T Visas in Removal Proceedings: From a Complete I-914 to a § 1003.18 Motion

Start with the current USCIS form.

A T-visa strategy during removal proceedings succeeds only when counsel separates two questions. First, has the trafficking survivor filed a complete and supportable Form I-914 with USCIS? Second, what should the immigration judge do with the removal case while USCIS decides that application? A receipt can be important evidence, but it is not T status and does not itself erase the Notice to Appear.

Two forums, two decisions

USCIS has sole jurisdiction over principal and derivative T applications, including when the applicant is already in removal proceedings. The application therefore goes to USCIS under the current form instructions—not to the immigration judge as an application for relief the judge can grant. The court filing is a motion concerning docket management: it may request termination, administrative closure, or a continuance depending on what has actually been filed and what USCIS has issued.

The distinction also controls stays. Merely filing Form I-914 does not automatically stop ICE from executing a final removal order. A USCIS bona-fide determination triggers the regulatory automatic stay. Before that point, a separate ICE stay request may be essential.

The five eligibility questions

A principal T-1 applicant should be able to answer five questions with facts and evidence:

1. Severe trafficking: Was the applicant subjected to—or recruited, transported, harbored, provided, obtained, patronized, or solicited for—a qualifying trafficking purpose? Except for sex trafficking of a person under 18, the analysis ordinarily requires force, fraud, or coercion connected to a prohibited end.
2. Physical presence: Is the applicant now present on account of the trafficking? The regulation recognizes ongoing trafficking, liberation, escape, a present connection to past trafficking, and specified participation in investigative or judicial processes. Departure and reentry require special attention.
3. Law-enforcement assistance: Did the applicant contact an agency with jurisdiction and comply with reasonable requests? If not, does the age exemption or trauma exception apply? An optional I-914 Supplement B can corroborate the record, but USCIS makes the eligibility decision.
4. Hardship: Would removal cause extreme hardship involving unusual and severe harm to the applicant? Medical and psychological needs, trafficking consequences, loss of access to justice, retaliation, re-victimization, safety, country conditions, and applicant-specific economic harm may matter.
5. Admissibility: Is the applicant admissible, and if not, is every applicable ground identified and supported in a Form I-192 waiver request?

These are cumulative requirements. A compelling account of trafficking cannot substitute for the physical-presence nexus or the unusual-and-severe-hardship showing.

The filing record USCIS needs

The core filing is the current, signed Form I-914 accompanied by a detailed signed personal statement in the applicant’s own words. The statement should give a usable chronology: recruitment and control, force, fraud or coercion, labor or commercial-sex purpose, duration, perpetrators, escape or rescue, relevant entry facts, present trafficking-related effects, law-enforcement contacts and requests, and the harm expected upon removal.

Any credible evidence may support the elements. Depending on the case, that can include law-enforcement reports, prosecutor or labor-agency communications, Continued Presence records, court documents, medical or counseling records, shelter and social-service records, witness declarations, wage and work records, contracts, advertisements, messages, travel records, photographs, or records generated by the trafficker. Evidence gaps should be explained; they should not be concealed behind generalized statements.

The package must also resolve identity, address history, entries and exits, prior immigration filings, arrests and dispositions, removability allegations, and inadmissibility. Foreign-language evidence needs a complete English translation and certification. Form I-192 and its evidence should be included when a waiver is required. Eligible relatives require Supplement A packages with relationship evidence and their own admissibility review.

A rapid but reliable preparation plan

An urgent case can move quickly when workstreams run at the same time:

• obtain the A-file, EOIR record, criminal records, and prior applications while the client declaration is being developed;
• send preservation and record requests immediately to law enforcement, prosecutors, labor agencies, health providers, shelters, and service organizations;
• create a dated trafficking chronology and an eligibility matrix that maps each fact and exhibit to the relevant regulation;
• identify conflicts among prior statements, then correct or explain them in the filing;
• draft the I-192 waiver at the same time rather than discovering inadmissibility at final review;
• verify the current form editions, instructions, fees, filing address, signatures, translations, and delivery service immediately before mailing; and
• prepare the court motion from the same verified record, without disclosing protected details more broadly than necessary.

Submitting a skeletal form simply to obtain a delivery date can be counterproductive. The bona-fide rule requires a properly filed and complete application plus a signed personal statement and completed initial checks without national-security concerns. A coherent initial package reduces rejection and request-for-evidence risk and gives the immigration judge a meaningful prima-facie record.

When a pending I-914 can support termination

Current 8 C.F.R. § 1003.18(d)(1)(ii)(B) authorizes discretionary termination when the respondent is prima facie eligible for relief or lawful status, USCIS would have jurisdiction if the respondent were outside proceedings, and the application or other qualifying action has been filed. Because USCIS has sole T-visa jurisdiction, an actually filed I-914 may satisfy the jurisdiction-and-filing components. The respondent must still establish prima-facie eligibility and persuade the judge to exercise discretion.

A copy of the receipt alone rarely tells that whole story. The motion should demonstrate every T element, identify any waiver filing, explain the procedural benefit of allowing USCIS to decide, and address the reasons DHS gives for proceeding. Counsel should request DHS’s position in advance. A joint or unopposed motion under § 1003.18(d)(1)(i)(G) generally receives more favorable regulatory treatment, although the judge may identify unusual supported reasons not to terminate.

How bona-fide determination and deferred action change the record

USCIS conducts an initial bona-fide review for qualifying I-914 filings submitted on or after August 28, 2024. Once USCIS sends a bona-fide-determination notice, the application is treated as bona fide as of the notice date. USCIS may then consider deferred action and an employment-authorization application. The bona-fide determination also automatically stays execution of a final removal order until an adverse T decision becomes final.

If deferred action is granted, § 1003.18(d)(1)(ii)(C) provides a separate discretionary termination ground. But the 2026 precedential decision Matter of Santiago-Santiago rejects the idea that deferred action alone dictates the result. The judge must consider the reason for termination, DHS’s opposition, and favorable and unfavorable factors. The motion should do that analysis rather than treat the notice as a talisman.

What to put in the immigration-court motion

• the procedural history, charge of removability, admissions or denials, and next hearing;
• the precise subsection of § 1003.18 relied upon;
• proof that USCIS received the I-914 and a copy or protected summary of the filed record;
• an element-by-element prima-facie analysis, including physical presence, cooperation or exception, hardship, and inadmissibility waivers;
• any bona-fide-determination, deferred-action, employment-authorization, or ICE prosecutorial-discretion notice;
• the requested disposition—often termination without prejudice—and the practical effect if USCIS later denies the application;
• positive discretionary facts, a candid treatment of adverse facts, and a response to DHS’s stated opposition; and
• proof of service, compliance with the court’s filing rules, and a proposed order where permitted.

Trafficking applications are subject to important confidentiality protections. Court strategy should minimize unnecessary disclosure and use available protective procedures while still giving the judge enough information to decide the motion.

Continuance, administrative closure, and stay protection

If the I-914 has not yet been filed, the specific pending-application termination ground in § 1003.18(d)(1)(ii)(B) is not available. A continuance for good cause may allow a concrete, diligently pursued filing to be completed. Administrative closure under § 1003.18(c) may be requested when its factors support pausing the case. The motion should provide a realistic timetable, likelihood of collateral relief, expected duration, responsibility for delay, anticipated effect, custody status, and an answer to DHS’s position.

A person with a final order needs a separate removal-protection analysis. Before a bona-fide determination, the T filing alone has no effect on ICE’s authority to execute that order. The regulations recognize a request for an administrative stay under 8 C.F.R. § 241.6, generally using Form I-246. The immigration judge and Board do not adjudicate the T-application stay described in § 214.205(g).

What happens after approval or denial

Approval of T-1 status changes the available court vehicle. Under § 1003.18(d)(1)(i)(D)(4), termination may be mandatory when the T status remains valid and, had it existed when proceedings began, the respondent would not have been removable as charged. If an immigration judge or the Board already entered the removal order, § 214.204(o)(2) permits the noncitizen to seek rescission by moving to reopen and terminate; ICE may join to overcome applicable time and number limits.

If USCIS finally denies an application after proceedings were terminated because it was pending, DHS may issue a new Notice to Appear. A final denial also ends the automatic stay generated by a bona-fide determination. The court motion should acknowledge these consequences and avoid promising that temporary docket relief is permanent immigration status.

The strongest T-visa case is not merely fast. It is filed in the right forum, complete enough for bona-fide review, supported on every element, candid about inadmissibility and adverse facts, and paired with a court request that fits the applicant’s exact procedural stage.