What happened
On April 24, 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the appeals body inside the Justice Department's immigration court system, decided Matter of Santiago-Santiago, 29 I&N Dec. 589. It is a published precedent decision, which means immigration judges across the country are expected to follow it.
The case began when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) filed a notice to appear in immigration court on August 5, 2025. The person in the case had DACA and asked the judge to end the case. On September 8, 2025, the immigration judge did, relying on a regulation that allows a judge to terminate a case when the person is a beneficiary of deferred action. DHS appealed.
The Board sided with DHS. Its holding, in its own words: the immigration judge “erred in terminating removal proceedings based solely on the fact that the respondent has been accorded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and without considering the reasons for any opposition to termination.” The Board sent the case back to immigration court, to a different judge, for a new decision.
Who this is about
The decision is about people who have DACA and are already in removal proceedings in immigration court, and about how a judge handles a request to end that case. The regulation, 8 CFR 1003.18(d)(1)(ii), still lists deferred action as one of the grounds for what it calls “discretionary termination.” The same regulation says the judge “shall consider the reason termination is sought and the basis for any opposition to termination.” The Board's point is that DACA can be weighed, but it is not, by itself, the deciding factor when DHS objects.
The Board also wrote that “a party's interest in bringing removal proceedings to a close on the merits is a persuasive reason to move forward with the case,” and that “there is an important public interest in the finality of immigration proceedings.” And it said plainly: “We express no opinion as to the ultimate outcome of these removal proceedings.”
What it does not mean
- It does not end DACA or cancel anyone's DACA grant. The decision is about whether a court case gets closed, not about the DACA program, which USCIS still runs under court orders.
- It does not say a person with DACA can be deported. In a footnote, the Board noted that the person in this case “cannot be removed from the United States while she has DACA protection,” citing a federal court order in her own habeas case. The decision did not change that.
- It does not put people with DACA into immigration court. It applies to cases that DHS has already filed.
- It does not take away a judge's power to terminate a case for someone with deferred action. It says the judge has to weigh the reasons on both sides and explain the decision.
What to do with this
If you or someone in your family has DACA and has received a notice to appear, or already has a case in immigration court, how this decision applies to that case is a question for a licensed immigration attorney or a DOJ-accredited representative at a recognized nonprofit. The organizations below are a place to start, and Advocasí helps prepare paperwork once a qualified advisor has said which path applies.
Advocasí is not a law firm. We explain what a policy says and help people prepare their own paperwork once a qualified advisor has told them which path applies.