BIA Precedent on Regulatory Definition of Attorney and Reinstatement Bar (Matter of Sarah J. M. Jones)

Validated finding · five-country-2010-20260922-v118-evidence-presentation-fix

CountryUnited States

Operative dateAugust 24, 2026

CategoryLegal status / removal adjudications / administrative procedures

Policy toolLegal interpretation

Affected groupLegal practitioners and representatives appearing before eoir and dhs

Policy effect

The Board of Immigration Appeals established binding nationwide precedent ruling that an individual who is eligible to practice law and in good standing in one jurisdiction fails to meet the regulatory definition of 'attorney' under 8 C.F.R. § 1001.1(f) if barred or otherwise restricted from practicing law in another jurisdiction. The Board further held that reinstatement is unwarranted where the practitioner engaged in unauthorized practice before Immigration Courts during a period of indefinite suspension. Phase scope: Nationwide binding precedent governing all EOIR and DHS proceedings

Conditions and exceptions

Validated condition or limit: The Board of Immigration Appeals established binding nationwide precedent ruling that an individual who is eligible to practice law and in good standing in one jurisdiction fails to meet the regulatory definition of 'attorney' under 8 C.F.R.; The Board further held that reinstatement is unwarranted where the practitioner engaged in unauthorized practice before Immigration Courts during a period of indefinite suspension.

Official source excerpt

Quoted verbatim from the official source below. Ellipses indicate omitted text.

(1) An individual who is eligible to practice law and is a member in good standing in one jurisdiction does not meet the regulatory definition of “attorney” if he or she is barred from or otherwise restricted in practicing law in another jurisdiction. (2) Reinstatement is unwarranted because, during the respondent’s indefinite suspension, she registered for and obtained an Executive Office for Immigration Review identification number and practiced before the Immigration Courts in several cases.

U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Board of Immigration AppealsMatter of Sarah J. M. JONES, 29 I&N Dec. 850 (BIA 2026), Interim Decision #4236Open official source

Retrieved from https://justice.gov/eoir/media/1458896/dl?inline=

Review method

Two separate automated exact-claim source reviews

Automated source validation is not independent human legal review. The finding should not be treated as legal advice. Record fcp6-e5f2fa90b923de86ee6e. Something wrong? Flag this record.

BIA Precedent on Regulatory Definition of Attorney and Reinstatement Bar (Matter of Sarah J. M. Jones)

Policy effect

Conditions and exceptions

Official source excerpt

Review method

Other United States changes operative in 2026