports(justice.gov).gov
- EOIR, Self-Help Materials(justice.gov).gov
- EOIR, Immigration Court Online Resource (ICOR)(icor.eoir.justice.gov).gov
- EOIR, Automated Case Information System (ACIS)(acis.eoir.justice.gov).gov
- EOIR Policy Memorandum PM 25-20, Cancellation of Director's Memorandum 23-02 (February 6, 2025)(justice.gov).gov
- Attorney General memorandum, Implementation of Executive Order No. 14,224 (July 14, 2025)(justice.gov).gov
- Affirmative Asylum Referrals Without Interview, interim final rule, 91 FR 47101 (July 28, 2026)(federalregister.gov).gov
- 8 CFR 208.10 (Failure to appear at an asylum interview)(ecfr.gov).gov