The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit filed consolidated immigration cases on Jan. 14, 2026, involving two Venezuelan sisters challenging denials of their asylum applications against high-profile Trump administration officials.
The consolidated cases, numbered 25-20073 and 25-20101, name Maribel Sayegh de Kewayfati and Marlen Sayegh Agam de Maari as appellants. The sisters are appealing decisions from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
The defendants in both cases include Attorney General Pamela Bondi, who was recently confirmed to lead the Department of Justice under President Trump's second administration. Also named are Kristi Noem, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Angelica Alfonso-Royals, Acting Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and the Houston Asylum Office Director.
According to court documents filed by Circuit Judge Don R. Willett, the Venezuelan sisters are seeking review of "nonfinal denials of their affirmative-asylum applications." The appellants contend that their Temporary Protected Status prevents any current opportunity to renew their asylum claims in removal proceedings.
The timing of these cases coincides with the new Trump administration's immigration enforcement priorities. Attorney General Bondi and Secretary Noem have both indicated support for stricter immigration policies, making these cases potential early tests of the administration's approach to asylum and immigration relief.
Temporary Protected Status is a federal program that provides temporary relief from deportation and work authorization for individuals from designated countries facing ongoing armed conflict, environmental disasters, or other extraordinary circumstances. Venezuela has been designated for TPS due to the ongoing political and economic crisis in the country.
The sisters' legal argument appears to center on the interaction between TPS and the asylum process. They contend that holding TPS status creates procedural barriers to pursuing or renewing asylum claims through the removal process, potentially leaving them in legal limbo.
The Fifth Circuit panel reviewing the cases consists of Circuit Judges Jerry E. Smith, Don R. Willett, and Stuart Kyle Duncan. This composition includes judges appointed by different Republican presidents, potentially providing insight into how conservative-leaning courts may approach immigration cases during the Trump administration.
The cases originate from the Southern District of Texas, a jurisdiction that has frequently been at the center of immigration litigation. The district court cases were numbered 4:24-CV-180 and 4:23-CV-4129, indicating the sisters filed their initial complaints in different years.
The consolidation of these related cases suggests the Fifth Circuit recognized the similar legal issues presented by both sisters' situations. Consolidation typically occurs when cases involve common questions of law or fact that can be efficiently resolved together.
Venezuelan asylum seekers have faced particular challenges in recent years as the immigration system has struggled to process the large number of applications from individuals fleeing the political and economic turmoil in their home country. The country has experienced hyperinflation, political persecution, and widespread violence that have driven millions of Venezuelans to seek refuge in other countries.
The appeals court's review of these nonfinal orders indicates the sisters sought immediate appellate intervention rather than waiting for final district court rulings. Such interlocutory appeals are typically permitted only in limited circumstances when immediate review is necessary to prevent irreparable harm.
The involvement of the Houston Asylum Office Director as a defendant highlights the role of local immigration offices in implementing federal policy. Houston serves a large Venezuelan immigrant population, making decisions from this office particularly significant for the community.
The cases also name Angelica Alfonso-Royals as Acting Director of USCIS, reflecting the administrative transitions occurring as the new administration installs its immigration policy leadership. Acting directors often serve during transition periods while permanent appointees undergo the confirmation process.
The legal questions presented in these cases could have broader implications for other Venezuelan nationals holding TPS who may wish to pursue asylum claims. The Fifth Circuit's ruling could establish precedent affecting how immigration authorities handle similar cases across the circuit.
As these cases proceed, they will likely provide early indicators of how Trump administration immigration officials will approach asylum policy and the intersection of various forms of immigration relief. The outcome could influence both individual cases and broader policy implementation strategies.