BIA Clarifies When Immigration Judges May Pretermit Asylum and Withholding Claims

What Matter of G-R-B- Decided

In Matter of G-R-B-, the respondent sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The Immigration Judge pretermitted the applications after determining that the respondent had not established a sufficient basis for the requested relief.

The respondent argued that the Immigration Judge should not have pretermitted the asylum and withholding applications because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had not filed a motion requesting pretermission. The BIA rejected that argument.

The BIA held that an Immigration Judge may pretermit an application for asylum or withholding of removal without a DHS motion when the applicant has not established a prima facie claim for relief and further proceedings are not necessary to resolve a genuine factual issue.

Why Pretermission Matters in Asylum Cases

Pretermission can prevent an application from proceeding to a full individual hearing on the merits. For an asylum applicant, this means that filing an application does not by itself guarantee that the Immigration Judge will conduct a complete evidentiary hearing.

The decision therefore makes the legal and factual foundation of an application particularly important. The application and supporting evidence should address the facts necessary to establish eligibility for the specific form of relief being requested.

The Importance of a Complete Record

The decision highlights the importance of developing a clear factual record in asylum and withholding cases. A declaration and supporting evidence should explain what happened to the applicant, who was responsible, why the applicant was targeted, and why the applicant fears harm if returned.

Where the claim depends on a protected ground or a particular social group, the application should clearly explain the connection between the alleged persecution and the legal theory being presented. Supporting country conditions and other evidence should be consistent with the facts alleged.

• Specific facts: Explain the relevant events rather than relying only on general statements.
• Legal theory: Clearly identify the basis for the requested protection.
• Supporting evidence: Submit relevant documentation when available and appropriate.
• Consistency: Review applications, declarations, prior statements, and evidence for unexplained inconsistencies.

Appeals and Applicable Circuit Law

The BIA's decision also illustrates the importance of properly developing arguments on appeal. In Matter of G-R-B-, the respondent did not adequately challenge certain findings made by the Immigration Judge, and the BIA treated those issues as waived.

An appeal should identify the specific legal or factual errors being challenged and explain why the Immigration Judge's decision should be changed. Simply disagreeing with the result is generally not enough to preserve an issue for meaningful appellate review.

Attorneys should also consider the law of the federal circuit where the immigration proceedings arise. The legal standards applicable to a particular issue can depend on controlling circuit precedent, so BIA decisions should be considered together with relevant federal appellate authority.

What Respondents Should Know

For individuals in removal proceedings, Matter of G-R-B- reinforces the importance of presenting a well-developed application for protection. An asylum or withholding application should establish the factual and legal basis for the requested relief rather than relying on the expectation that additional evidence will always be presented at a later hearing.

The decision also shows why respondents should carefully review an Immigration Judge's decision and preserve each significant issue on appeal. The effect of the decision will depend on the facts of the individual case, the relief requested, and the law applicable in the relevant jurisdiction.

Matter of G-R-B-, 30 I&N Dec. 102 (BIA 2026) is an important decision for attorneys and respondents handling asylum, withholding, and removal defense cases. Careful preparation of the application and record can be especially important when the government has not filed a motion but the Immigration Judge is considering whether the claim establishes a sufficient basis for relief.