8 C.F.R. § 1003.10

Immigration judges

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Appointment. The immigration judges are attorneys whom the Attorney General appoints as administrative judges within the Office of the Chief Immigration Judge to conduct specified classes of proceedings, including hearings under section 240 of the Act. Immigration judges shall act as the Attorney General's delegates in the cases that come before them.

(b) Powers and duties. In conducting hearings under section 240 of the Act and such other proceedings the Attorney General may assign to them, immigration judges shall exercise the powers and duties delegated to them by the Act and by the Attorney General through regulation. In deciding the individual cases before them, and subject to the applicable governing standards set forth in paragraph (d) of this section, immigration judges shall exercise their independent judgment and discretion and may take any action consistent with their authorities under the Act and regulations that is necessary or appropriate for the disposition or alternative resolution of such cases. Such actions include administrative closure, termination of proceedings, and dismissal of proceedings. The standards for the administrative closure, dismissal, and termination of cases are set forth in § 1003.18(c), 8 CFR 1239.2(c), and § 1003.18(d), respectively. Immigration judges shall administer oaths, receive evidence, and interrogate, examine, and cross-examine aliens and any witnesses. Subject to §§ 1003.35 and 1287.4 of this chapter, they may issue administrative subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the presentation of evidence. In all cases, immigration judges shall seek to resolve the questions before them in a timely and impartial manner consistent with the Act and regulations. In the absence of exceptional circumstances, an immigration judge shall complete administrative adjudication of an asylum application within 180 days after the date an application is filed. For purposes of this paragraph (b) and of §§ 1003.29 and 1240.6 of this chapter, the term exceptional circumstances refers to exceptional circumstances (such as battery or extreme cruelty to the alien or any child or parent of the alien, serious illness of the party or immigration judge, or serious illness or death of the spouse, child, or parent of the alien, but not including less compelling circumstances) beyond the control of the parties or the immigration court. A finding of good cause does not necessarily mean that an exceptional circumstance has also been established.

(c) Review. Decisions of immigration judges are subject to review by the Board of Immigration Appeals in any case in which the Board has jurisdiction as provided in 8 CFR 1003.1.

(d) Governing standards. Immigration judges shall be governed by the provisions and limitations prescribed by the Act and this chapter, by the decisions of the Board, and by the Attorney General (through review of a decision of the Board, by written order, or by determination and ruling pursuant to section 103 of the Act).

(e) Temporary immigration judges—(1) Designation. The Director, subject to the approval of the Attorney General, is authorized to designate or select temporary immigration judges as provided in this paragraph (e). The Director may designate or select, with the approval of the Attorney General, any attorney to serve as a temporary immigration judge for renewable terms not to exceed six months, subject to all applicable statutory and regulatory limitations on the temporary service.

(2) Authority. A temporary immigration judge shall have the authority of an immigration judge to adjudicate assigned cases and administer immigration court matters, as provided in the immigration laws and regulations, subject to paragraph (e)(3) of this section.

(3) Assignment of temporary immigration judges. The Chief Immigration Judge is responsible for the overall oversight and management of the utilization of temporary immigration judges and for evaluating the results of the process. The Chief Immigration Judge shall ensure that each temporary immigration judge has received a suitable level of training to enable the temporary immigration judge to carry out the duties assigned.

[72 FR 53677, Sept. 20, 2007, as amended at 79 FR 39956, July 11, 2014; 85 FR 81655, 81750, Dec. 16, 2020; 89 FR 46792, May 29, 2024; 90 FR 41888, Aug. 28, 2025]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 114 cases (54 in the last 5 years), 2004–2026 · leading case: Yeison Meza Morales v. William Barr

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Yeison Meza Morales v. William Barr, 973 F.3d 656 (7th Cir. 2020). · cites it 15× “The most salient is 8 C.F.R. § 1003.10 (b), which explains, “In deciding the individ- ual cases before them, … immigration judges shall exercise their independent judgment and discretion and may take any action consistent with their authorities under the Act and reg- ulations…”

Jesus Zuniga Romero v. William Barr, 937 F.3d 282 (4th Cir. 2019). · cites it 7× “First, 8 C.F.R. § 1003.10 (b), which concerns the “powers and duties” of IJs, states in part: In conducting hearings under section 240 of the Act and such other proceedings the Attorney General may assign to them, immigration judges shall exercise the powers and duties delegated…”

Victor Jimenez-Rodriguez v. Merrick Garland, 996 F.3d 190 (4th Cir. 2021). · cites it 10× “To suggest that they do, Jimenez-Rodriguez urges this Court to join the Seventh Circuit in reading 8 C.F.R. § 1003.10 (a) to grant IJs the full powers of the Attorney General under the INA unless otherwise limited by regulation.”

Roberto Hernandez-Serrano v. William Barr, 981 F.3d 459 (6th Cir. 2020). · cites it 10× “The question presented here is thus one of law, namely whether the Attorney General correctly interpreted 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.10 and 1003.1(d) when holding, in Castro-Tum, that “immigration judges and the Board do not have the general authority to suspend indefinitely immigration…”

Yajure Hurtado, 29 I. & N. Dec. 216 (BIA 2025). · cites it 2× “3 See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.10 (b) (2025); see also Matter of A-W-, 25 I&N Dec.”

Jacqueline Stevens v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 877 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir. 2017). · cites it 3× “§ 1229a(b)(1), (c); 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.10 (b), 1003.35. In addition, the structure of immigration proceedings contains many safeguards -- similar (although not always identical) to those discussed in Butz in the context of administrative hearings 6 -- that tend to reduce the risk…”

Garcia v. Garland, 64 F.4th 62 (2d Cir. 2023). · cites it 5× “djudicators have inferred that authority from broad regulatory language that authorizes IJs, “[i]n deciding the individual cases before them, and subject to the applicable governing standards,” to “take any action consistent with their authorities under the [Immigration and…”

Javier Chavez Gonzalez v. Merrick Garland, 16 F.4th 131 (4th Cir. 2021). · cites it 7× “First, this court overruled Castro-Tum, relying on two regulations that bestow the IJ and BIA authority to administratively close cases -- 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.10 (b) and 1003.1(d)(1)(ii).”

Finest Meridor v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 891 F.3d 1302 (11th Cir. 2018). · cites it 3× “See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.10 (a) (explaining that IJs are "attorneys whom the Attorney General appoints as administrative judges" that "shall act as the Attorney General's delegates in the cases that come before them").”

Avetisyan, 25 I. & N. Dec. 688 (BIA 2012). · cites it 2× “8 C.F.R. § 1003.10 (b) (2011). An Immigration Judge has the authority to regulate the course of the hearing and to take any action consistent with applicable law and regulations as may be appropriate.”

Jose Gonzalez-Caraveo v. Jefferson Sessions, 882 F.3d 885 (9th Cir. 2018). “See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003.10 (b), 1003.1 (d)(1)(ii); Avetisyan, 25 I.”

Matovski v. Gonzales, 492 F.3d 722 (6th Cir. 2007). · cites it 2× “Respondent relies upon 8 C.F.R. § 1003.10 , which provides that "Immigration Judges, as defined in 8 C.”

Show all 114 citing cases →

— 8 C.F.R. § 1003.10(b) — 2 cases

Zenaida Orozco Cruz v. U.S. Attorney Gen. (11th Cir. 2018).

Refugee & Immigrant Ctr. for Educ. & Legal Servs. v. Markwayne Mullin (D.C. Cir. 2026).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.