The immigration landscape for asylum seekers has been fundamentally reshaped by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) in its recent precedential decision, Matter of C-I-G-M- & L-V-S-G-, 29 I&N Dec. 291 (BIA 2025). This ruling significantly strengthens the procedural effectiveness of Asylum Cooperative Agreements (ACAs), often referred to as “Safe Third Country” agreements, and mandates a critical shift in how Immigration Judges (IJs) adjudicate asylum cases.

🏛️ The BIA’s Key Holding

The central takeaway from Matter of C-I-G-M- & L-V-S-G- is a mandatory procedural sequence for IJs when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) claims an ACA bar applies.

The BIA held that an Immigration Judge must first determine whether the Safe Third Country bar applies under 8 C.F.R. § 1240.11(h) before moving on to consider the merits  of an asylum application (i.e. the applicant’s eligibility for asylum).

This decision reverses the Immigration Judge’s initial denial of DHS’s motion to pretermit (terminate) the asylum claims of the Guatemalan nationals in this case, sending the matter back to the IJ for a mandatory pre-screen under the U.S.-Honduras ACA.

⚖️ The Critical Burden Shift for Asylum Applicants

If DHS successfully invokes an ACA, the burden of proof shifts entirely to the asylum applicant.

To overcome the Safe Third Country bar and proceed with their asylum claim in the United States, the applicant must now establish by a preponderance of the evidence that they would more likely than not face persecution on account of a protected ground or torture in the relevant third country.

In essence, the BIA’s decision permits DHS to dispose of an asylum case on a procedural ground—the failure to overcome the ACA bar—potentially before the applicant ever receives a full hearing on the underlying merits of their fear of persecution in their home country.

🎯 What This Means for Migrants and Legal Strategy

This is a monumental shift in strategy, particularly for those who have traveled through countries with which the U.S. has an effective ACA, such as Guatemala or Honduras.

• Heightened Stakes in the Pre-Screening Phase: The legal fight has now been front-loaded. Applicants and their counsel must be prepared to litigate the applicability of the ACA and the risk of persecution or torture in the safe third country immediately.

• A Shift from “Merits First” to “Bar First”: This ruling ensures that the statutory bar to asylum eligibility takes precedence over the consideration of the underlying claim.

• Increased Use of Motions to Pretermit: We expect an increase in DHS filing motions to pretermit asylum claims based on this procedural bar, forcing practitioners to respond with compelling evidence of risk in the third country.

For individuals who transited through an ACA nation, counsel must now prioritize gathering evidence to demonstrate a clear and immediate risk of persecution or torture in the safe third country to prevent the pretermission of the case. The decision effectively formalizes a mechanism for deterring asylum seekers by limiting their access to the U.S. immigration court system for a merits hearing.

🤝 How Cohen, Tucker + Ades Can Help

As a law firm dedicated to helping individuals navigate the complexities of immigration law, including robust deportation defense and appeals before the BIA, Cohen, Tucker + Ades is closely monitoring the implementation of this decision.

If you or a loved one are facing removal proceedings and are subject to an Asylum Cooperative Agreement, it is more critical than ever to have experienced counsel. Our team is prepared to develop the strategic, evidence-based arguments necessary to challenge the application of the Safe Third Country bar and defend your right to pursue protection in the United States.

Don’t navigate this complex new landscape alone. Contact Cohen, Tucker + Ades today for a consultation.

Disclaimer: This blog post contains general information and is for informational purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Cohen, Tucker + Ades P.C. Immigration laws and fee schedules are subject to frequent change. The information provided herein may not reflect the most current legal developments. You should not act or refrain from acting based on information contained in this post without seeking professional counsel from an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction. Cohen, Tucker + Ades P.C. expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all of the contents of this post.

Sources:

U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Board of Immigration Appeals | Matter of C-I-G-M- & L-V-S-G-, 29 I&N Dec. 291 (BIA 2025)