Federal Government Again Asks Miami Judge to Toss Lawsuit by Nearly 1,000 Cubans With I-220A Papers

The federal government has again asked a Miami federal judge to throw out a lawsuit brought by nearly 1,000 Cuban migrants who were released into the United States with Form I-220A and who argue they should be allowed to seek green cards under the Cuban Adjustment Act. The motion, filed Friday, Oct. 9, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, asks U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Becerra to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction and for failure to state a claim, according to the court docket. The plaintiffs' response is due Oct. 23.

The case, Bello-Rubio v. United States Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:25-cv-23665, has drawn close attention in South Florida's Cuban community because it tests a question that affects many recent arrivals: whether release on an I-220A counts as the kind of parole that opens the door to permanent residency. The suit lists about 992 plaintiffs, according to CiberCuba, which first reported the new filing. The judge has not ruled on the new motion, and the filing does not change anyone's immigration status.

What the I-220A dispute is about

The I-220A is an Order of Release on Recognizance, a document Immigration and Customs Enforcement has issued to migrants who were detained after crossing the border and then released while their immigration cases proceed. Many Cubans who entered through the U.S.-Mexico border in recent years received one.

Under the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966, a Cuban native or citizen can apply for a green card after one year of physical presence in the United States, but only if he or she was "inspected and admitted or paroled" into the country, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. The government's long-standing position has been that release on recognizance is not parole. The Board of Immigration Appeals adopted that view in a 2023 precedent decision, Matter of Cabrera-Fernandez, and immigration judges have relied on it to rule that I-220A holders are ineligible to adjust under the act.

The plaintiffs argue that they were detained as applicants for admission under a different section of immigration law, and that their release therefore amounted to parole, making them eligible to apply. The suit, first filed as a habeas corpus petition, also seeks class certification so that a ruling could reach people beyond the named plaintiffs, and an order under the All Writs Act that would protect the plaintiffs while the case is pending.

How the case got here

The docket shows a case that has moved slowly for more than a year, with the government losing two earlier bids to halt it. The key steps are below.

After the Sept. 10 hearing at the Wilkie D. Ferguson Jr. U.S. Courthouse in downtown Miami, Becerra issued a written order on Sept. 11 memorializing her denial of the first motion to dismiss. Cuban-American outlets covering the hearing stressed that the ruling kept the case alive but did not declare that an I-220A equals parole or grant residency to anyone.

The judge did not decide the two other major requests. She ordered the government to file additional briefing on class certification, addressing whether members of the proposed class can be identified and whether the court can grant class-wide relief under the Administrative Procedure Act. She also required more detail on the "other adequate remedies" the government says make the All Writs Act injunction unnecessary, and she put that motion on hold pending the briefing. A separate request for an expedited order to show cause was denied, with the judge noting that any plaintiff detained without bond while the case is pending can file an individual habeas petition.

Becerra also asked both sides to address whether the case should be consolidated with three related I-220A suits in the same court: Morejon v. Mullin, Echazabal-Verdecia v. Noem and Cabrera Mollinedo v. Secretary of Homeland Security.

The government's latest filings

The Oct. 9 motion targets the second amended complaint, challenging both the court's authority to hear the case and the legal sufficiency of the claims, according to the docket. The same day, government lawyers filed the supplemental briefs the judge had ordered. The class certification supplement attaches a declaration from the director of a government office identified on the docket as LESA, and the injunction supplement attaches a habeas grant as an exhibit, the docket shows. The full documents were not publicly available Monday.

The plaintiffs are represented by Mark Prada and Anthony Dominguez of the firm Prada Dominguez and by attorney Maitte Barrientos. Prada has said he expects further hearings on class certification and on protection from deportation for the plaintiffs, according to CiberCuba's coverage.

An appeals court opening

The legal ground shifted in February. On Feb. 23, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which covers Florida, Georgia and Alabama, vacated Board of Immigration Appeals decisions that had found two Cuban families ineligible for adjustment under the act because they were released on their own recognizance. In the unpublished opinion in Labrada-Hechavarria v. U.S. Attorney General, the court noted that the government had reversed its position in July 2025 and now agreed the families were detained under the section that applies to applicants for admission, the same argument the Miami plaintiffs make. The government still argued the families had merely benefited from a mistake by the Department of Homeland Security. The court sent both cases back to the board for further proceedings rather than deciding whether the families can adjust.

Those two appeals were the ones the government cited in October 2025 when it unsuccessfully asked Becerra to pause the Miami case.

Why it matters in Florida

South Florida is home to the largest Cuban community in the United States, and the number of Cubans holding I-220A papers has been estimated at roughly 500,000 nationwide in Spanish-language media reports. Without a path under the Cuban Adjustment Act, many face removal proceedings in immigration court, where they must pursue asylum or other relief. Their status has taken on new urgency this year as the Trump administration has stepped up immigration enforcement and pressure on the Cuban government.

A favorable class-wide ruling in Miami could, in theory, extend well beyond the 992 named plaintiffs, which is a central reason the government is contesting class certification. A dismissal would leave I-220A holders to fight their eligibility one case at a time before immigration judges and the appeals courts.

What's next

The plaintiffs must respond to the new motion to dismiss by Oct. 23, and they are also due to answer the government's supplemental briefs on class certification and the injunction. Becerra could then rule on the papers or schedule another hearing. She has yet to decide whether to certify a class, whether to grant interim protection to the plaintiffs, and whether to merge the case with the three related lawsuits. The transcript of the Sept. 10 hearing is scheduled to become publicly available through the court's electronic system on Dec. 21.