Strategic Litigation as a Check on Agency Power

By Angelyne Lisinski

Immigration law has become a highly scrutinized area shaped by shifting policies and evolving agency interpretations. In this present reality, immigration lawyers must consider not only immediate case outcomes, but also how litigation can clarify legal standards and constrain unlawful agency practices. For the Lisinski Law Firm (LLF), strategic litigation — bringing carefully selected, targeted lawsuits to achieve systemic change — is a deliberate practice choice. This commitment is reflected in LLF’s response to evolving governmental practices that depart from previously settled procedural standards.

The USCIS Signature Issue

One example is LLF’s strategic litigation efforts on behalf of individual clients. The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), a component agency of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, for years required an original “wet ink” signature on all immigration forms filed by mail. In 2020, however, when COVID-19 disrupted daily life across the nation and the world at large, USCIS adopted a more flexible policy permitting applicants and attorneys to submit electronically reproduced signatures, such as scanned copies of signed forms. Under this policy, USCIS accepted, and subsequently approved, cases submitted by LLF and other immigration practitioners across the country for several years.

Then, immigration advocates and practitioners identified a troubling trend: USCIS abruptly began issuing Requests for Evidence (RFEs), Notices of Intent to Deny (NOIDs), and denials alleging that certain signatures were “deficient” because they appeared to be reproductions rather than original “wet ink” signatures. Even more troubling was that these challenges were primarily targeted at survivors of human trafficking seeking protections in the form of T-Visas, while other case types with the same signature formats continued to be approved.

You are not alone in this process, contact us for support.

Legal Action Against USCIS

What began as isolated adjudicatory decisions soon revealed a broader nationwide pattern of harmful agency conduct. LLF, among other immigration practitioners, began receiving similar RFEs, NOIDs, Notices of Intent to Revoke (NOIRs), and denials, particularly in cases involving survivors of severe human trafficking and abuse. In July 2025, after LLF attempted to negotiate with the federal government, LLF filed a suit against USCIS on behalf of 14 survivors of human trafficking who had their cases unlawfully denied or revoked based on a signature issue.

LLF sought injunctive and declaratory relief on the grounds that USCIS had retroactively altered its signature requirements without prior notice and opportunity for comment, in direct violation of 5 U.S.C. § 553(b), (c), and (e), and arbitrarily and capriciously rejected cases that were filed in compliance with the signature rule in effect at the time of filing. For survivors of trafficking and domestic violence, unlawful denials carry especially severe consequences, including loss of lawful presence, exposure to removal, and re-traumatization through prolonged legal uncertainty.

In response, USCIS re-opened affected cases and provided mechanisms to cure the alleged signature deficiencies. In a second lawsuit recently filed in February 2026, LLF again sued USCIS, this time representing eight more survivors of human trafficking. In addition to reiterating the claims raised in the first action, LLF alleged that USCIS had adopted an unwritten policy requiring applicants to address alleged signature deficiencies only after USCIS re-opened each unlawful denial. Both lawsuits remain ongoing. Interestingly, USCIS more recently appears to be applying this same abrupt change only to H-1B visa applicants. For LLF, these cases illustrate how individual representation can expose systemic issues that warrant escalation through strategic litigation.

To stay informed on immigration matters, follow Attorney Angel on social media.

ICWC v. Noem and Systemic Change

In addition to strategic litigation efforts on behalf of individual clients, LLF actively contributes to litigation efforts that seek to remedy systemic issues affecting the populations it serves, such as ICWC v. Noem, a national class action pending before the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The case challenges a 2025 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) policy permitting the routine arrest, detention, and removal of immigrant survivors of domestic violence, human trafficking, and other serious crimes.

The ICE policy disregards deferred action protections that authorize eligible survivors to remain lawfully in the United States for a designated period. As implemented, the policy has enabled ICE to deport survivor-based applicants without conducting the statutorily-required inquiry into visa eligibility and to summarily deny requests for stays of removal.

The litigation remains in its early stages, with plaintiffs seeking preliminary injunctive relief and class certification. LLF contributed to this effort by submitting declarations from affected clients demonstrating how the policy harms noncitizens and interferes with effective legal representation. Across practice areas, attorneys frequently encounter agency actions that appear defensible in isolation but reveal structural flaws when viewed collectively. By identifying these inflection points, firms engaged in individual advocacy can meaningfully contribute to broader efforts that reinforce accountability and the rule of law.

Looking Forward

The potential outcomes of ICWC v. Noem illustrate the value of strategic litigation. A favorable ruling would require ICE to rescind or revise the policy and restore procedural protections enacted by Congress while also clarifying the limits of agency discretion. Even interim relief would safeguard individuals from arrest, detention, or removal during judicial review.

Strategic litigation plays a critical role in protecting vulnerable populations and reinforcing the integrity of administrative processes. LLF’s mission is to change as many lives as possible through direct representation and strategic litigation to ensure all applicants benefit from a fair and just immigration system. In just five years, LLF is proud to have helped more than 55,000 immigrants pursue pathways to legal status. With more than 60 attorneys across 15 offices nationwide, LLF remains committed to advancing this work and continuing its leadership in the immigration law field.