Termination, Dismissal, and Administrative Closure in Immigration Proceedings: What is the Difference?

Navigating the complex realm of immigration law can be challenging, especially when it comes to understanding the various outcomes of immigration proceedings.

Three common terms that often arise in such scenarios are:

• Termination of proceedings
• Dismissal of proceedings
• Administrative closure of proceedings

While they might appear similar at first glance, each term holds unique implications and consequences. It is important to understand the fundamental difference between them as when offered you need to know which is right for you.

On face, they all mean the same thing, that your current case before the immigration court is done, and you will not be deported. However, while the result of your current case may be the same, the underlying future consequences is what makes them distinctive from each other.

Today, we will explore the differences between these terms and shed light on their significance within the context of immigration proceedings.

Termination of Proceedings: What Is It?

Termination of proceedings refers to the conclusion of a specific immigration case before an immigration judge. This outcome usually occurs when the government decides to cease its efforts to pursue the removal or deportation of an individual.

The reasons for termination of proceedings can vary, including factors such as humanitarian concerns, a change in circumstances, or eligibility for relief or protection.

A motion to terminate asks an IJ to end a case by alleging that the government’s charges are substantively or procedurally defective.

In Gonzalez v. Garland, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in 2021 abrogated a 2018 decision in Matter of S-O-G- & F-D-B- which was issued by the Attorney General (AG) and restricted an IJ’s authority to terminate removal proceedings. The Fourth Circuit held that the plain language of the regulations confers on IJs and the BIA the inherent authority to terminate removal proceedings.

In reaching this conclusion, the Court focused on 8 CFR § 1003.10(b) and 8 CFR § 1003.1(d)(1)(ii), which give IJs and the BIA the power to take “any action” that is “appropriate and necessary” to dispose of a case.

When proceedings are terminated, it essentially means that the case is dismissed without prejudice.

This means that the government retains the option to reopen the case at a later date if warranted by new evidence or changed circumstances. Importantly, termination of proceedings does not confer any legal immigration status or benefits upon the individual. Instead, it provides a temporary reprieve from removal proceedings and allows the individual to remain in the country, albeit without a lawful immigration status.

The key point here is that if you have been offered a termination of proceedings and you accept the termination, then you are safe from being deported today. It does not stop the government from reopening this case later to try and deport you again.

If you feel that you have a strong relief or case for relief then consult an attorney to appeal or oppose the termination so that you can have your day in court. 

So even if you have a strong case, why would you NOT terminate your case? Isn’t that the whole point of hiring an attorney? So you won’t be deported? Well now you’re not being deported, so why would you oppose it?

Because the relief you currently have that you feel is strong may lose its effectiveness in the future. For example, if you from a country of political turmoil (Ukraine, Russia, China, et…) and you have a good case for asylum, there’s no guarantee that those same circumstances will still be there in the future for you to claim your asylum.

Or if you have a strong case for 42b cancellation of removal because your United States Citizen/Legal Permanent Resident elderly mother or minor child requires your help, your elderly mother may not be around the next time the government wants to deport you or your minor child may age out.

Dismissal of Proceedings: How is it Different from Termination and Administrative Closure?

Dismissal occurs when an immigration judge decides to terminate the proceedings against an individual with prejudice. In other words, a dismissal signifies that the case has been concluded permanently, barring any further action by the government to reopen the case. Dismissal can result from a variety of factors, such as the government's failure to meet its burden of proof, a lack of jurisdiction, or due process violations. 

The motion to dismiss is stipulated in 8 CFR § 1239.2(c). This regulation allows for the government counsel to seek dismissal of the case based on grounds set out in 8 CFR § 239.2(a).

These grounds are where the respondent:

1. is a national of the U.S.; 
2. is NOT deportable or inadmissible; 
3. is deceased; 
4. is NOT in the U.S.; 
5. failed to file a timely petition but the failure was excused; 
6. the NTA was improvidently issued; or 
7. circumstances in the case have changed. 

This motion is largely permitted through prosecutorial discretion (PD) and most cases for unaccompanied children will fall under prongs six or seven. PD arms ICE prosecutors with the discretion to not pursue a case even if ICE has the authority to do so.

Read More: The Deport Report – USCIS moves the moral compass on “Good Moral Character” requirement

The extent and limit of PD was recently set out in two memos issued by ICE’s Office of the Principal Advisor (OPLA), the representative of the government in the immigration sphere.

When an immigration case is dismissed, the individual is relieved from the threat of removal and may be eligible for certain immigration benefits or relief. For instance, they may be eligible to apply for adjustment of status, asylum, or other forms of relief available under the immigration laws. Dismissal is generally seen as a favorable outcome, as it provides a stronger legal foundation for the individual to pursue their immigration goals.

Lastly, What is Administrative Closure of Proceedings?

Administrative closure refers to a procedural decision made by an immigration judge to suspend or put on hold the immigration proceedings temporarily. Unlike termination of proceedings or dismissal, administrative closure does not resolve the case definitively. Instead, it allows the court to temporarily halt the proceedings while waiting for a specific event or condition to be resolved.

Administrative closure is often used in situations where other related processes or legal issues need to be addressed before the immigration case can proceed further. For example, if an individual has a pending application for a visa or other immigration benefits with another government agency, the judge may choose to administratively close the proceedings until a decision is made on that application.

During administrative closure, the individual's case remains active but is effectively paused. The case can be reopened at a later date, if necessary, either at the request of the government or the individual.

Administrative closure does not grant any immigration status or benefits but allows for the temporary suspension of proceedings until certain conditions are met.

While termination of proceedings, dismissal, and administrative closure may all signify the end of immigration proceedings, it is crucial to understand their distinct implications. Termination of proceedings provides a temporary reprieve, dismissal concludes the case permanently, and administrative closure suspends proceedings until certain conditions are resolved.

Navigating immigration proceedings can be complex, and it is essential to seek professional legal guidance to comprehend the nuances of these outcomes fully. Consulting with an experienced immigration attorney is highly recommended to ensure the best possible outcome and to explore any potential avenues for relief or immigration benefits.