The Power of an Approved I-360: Terminating Removal Proceedings in Immigration Court

When an individual receives a Notice to Appear (NTA), they are placed into the adversarial setting of removal proceedings before an Immigration Judge (IJ). For clients who have survived trauma, such as abused children or victims of domestic violence, this process can be daunting. Fortunately, Congressional intent created specific protections for these vulnerable populations through the Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) and the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petitioning process.

The approval of Form I-360, Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), or Special Immigrant, for SIJS or VAWA purposes is often a major turning point. While clients generally need to wait for a visa to become available before they can adjust status to a Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR), the approved I-360 can be utilized immediately in Immigration Court to argue for the termination of removal proceedings. This strategy is critical because a successful Motion to Terminate (MTT) allows the client to pursue their green card through USCIS (or consular processing) without the complication and stress of ongoing deportation litigation.

The Legal Basis for Termination

The Immigration and Nationality Act grants the Immigration Judge the authority to terminate removal proceedings in certain circumstances. When an I-360 petition is approved, it means that USCIS, the agency responsible for adjudicating petitions, has formally recognized that the client meets the threshold requirements for special immigrant or VAWA relief.

An approved I-360 establishes two critical facts:

1. Adjudicative Authority: The I-360 is a petition filed with USCIS, not the Immigration Court (EOIR). Once USCIS has approved it, the Immigration Court must respect that determination.
2. Eligibility for Relief: The approval confirms the client is eligible for adjustment of status (Form I-485) once a visa number becomes available.

The main argument in a Motion to Terminate is that pursuing removal against an individual who has already been deemed eligible for a specific form of relief by Congress is an inefficient use of government resources and inconsistent with the humanitarian nature of the law.

The Strategy: Terminating Without Deferred Action (DA)

Traditionally, when SIJS petitioners faced the visa backlog, granting Deferred Action (DA) alongside the I-360 approval provided explicit protection that could be used to support an MTT. However, policy changes and court litigation have made DA grants less certain and automatic.

This shifting DA environment highlights the importance of pursuing termination based solely on the strength of the approved I-360 petition.

A growing trend in Immigration Court supports the argument that an approved I-360 alone is sufficient grounds for termination. Immigration Judges often view the approved petition as definitive proof that the government's interest is better served by allowing the client to complete their path to permanent residency outside of the removal context.

Key Components of a Successful Motion to Terminate

• Evidence: The motion must include the formal USCIS approval notice for the I-360 petition.
• Waivers and Inadmissibility: Attorneys must confirm that the client is not subject to any inadmissibility grounds that cannot be waived. For VAWA and SIJS petitioners, special waiver provisions often apply, making their path to adjustment of status feasible.
• DHS Concurrence: Since the Attorney General's decision in Matter of Coronado Acevedo, 28 I&N Dec. 648 (A.G. 2022), Immigration Judges' authority to terminate proceedings over DHS objection has been significantly curtailed, and in most circuits DHS non-opposition is as a practical matter essential. Attorneys should engage the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Chief Counsel early and ask DHS to join in the motion — or, better, to move the court to dismiss the NTA outright. DHS frequently agrees to terminate or dismiss where a clear path to LPR status, like an approved I-360, already exists.

Terminating removal proceedings based on an approved I-360 means the client exits the defensive immigration system. They can then wait for their priority date to become current and file their application to adjust status directly with USCIS in a non-adversarial environment.

VAWA Self-Petitions and the I-360

For VAWA self-petitioners, termination is frequently sought because the client is often eligible to file their Form I-485 application to adjust status concurrently with or shortly after the I-360, depending on visa availability. If the I-360 is approved, terminating the removal proceedings is a logical step, as the client has established eligibility for LPR status. Furthermore, termination ensures the client's ability to apply for adjustment and pursue consular processing for any eligible derivatives before they age out under the Child Status Protection Act (CSPA).

Practical Takeaways

• Prioritize I-360 Approval: If a client is in removal proceedings and eligible for SIJS or VAWA, prioritize the filing and approval of the Form I-360.
• Approved Status is Powerful: Do not wait for a visa to become current or for Deferred Action to be granted; immediately use the approved I-360 as the basis for a Motion to Terminate in Immigration Court.
• Seek DHS Concurrence: Collaborate with DHS counsel to secure their non-opposition, which drastically increases the likelihood of a successful motion.

Conclusion

The approved I-360 petition is more than just an approval notice; it is a powerful legal tool that confirms a client's future eligibility for permanent residency under humanitarian protection laws. Leveraging this approval to terminate removal proceedings is often the fastest and most efficient way to protect vulnerable clients and secure their path forward in the U.S.

Call to action: If you have an approved VAWA or SIJS petition (Form I-360) and are currently in removal proceedings, contact New Horizons Legal immediately to discuss a Motion to Terminate.

Disclaimer: This blog is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this blog does not create an attorney-client relationship.