All hearings, other than exclusion hearings, shall be open to the public except that:
(a) Depending upon physical facilities, the Immigration Judge may place reasonable limitations upon the number in attendance at any one time with priority being given to the press over the general public;
(b) For the purpose of protecting witnesses, parties, or the public interest, the Immigration Judge may limit attendance or hold a closed hearing.
(c) In any proceeding before an Immigration Judge concerning an abused alien spouse, the hearing and the Record of Proceeding shall be closed to the public unless the abused spouse agrees that the hearing and the Record of Proceeding shall be open to the public. In any proceeding before an Immigration Judge concerning an abused alien child, the hearing and the Record of Proceeding shall be closed to the public.
(d) Proceedings before an Immigration Judge shall be closed to the public if information subject to a protective order under § 1003.46, which has been filed under seal pursuant to § 1003.31(d), may be considered.
[52 FR 2936, Jan. 29, 1987. Redesignated and amended at 57 FR 11571, 11572, Apr. 6, 1992; 62 FR 10334, Mar. 6, 1997; 67 FR 36802, May 28, 2002]
Notes of Decisions
Jacqueline Stevens v. U.S. Attorney Gen., 877 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir. 2017).
· cites it 12× “4 Case: 16-12007 Date Filed: 12/15/2017 Page: 5 of 39 for his request and referred him to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.27 , which deals with the public’s access to immigration hearings.”
Stevens v. Holder, 950 F. Supp. 2d 1282 (N.D. Ga. 2013).
“8 C.F.R. § 1003.27 . Dr. Stevens maintains she asked for, but was never given, a reason or under what exception Judge Cassidy was closing the hearing.”
Tepec-Garcia, 29 I. & N. Dec. 371 (BIA 2025).
“10 (b) (cross referencing 8 C.F.R. § 1003.27 (2025)). Page 374 Cite as 29 I&N Dec.”
Brennan Ctr. for Just. v. Dep't of Homeland Sec. (D.D.C. 2019).
“On June 23, 2015, plaintiff sent a FOIA request to ICE, requesting “records relating to the closure of immigration court proceedings on national security grounds pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.27 (d) and the issuance of protective orders on national security grounds pursuant to 8 C.”
Oscar Enrique Nunez Euceda v. United States (C.D. Cal. 2022).
“g the names and 99 contact information of third parties, and non-supervisory federal and non-federal 1100 employees), the release of which to the public may adversely impact identifiable law 1111 enforcement or national security interests; 1122 (g) information pertaining to…”
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.