Center for Federal Accountability

Immigration court agency proposes Privacy Act exemptions for its fraud program records

The Executive Office for Immigration Review would exempt the records of its Fraud and Abuse Prevention Program, which cover complainants, witnesses, subjects of investigations, and EOIR staff or members of the public who report fraud, and are shared with law enforcement and disciplinary authorities, from the Privacy Act's access, amendment and disclosure-accounting provisions. Comments close November 16, 2026.

2026-10-16 · Executive Office for Immigration Review, Justice Department · Information · Docket CPCLO Order No. 014-2026

On October 15, 2026, the Justice Department's Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which conducts immigration court proceedings and appeals, proposed exempting a new system of records, Fraud and Abuse Prevention Program Records (JUSTICE/EOIR-006), from two provisions of the Privacy Act (91 FR 65512, FR Doc. 2026-21063, CPCLO Order No. 014-2026). Comments are due November 16, 2026. The proposal has no RIN, and regulations.gov lists it in the Department's temporary holding docket (DOJ_FRDOC_0001-0336), where no comments had been posted as of October 15, 2026. The notice creating the system of records was published in the same day's Federal Register; CFA could not read it for this article.

## What would change

The proposal would add paragraph (g) to 28 CFR 16.83, "Exemption of the Executive Office for Immigration Review System--limited access," and exempt the new system from two parts of the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a: (c)(3), giving a person the accounting of who received their records, and (d), a person's right to see and seek amendment of their records (91 FR 65514). The Department claims the exemptions under 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(2), which covers investigatory material compiled for law enforcement purposes.

The reason given is that access or an accounting "could inform the subject of the investigation of an actual or potential criminal, civil, or regulatory violation or the existence of that investigation," reveal the evidence obtained and "the identity of confidential sources, witnesses, and law enforcement personnel," and help a subject "avoid detection or apprehension" (91 FR 65514). The proposal limits the exemption: "To the extent that information in a record pertaining to an individual does not relate to official Federal investigations and/or law enforcement matters, the exemption does not apply," and EOIR may waive it where compliance would not interfere with enforcement (91 FR 65514-65515).

## How the program works

According to the proposal, the Fraud and Abuse Prevention Program sits in EOIR's Office of the General Counsel under a designated anti-fraud officer. It "investigates complaints of immigration fraud, immigration scams, and the unauthorized practice of immigration law within EOIR proceedings," refers complaints to law enforcement and disciplinary authorities, and trains staff and educates the public (91 FR 65513, citing 8 CFR 1003.0(f)(2)). It coordinates with investigators at the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security, and with EOIR's disciplinary counsel on fraud or abuse by attorneys and accredited representatives.

The records cover "complainants, witnesses, and subjects of investigations of alleged fraud and individuals (EOIR adjudicators or personnel, or members of the public) reporting or observing alleged fraud." The program refers complaints to "Federal, state, local, territorial, or tribal law enforcement and disciplinary authorities," and "When referring complaints, the Fraud Program will provide authorities with copies of records maintained in the system" (91 FR 65513). The Paperwork Reduction Act section adds that the system "may include copies of the official records of proceedings (ROPs) in immigration cases before EOIR," made up in part of EOIR and Homeland Security forms (91 FR 65514).

## CFA's observations

These are CFA's observations from the text, not findings about how the program is run.

The proposal claims fewer exemptions than two other recent Justice Department proposals. The Bureau of Justice Statistics proposal published the same day claims six provisions, including (e)(1), the requirement to keep only relevant and necessary information (91 FR 65512), and the Office of the Pardon Attorney's proposal of October 7, which CFA covered on October 8, claims (e)(1), (e)(2) and (e)(5) among others (91 FR 64128). EOIR claims only the accounting and access provisions.

The summary says the system "is exempt" from (c)(3) and (d) (91 FR 65512), but the same document says an agency that intends to exempt a system "must first issue a rulemaking" (91 FR 65513), which is what this proposal begins. The preamble also describes the exemption as covering "552a(c)(3) and (d) and (2)" (91 FR 65513); the regulation text lists only (c)(3) and (d), and the "(2)" is not explained.

The records cover the people who report fraud as well as those accused of it, and may include copies of a person's own immigration case record. The proposal does not say how a complainant could see the complaint they filed, or how a request for one's own case records held in this system would be handled. It leaves the line between investigative and non-investigative information to case-by-case application and EOIR's waiver.

The accounting exemption would reach the disclosures made through these referrals, so EOIR would not have to tell a person which Federal, state, local, territorial or tribal authority received their records. The routine uses that permit those referrals are set out in the companion notice, which CFA did not read.

The proposal does not mention a privacy impact assessment for the program's records.

## CFA's records on the Justice Department

CFA does not yet grade the Justice Department on its agency scoreboard. The government-wide grade is "Minor," with a composite score of 83.38 across 8 areas. CFA's system of records analysis counts 482 Justice Department notices in the Federal Register export as of the October 15, 2026 refresh, up from 480 in the previous refresh, ranking it 14th among agencies with 2.2 percent of all notices. CFA's privacy notice and assessment linkage report has crawled 261 Justice Department privacy impact assessment pages. CFA has not checked whether any of them covers this system.

## What to watch

Whether the final rule corrects the summary's statement that the system "is exempt" and the unexplained "(2)" in the preamble.

Whether the companion system of records notice's routine uses match the referrals the proposal describes, to Federal, state, local, territorial and tribal law enforcement and disciplinary authorities.

Whether EOIR explains how complainants, and people whose case records are copied into the system, can get access to information that does not relate to an investigation.

Whether EOIR publishes a privacy impact assessment for the Fraud and Abuse Prevention Program records.

## How to comment

Comments are due November 16, 2026, and must cite CPCLO Order No. 014-2026. They can be filed at regulations.gov (document DOJ_FRDOC_0001-0336) before midnight Eastern time that day; sent by email to the address given in the notice; faxed to 202-307-0693; or mailed to the United States Department of Justice, Office of Privacy and Civil Liberties, ATTN: Privacy Analyst, Two Constitution Square, 145 N St. NE, Suite 8W-300, Washington, DC 20530. Mailed comments are on time if postmarked by the closing date. Comments are posted publicly unless marked as the notice describes. Questions go to EOIR's Senior Component Official for Privacy, Office of the General Counsel, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2600, Falls Church, VA 22041.

Authorities