Withholding/CAT Withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture
These are not visas and not a status - they are orders that stop the government removing you to a specific country. Withholding of removal under INA 241(b)(3) applies where it is more likely than not you would be persecuted on a protected ground; Convention Against Torture protection applies where it is more likely than not you would be tortured with government acquiescence. They are what remains when asylum is barred, and they give far less: no green card, no family, no travel, and no protection against being sent somewhere else.
- Duración
- Indefinite but conditional and fragile. A grant stops removal to the named country only. It does not expire, but it can be reopened and terminated if conditions change, and it does not prevent removal to a third country.
- Extensiones
- Nothing to extend. Work authorisation is renewed periodically; the underlying order continues until terminated.
- Trabajo
- Yes, but as a consequence of the order rather than a status. A person granted withholding or CAT is eligible for employment authorisation, which must be renewed. There is no lawful permanent status behind it.
- Dependientes
- None. This is the sharpest difference from asylum. Withholding and CAT are personal to the applicant - there are no derivatives, no Form I-730, and no way to bring a spouse or children. Each family member must win their own case.
- Camino a la residencia permanente
- None. Withholding and CAT confer no route to permanent residence and no route to citizenship. The person remains under a final order of removal that is simply not being executed to the named country. Any green card must come from a wholly separate basis, and the outstanding removal order complicates that considerably.
- Tiempo de trámite
- These claims are decided inside removal proceedings, so the timing is the immigration court's. There is no separate published figure and case-level timings are unverified.
- Cupo anual y filas de espera
- None. Neither form of protection is numerically limited and neither carries a priority date, so nothing appears in the Visa Bulletin. Both are mandatory relief where the standard is met.
Quién califica
- A person in removal proceedings who fears return, whether or not they are eligible for asylum
- A person barred from asylum by the one-year deadline, a prior denial, a particularly serious crime, firm resettlement, or the security bars - withholding has its own, narrower bars and CAT deferral has almost none
- A person screened into proceedings after reinstatement of a prior removal order or administrative removal, through a reasonable fear interview
- For CAT deferral of removal specifically, even a person barred from withholding by a particularly serious crime or as a danger to security
Requisitos
- Withholding of removal: a clear probability - more likely than not - of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group, under 8 CFR 208.16(b) and 1208.16(b)
- CAT: that it is more likely than not the applicant would be tortured, by or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official, under 8 CFR 208.16(c), 1208.16(c), 208.17 and 1208.17 for deferral, and 208.18 and 1208.18 for definitions
- Both are mandatory rather than discretionary if the standard is met - an immigration judge has no discretion to refuse withholding to a qualifying applicant, which is the one respect in which they are stronger than asylum
- Withholding bars: the persecutor bar, a particularly serious crime, a serious nonpolitical crime committed abroad, and danger to the security of the United States. Since 31 December 2025 a public health risk may be treated as a danger to security
- Reasonable fear screening after reinstatement or administrative removal uses the lower reasonable possibility standard, and no mandatory bars are applied at the screening stage - the immigration judge applies them afterwards
- Filed on Form I-589, the same form as asylum
Cómo solicitar
- 1
File Form I-589 with the immigration court, marking the withholding and CAT boxes as well as asylum. The same form covers all three, and there is no separate fee for withholding or CAT.
- 2
Pay the $100 H.R. 1 fee through the EOIR Payment Portal. Since 23 February 2026 EOIR no longer accepts checks or money orders - all fees must be paid electronically.
- 3
If you are in reasonable fear proceedings after reinstatement of a removal order, the screening applies the lower reasonable possibility standard and does not apply the mandatory bars; the immigration judge applies them later.
- 4
Present individualised evidence. Since 2025 the Board has repeatedly held that general country conditions, anecdotal reports and expert testimony about corruption are not enough without evidence about the applicant.
- 5
If you lose, appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals on Form EOIR-26 at $1,030 - but note that since 9 March 2026 the Board's merits review of an immigration judge's decision is discretionary.
- 6
If you win, apply for employment authorisation and renew it. Do not expect anything else - no family petition, no travel document, no green card.
Tarifas y formularios
| Form I-589 filed in immigration court, covering asylum, withholding and CAT | $100 H.R. 1 asylum fee, non-waivable, paid through the EOIR Payment Portal |
| Annual Asylum Fee | $102 - but per Matter of L-F-R- the fee and the consequences of not paying it do not reach withholding of removal or CAT |
| Form EOIR-26 appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals | $1,030, rising to $1,060 on 1 October 2026 |
| Motion to reopen or reconsider before an immigration judge | $1,065, rising to $1,095 on 1 October 2026 |
| Motion to reopen or reconsider before the Board of Immigration Appeals | $1,030, rising to $1,060 on 1 October 2026 |
| Form EOIR-26A fee waiver request | $0 - available for appeals and motions |
| Biometrics | $30 per person |
Qué cambió en 2025 y 2026
- 31 December 2025 - the Security Bars and Processing rule (90 FR 61035, published 30 December 2025) took effect, retaining authority to treat a public health risk as a danger to the security of the United States. That is a bar to both asylum and withholding of removal, and it also revises credible fear screening. This is the only substantive change to the bars in 2025 or 2026 - a Federal Register sweep of DHS and EOIR rulemaking from 20 January 2025 forward returns no omnibus rule restricting withholding or CAT.
- 23 February 2026 - EOIR stopped accepting checks and money orders. All immigration fees must go through the EOIR Payment Portal.
- 9 March 2026 - an interim final rule on appellate procedures for the Board of Immigration Appeals (91 FR 5267, published 6 February 2026) made the Board's merits review of immigration judge decisions discretionary.
- 11 June 2026 - the EOIR Fees rule (91 FR 35369) took effect on publication, following the FY2026 OBBBA inflation notice at 91 FR 2561 of 21 January 2026, effective 1 February 2026.
- 24 July 2026 - Matter of L-F-R-, 29 I&N Dec. 787 (BIA), held that non-payment of the Annual Asylum Fee pretermits or abandons the asylum application but does not reach withholding of removal or CAT. A claimant who loses asylum to non-payment keeps those claims.
- 21 August 2026 - the FY2027 OBBBA inflation adjustment (91 FR 54211) set EOIR fees effective 1 October 2026: EOIR-26 and EOIR-29 to $1,060, EOIR-45 to $2,070, motion to reopen or reconsider before an immigration judge to $1,095 and before the Board to $1,060, EOIR-40 and EOIR-42A to $730, EOIR-42B to $1,690. The notice does not restate the I-589 or Annual Asylum Fee amounts for FY2027, which are unverified.
- Third-country removals are the live threat to anyone holding withholding or CAT, because both are country-specific. An ICE directive of 18 February 2025 treats withholding and CAT as no bar to removal to a third country. In D.V.D. v. DHS, 1:25-cv-10676 (D. Mass.), the nationwide preliminary injunction was stayed by the Supreme Court on 23 June 2025 and the remedial order stayed on 3 July 2025. On 25 February 2026 the district court granted partial summary judgment and set aside the third-country removal policy, but the First Circuit stayed that decision on 16 March 2026 and expedited the appeal, argued 13 May 2026. Whether the First Circuit has since ruled is unverified.
- Board precedent tightening both forms of protection: Matter of M-S-I-, 29 I&N Dec. 61 (2025) (acquiescence is not the same as unable or unwilling, and speculation that police will not help is insufficient); Matter of W-F-, 29 I&N Dec. 319 (2025) (anecdotal bribery reports and generalised gang violence do not support Haitian CAT deferral); Matter of A-A-R-, 29 I&N Dec. 38 (2025); Matter of H-L-S-M-, 29 I&N Dec. 767 (2026) (general country conditions plus expert corruption testimony insufficient without individualised circumstances); Matter of J-E-L-, 29 I&N Dec. 605 (2026) (no state action or acquiescence for cartel harm in Mexico); Matter of I-U-V-, 29 I&N Dec. 816 (2026) (pattern-or-practice withholding still requires an objective clear probability with no subjective component); Matter of G-L-C-, 29 I&N Dec. 717 (2026) and Matter of J-O-A-, 29 I&N Dec. 672 (2026) on particularly serious crime findings; and Matter of H-A-A-V-, 29 I&N Dec. 233 (2025), permitting an immigration judge to pretermit asylum, withholding and CAT without an evidentiary hearing.
Dónde suele fallar
- Treating a withholding grant as a win in the ordinary sense. There is no green card, no citizenship, no family reunification and no travel, and the person remains under a final removal order.
- Forgetting the third-country problem. Protection names a country. Since February 2025 ICE has taken the position that neither withholding nor CAT bars removal somewhere else, the Supreme Court stayed the nationwide injunction against that policy in June 2025, and the district court's February 2026 order setting the policy aside was itself stayed in March 2026.
- Relying on country conditions evidence alone. The Board has repeatedly held since 2025 that generalised violence, anecdotal corruption reports and expert testimony do not carry a CAT claim without individualised evidence.
- Assuming an evidentiary hearing. Since Matter of H-A-A-V- an immigration judge may pretermit asylum, withholding and CAT without one.
- Assuming a Board appeal gets merits review. Since 9 March 2026 that review is discretionary.
- Abandoning the withholding and CAT boxes on the I-589 when the asylum claim is the focus. If the asylum claim falls away - to the one-year bar, or to non-payment of the Annual Asylum Fee - those are what is left.
- Missing that the Annual Asylum Fee does not sink these claims. Matter of L-F-R- is explicit, and an applicant told otherwise should say so on the record.
También en Protection
¿No está seguro de que sea esta? Describa su situación. Describa su situación y el buscador nombrará las opciones que vale la pena explorar. Nada de esto es asesoría legal; la elegibilidad depende de hechos que una página no puede ver.