The Law Office of Anne Z. Sedki, LLC

What will become of Trump’s birth tourism and birthright citizenship orders?

2026-08-11T04:02:13Z

You’ve likely seen the headlines. After the Supreme Court struck down his broad 2025 order on birthright citizenship, President Trump has signed two new executive orders (EOs) in August 2026 targeting “birth tourism” and further limiting who qualifies as an American citizen by birth. If you’re feeling confused about what this means for you or your family, you’re not alone. Immigration law is complicated enough without sudden new policy changes. Let’s break down what happened, what’s in these new orders, who they affect, and what the likely outcome might be – all in plain language.

What did the Supreme Court decide on birthright citizenship?

Earlier this summer, the Supreme Court dealt a major blow to the Trump administration’s effort to end automatic citizenship for most babies born in the U.S. In Trump v. Barbara (June 30, 2026), the Court held by a 6-3 vote that the 14th Amendment’s Citizenship Clause still guarantees that nearly everyone born on U.S. soil is automatically a citizen. Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority that even children born to parents “unlawfully or temporarily present” in the country are “citizens at birth” if they are born here. In short, the Court said that the Constitution, not an executive order, defines who is a citizen at birth, and that definition remains broad. Practically speaking, this decision struck down Trump’s first executive order (EO 14160) from January 2025, which had tried to exclude many children of undocumented immigrants and temporary visa holders from automatic citizenship. The Court found that approach incompatible with the 14th Amendment. (Justice Kavanaugh concurred, not on constitutional grounds but by pointing out that existing federal law already grants birthright citizenship and Congress has not changed it.) The bottom line: the Supreme Court reaffirmed that birthright citizenship is broadly guaranteed by the Constitution. No executive order can simply undo that guarantee. As the ACLU’s deputy director put it right after the ruling: “The Supreme Court already decided this issue: Birthright citizenship is guaranteed by the Constitution. No additional executive order can change the meaning of the Constitution”. Still, the Court’s decision left the door slightly ajar for future action. It hinted that any exceptions to birthright citizenship must be historically recognized or enacted by Congress, not just claimed by the President. In fact, Chief Justice Roberts noted that some narrow categories (children of foreign diplomats or foreign occupying armies, for example) were historically excluded from birthright by longstanding practice. But Trump’s broad Jan 2025 order went well beyond those exceptions, and the Court said that was unconstitutional. This distinction is key for understanding Trump’s new orders.

Executive Order 1: Ending “Birth Tourism”

The first new order specifically targets “birth tourism.” That term refers to the practice of foreign nationals traveling to the U.S. (often on tourist visas) for the express purpose of giving birth here so their baby obtains U.S. citizenship. In this order, Trump directs the State and Homeland Security Departments to crack down on birth tourism. It defines birth tourism broadly (any foreign national entering on a temporary visa with the intent to give birth in the U.S.). The order authorizes regulations to prevent visas or entry for anyone planning to use a visit to have a baby here. For example, the Secretaries can deny or revoke visas, bar entry, and remove anyone found engaging in this scheme. The administration says this is meant to “promote the integrity” of U.S. immigration by ensuring tourist and other temporary visas are not used “to obtain permanent immigration benefits” like citizenship. Who could be affected? Pregnant women (or those acting on their behalf, such as surrogacy agencies) who try to secure tourist visas or other visitor visas specifically so their child can be born in the U.S. might find it much harder to get a visa or to enter now. In practice, applying for a tourist visa generally involves stating your purpose honestly. If a consular officer or CBP officer suspects your main reason is to give birth, they could now deny entry. Note that visa fraud is already illegal – lying about why you plan to travel is grounds to deny a visa. This order makes it explicit that targeting births is against policy. What the order doesn’t do is immediately deport any current pregnant visitor. It mostly aims to tighten future visa issuance and entry policies. If you arrived legally and truthfully stated your purpose, you won’t suddenly be kicked out. Instead, officials will get new guidance on screening for birth tourism. Trump and his aides (like Stephen Miller) claimed birth tourism is a big problem. For example, Miller said at the signing ceremony: “People come here pretending to be a tourist… but the real reason they’re here is to have a child, to make that child an automatic citizen”. The administration calls this exploitative. However, data suggest the practice is rare. One Migration Policy Institute study noted government data show fewer than 10,000 births in 2024 to mothers with foreign addresses – well under 1% of the 3.5 million babies born nationwide. Even Trump’s own people admit it’s hard to quantify. At any rate, this “birth tourism” order is much narrower than changing birthright law itself. It doesn’t attempt to rewrite the 14th Amendment – it just tries to stop people from abusing visa rules. But critics note that even today a visitor who lies about the purpose of her trip is in legal trouble. How much more this order will add beyond existing law is uncertain.

Executive Order 2: Further limiting birthright citizenship

The second order is the one that more directly touches on birthright citizenship again – but in a narrower way than Trump’s failed 2025 order. It enumerates specific new categories of U.S.-born children who allegedly would not get automatic citizenship. According to the order text (EO on “Protecting the Meaning and Value of Citizenship”), a child born in the U.S. would not be considered a citizen at birth if neither parent is a citizen and any of the following applies:

“Alien enemies”: If either parent is defined as an “alien enemy” (for example, a member of a designated terrorist organization).
Foreign government employees: If either parent is employed by a foreign government in an official capacity (beyond just diplomats, this includes consular staff and anyone with international-organization immunity).
Citizenship schemes: If either parent engaged in a commercial transaction (“purchased” citizenship), such as paying a surrogate or paying someone to give birth in the U.S..
Certain U.S. territories: If the child is born in a U.S. territory or waters where citizenship isn’t automatically given by federal law (currently only American Samoa qualifies).

Put simply, this EO tries to carve out exceptions. As one White House official explained, it expands the historical exceptions to birthright citizenship recognized by courts (which already exclude children of diplomats, hostile forces, etc.) to new categories like terrorists or government agents. It also attempts to bar “birth tourists” by targeting anyone who “engaged in a commercial transaction” to secure a birth in the U.S.. How does this differ from Trump’s 2025 order? The old order said: any child born here whose parents were both non-citizens (one unlawfully present, one not a citizen/LPR) would lose citizenship. The new order is far narrower: only children with certain disqualifying parents lose citizenship, not all children of undocumented or nonimmigrant visitors. For example, a baby born to a student visa holder who is not in one of the listed categories (not a diplomat or terrorist etc.) would still be a citizen under the new order. Who could be affected by this EO? In theory, it mainly targets children of people the U.S. regards as foreign adversaries or those cheating the system. For instance, if one parent were a member of a designated terrorist group or a high-ranking foreign government official, the baby might be excluded from citizenship. It also explicitly repeats that children of foreign diplomats remain excluded (that exception already exists in law). Public reports note the new order tries to close loopholes. Stephen Miller said it would cover “children of members of foreign terrorist organizations” and “large categories of people who lobby and act on behalf of foreign governments”, though critics question how that broad language would be applied. Importantly, if the parents don’t fit any of these categories, your child is unaffected. The vast majority of parents (tourists, visa students, workers, undocumented, refugees, etc.) aren’t in those specific groups. The administration claims this order is consistent with the Supreme Court case, that identified “extraterritorial fictions.” But legal experts point out that even in Barbara, the Court reaffirmed citizenship for nearly all U.S.-born children. So while Trump’s new order is narrower, many lawyers warn it likely still violates the 14th Amendment.

How will the new EOs affect families and children born in the U.S.?

For most immigrant families, these orders won’t change anything immediately. If your child is born on U.S. soil to parents not falling into the targeted categories, nothing about their citizenship status changes under current law. They will remain U.S. citizens by birth. If a baby is born and one of the parents is, say, a designated terrorist or certain foreign official, the new order says federal agencies should treat that child as not a citizen. That could mean USCIS would refuse to issue a birth certificate showing U.S. citizenship (or a Certificate of Citizenship) in that case. It could also mean the child might not be eligible for a U.S. passport or Social Security number as a citizen. Practically speaking, it would create the very outcome Trump criticized – potentially a U.S.-born child who is not considered an American. However, note that the order itself must still survive legal review to take effect, and for now it remains subject to challenge. Until (and unless) a court upholds it, the status quo stands: U.S. law (as interpreted in Barbara) still grants citizenship to virtually all U.S.-born children. What about pregnant visitors or citizens-in-waiting? A foreign national who truthfully said she was visiting to have a baby in 2026 and entered legally would not automatically get deported under these orders. But future visa applicants might face stricter scrutiny. For example, a visa applicant who is visibly pregnant might get extra questions about why she is traveling. The order gives consular officers more authority to deny visas if they suspect birth tourism. U.S. Customs and Border Protection could also turn back entry if officials think someone intended to give birth here. As for birth certificates: States have always issued certificates for all births in the U.S. They typically do not list parents’ immigration status or confer citizenship – they just record the birth. The Trump orders target federal recognition of citizenship, not state certificates. It’s unclear how state agencies might respond. For now, doctors and hospitals will continue to report births normally, and states will keep issuing certificates as they always do. If the new orders are blocked by courts, nothing changes on this front. Parents’ immigration status: If a parent lies on a visa application about their intent (for example, saying they are visiting family but actually planning to have a baby), that can be visa fraud under existing law. The new orders emphasize that such deception is unacceptable, but they don’t add any new criminal penalty. A parent could still face visa issues or removal if caught lying. However, simply giving birth here is not a crime. Even before these orders, nonimmigrants have come to the U.S. and had babies without losing their own status (so long as they didn’t break visa rules). In practical terms: Families should not panic or tear up their passports. Most children born here will remain U.S. citizens. The controversial part is that a few specific children might be treated as non-citizens if these orders hold. It’s reasonable to keep an eye on your own situation. If you’re an expectant mother traveling on a tourist or other temporary visa primarily to give birth in the U.S., be extra truthful on visa forms. You may want to consult an attorney before you travel, since that could raise questions under the new policy. For those who already have a child on the way or just born, continue to assert your rights under current law – a U.S.-born child is still entitled to citizenship until a court definitively says otherwise.

What Is the likely fate of Trump’s new birthright citizenship EOs?

We should be honest: both of these orders will face immediate legal challenges. Civil rights groups like the ACLU and NAACP will likely file suit, and Democratic-led states may do the same. The Supreme Court’s recent ruling suggests the courts are skeptical that a president can bypass the 14th Amendment with an order. ACLU’s Cody Wofsy put it bluntly: “No additional executive order can change the meaning of the Constitution… Any executive order that tries to rewrite birthright citizenship will meet the same fate as the last one.”. In other words, if these orders are challenged, many lawyers expect courts to invalidate them as unconstitutional, just as happened before. What exactly could happen in court? One scenario: a federal judge quickly issues an injunction blocking the orders from taking effect. That happened with the first Trump order – lower courts stopped it from ever going into effect while litigation played out. Given the language is different but the principle is similar, we’d likely see lawsuits arguing the 14th Amendment prohibits these exclusions. Can a president change birthright citizenship via executive action? Under our Constitution, the 14th Amendment explicitly says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States... are citizens.” That language leaves very little wiggle room. The Supreme Court’s majority said the Amendment covers anyone born here who is “subject to the jurisdiction” of the U.S. – essentially everyone except a few narrow categories (children of foreign diplomats, hostile invaders, etc.). The new orders create new categories that the Constitution doesn’t obviously exempt. Justice Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion (back in June) noted that Congress could theoretically change the law by amending statutes, but he agreed the President can’t do it alone. Courts seem likely to agree. Even if some judges might entertain narrow exceptions, any broad exclusion (especially targeting immigrants or tourists) will probably be struck down. If the courts do block them, then nothing actually changes except political talking points. Pregnant women and their babies will continue under the same rules as before. If, against expectations, some part of the orders survives, then a small number of children might have their citizenship questioned. For example, if in the unlikely event a court allowed the “alien enemy” clause to stand, a baby with terrorist parent could theoretically lose birthright. But note: such a child would also likely face many other legal obstacles (Congress often excludes criminals or terrorists from immigrating anyway). At this point, it’s important to remember: these orders are not law yet. They were just signed on one day; they still have to be implemented and defended in court. The history of this issue suggests the courts will not easily allow them. No one should assume these orders will actually strip away anyone’s citizenship without a final, definitive court ruling.

What should immigrants and families do now?

In light of all this, here’s a pragmatic guide on what to do (and not do):

Do not make major decisions based solely on the EOs. Your rights and status do not instantly change just because an order was signed. Until courts say otherwise, the law remains that almost all babies born here are U.S. citizens.
Stay informed and consult experts. This is a complicated, evolving situation. If your family is expecting a child or you are planning travel, stay updated through reliable sources (this blog, government websites, reputable news) and consider talking to an immigration attorney if you have concerns.
Be truthful on visa applications. If you are applying for a visa or entry, always honestly state the purpose of travel. Deception can get you in trouble no matter what the order says. If your travel purpose is genuinely tourism, business, or visiting family, make that clear. If your purpose is indeed to have a baby here, realize this may be flagged under the new rules.
Prepare documents. While nothing has changed on citizenship certainties yet, it’s always good practice to keep clear records (birth certificates, passports, visas, immigration documents) in order. If any official communications about your child’s citizenship come up, bring them to an attorney.
Monitor court developments. We expect lawsuits soon. If you have a case that could be affected (for example, a pending naturalization or citizenship interview involving a child born here), check with counsel about the timeline.
Seek legal advice when needed. If you have doubts or a unique situation (e.g., you think the EO might apply to you or your child), it’s wise to consult an immigration lawyer. The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki, with offices in New York and New Jersey, can provide guidance on how these orders interact with your case. We assist clients nationwide – even worldwide – and we’re watching these policies closely.

The bottom line: Keep calm and stay prepared. Right now, birthright citizenship is still protected by the Supreme Court’s ruling. The new orders are a setback in the courts but haven’t actually changed the law that applies to you yet. We’ll continue to follow developments and update our clients. In the meantime, focus on your family, keep your paperwork in order, and reach out if you have questions or need help navigating the uncertainty.

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki

Immigration policy changes can be stressful, especially when they happen suddenly and involve families and children. The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki helps individuals and families understand new immigration rules and plan their best path forward. Whether you have a child’s citizenship status in question, need guidance on travel or visa issues, or simply want to protect your family’s future, we’re here to help. With experienced immigration attorneys in New York and New Jersey – serving clients nationwide and internationally – our team can review your case and advise you on the steps to take now. If you have concerns about birthright citizenship, “birth tourism,” or any immigration matter, don’t go it alone. Contact our office to schedule a consultation. Let us help you understand your options and protect your rights.

USCIS’s new Asylum rule explained: How it affects applicants and pending cases

2026-08-04T08:38:40Z

Imagine you filed an asylum application months or years ago and have been anxiously waiting for your USCIS interview and decision. Now picture USCIS announcing a new policy that changes the process. In late July 2026, DHS introduced an interim final rule that allows USCIS to skip interviews and send some asylum cases straight to immigration court. The goal is to reduce the massive backlog of pending asylum applications. This blog breaks down what the rule does, who it affects, and what applicants need to know to prepare.

What is USCIS’s new rule for reducing the asylum backlog?

Effective immediately (the rule was published July 28, 2026), USCIS will amend its regulations to allow asylum officers to refer certain affirmative asylum cases to the immigration court without first conducting an asylum interview. In plain language, USCIS can now decide that an applicant’s case does not need an interview and send it directly to the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR). Before this change, USCIS generally scheduled an in-person interview for every affirmative asylum applicant (those who filed Form I-589 with USCIS) before making a decision or referring them to court. Now, that interview is not guaranteed. According to the Federal Register notice, USCIS will still offer interviews for cases that merit one (for example, strong claims needing testimonial evidence), but it explicitly can refer other cases to an Immigration Judge “based on the record and other relevant evidence”. The rule even removes USCIS’s old requirement to include a written credibility assessment in referral letters, simplifying the process. Why such a drastic change? The asylum backlog has exploded: by the end of FY2025 there were over 1.4 million affirmative asylum cases pending at USCIS. USCIS reports that asylum applicants could wait 7.3 years or longer for a final decision. DHS believes this system “may not be so significant” to require lengthy notice-and-comment delays, and so it issued this procedural rule with an immediate effective date. In short, the new rule is meant to speed up the asylum process by reallocating USCIS resources.

Who Is affected by the new rule?

The rule applies to affirmative asylum applicants– anyone who filed a Form I-589 at USCIS, whether individually or as part of a family. It affects both new applications (filed after July 28, 2026) and pending cases already in USCIS queues. In other words, if you have an asylum case waiting for USCIS decision, this rule kicks in right away. This policy does not apply to defensive asylum cases (asylum sought as a defense in removal proceedings) or to any other visas or statuses. It’s specifically targeted at the USCIS adjudication of asylum. There are no special carve-outs mentioned for minors or particular nationalities – any affirmative asylum case could potentially be referred without interview. However, the rule is not arbitrary. DHS expects officers to use it mainly for cases with clear legal bars or extremely weak claims. For example, applicants who filed later than one year after entry (violating the one-year filing deadline) are likely candidates for referral. DHS estimates about 132,000 future filings per year could be sent to court without interview because of filing bars, other legal bars, or purely discretionary denials. Already, roughly 31% of the 1.43 million pending asylum cases involve late filings (about 444,724 cases) and “may be impacted” by this rule. In practice, this means an applicant who filed late, has a serious criminal conviction, or otherwise lacks a prima facie case might be routed directly to removal proceedings. US citizens’ relatives and others not in asylum proceedings are unaffected. And if your case is already in Immigration Court (defensive asylum), it continues under the court’s rules. But if USCIS referred you without an interview, you’ll find yourself in court just as if USCIS had denied your claim.

How the new asylum process works

Here’s a step-by-step look at how affirmative asylum applications will be handled under the new policy:

File Your Asylum Application (Form I-589): You still start by submitting Form I-589 to USCIS (no changes here). If you’re applying for work authorization (EAD) 150 days after filing, remember other work permit rules are also changing, but that’s separate from the interview rule.
Initial USCIS Review: After USCIS receives your application, an asylum officer will review the file. Under the new rule, the officer checks if the case falls into a category that can be referred without an interview – for example, one-year bar, other ineligibility, or if on the facts there’s little to grant.
Referral vs. Interview:
- Referral Without Interview: If USCIS decides a case should go to immigration court, it will send you a notice (often called an NTA, Notice to Appear) referring the case to EOIR without holding a USCIS interview. Your case then moves to the immigration courts.
- Interview: If USCIS does not refer your case outright, they will schedule the usual asylum interview. This happens at a USCIS asylum office, just like before. After the interview, the officer can grant asylum or deny it (in which case a referral to EOIR follows as usual).
In Immigration Court: Once your case is in EOIR (either by USCIS referral or by USCIS denial after interview), you’ll get a court date. The immigration judge will consider your asylum claim (and any other relief) in a fully adversarial hearing. You can present new evidence and testimony there, but now the Department of Homeland Security will have an attorney opposing your claim.
Timeline Changes: In theory, skipping some USCIS interviews speeds things up. You may reach the court stage sooner than waiting years for a USCIS appointment. However, note that immigration courts also have long backlogs (averaging multiple years for a hearing). DHS argues this trade-off will still shorten total processing time, especially for strong claims that USCIS will prioritize.
Administrative Details: USCIS says they will still issue Requests for Evidence or opportunities to supplement your application when needed. If your case is pending and USCIS skips the interview, they might send an RFE first so you can add missing documents or address issues. In any case, you should keep your application as complete as possible from day one, since USCIS officers may rely solely on the filed materials if no interview is conducted.

Will the new rule really reduce the Asylum backlog?

The government’s rationale is that this rule will make the asylum system more efficient. Under the old process, every affirmative asylum case typically got a full interview, even when the outcome seemed obvious. USCIS observed that many interviews were effectively “duplicative” – for example, asylum seekers barred by law (late filers, aggravated felons, etc.) would still have been interviewed only to be referred for removal afterward. That wasted officer time and delayed resources that could go to potentially grantable cases. DHS argues that by letting officers skip the interview in clear-cut cases, the agency can prioritize its limited resources for cases that merit protection. The Federal Register summary states that eliminating automatic interviews for ineligible cases “may reduce the growth of the affirmative asylum backlog”. The expectation is that meritorious applicants will get decisions faster, and those who pose security or criminal concerns can be sent to court (and possibly detained or removed) more quickly. On paper, the rule could shorten wait times. For example, DHS estimates around 132,000 new asylum applicants per year could be referred without interview under these rules. In those cases, instead of waiting for a USCIS appointment many months away, the applicant goes straight to court where an immigration judge could resolve the case (either granting or ordering removal) faster. Over time, DHS believes this will “increase efficiency” and help stem the growth of the backlog. That said, it’s important to note a downside. If USCIS refers cases that should have been granted, applicants could face longer delays because they’ll go to court instead of having a USCIS interview. In FY2021 about 68% of asylum cases originally referred by USCIS to immigration court were ultimately granted asylum by judges. In other words, a large share of those referrals turned out to be valid asylum claims. Some critics worry that skipping the USCIS interview stage could push legitimate cases into a more adversarial process and keep deserving refugees in limbo even longer. Another concern is that the rule might simply shift the backlog from USCIS to the courts. Immigration judges already have years-long queues, and sending more cases their way might not, in reality, reduce total wait times. And due process advocates argue that each asylum seeker should have a fair chance to tell their story in a non-adversarial setting first. With this rule, that opportunity could vanish for some. In summary, DHS stands by this change as a necessary efficiency measure. But its effectiveness in practice will depend on how USCIS implements it (which cases get flagged for referral) and whether immigration courts can handle the increase. It’s possible the total time from application to final decision might still be long, even if the case moves into a different queue.

What does this mean for current and future Asylum applicants?

If you have already applied for asylum, your case is now under these new rules. USCIS may review your file and decide to refer it to the immigration court without ever setting an interview date. Keep in mind:

Stay Alert for Notices: Watch your mail and USCIS online account. If USCIS plans to skip your interview, they should send you a notice (likely a Notice to Appear in immigration court). Read any USCIS communication immediately and follow instructions or seek help if something is unclear.
Gather and Update Evidence: Because you might not get an interview, it’s more important than ever that your initial application be thorough. Submit as much supporting documentation as you can with your I-589. If you have additional evidence after filing, you can try to submit it or inform USCIS as soon as possible (the new rules suggest USCIS will allow RFEs or supplemental filings to give applicants a chance to present their case).
Prepare for Court: If your case is sent to EOIR, it will be treated as a defensive asylum case even though you filed affirmatively. This means you’ll go to immigration court with a hearing. You can still apply for asylum before the judge, but the government will be opposing you. Make sure you have an attorney or accredited representative to present your case, gather witnesses if needed, and understand the court process.
Maintain Legal Status: If you are in lawful status (like a student or worker) while waiting, ensure you keep that status current. If you are on a work permit based on asylum, note that USCIS has also changed asylum-based EAD rules (those changes mean new initial EADs might be paused in future). This blog isn’t about work permits, but you should be aware that the asylum EAD regulations are in flux.
New Applicants: If you haven’t filed yet but plan to, start as soon as you can. Be mindful of the one-year filing deadline and exceptions to it, since late filing will likely trigger a court referral under the new rule. When you do file, include all relevant evidence up front. And plan for the possibility that USCIS might not interview you; you may need to make your strongest case on paper.
Seek Legal advice: Given these changes, consulting an immigration attorney is more important than ever. A lawyer can help you determine whether your case is at risk of referral, assist in preparing a complete application package, and represent you in court if needed.

Frequently Asked Questions about the new USCIS Asylum rule

Does this change my pending asylum application?

Yes. If your asylum application is pending at USCIS, the agency will now process it under the new rule. USCIS can choose to refer it to immigration court without an interview. Continue to engage with USCIS normally (respond to RFEs, attend scheduled biometrics, etc.), but be prepared for the referral possibility.

Will I still receive an asylum interview?

It depends. USCIS will offer interviews when they decide one is needed. But they are no longer obligated to interview every applicant. If USCIS thinks your case has clear bars or doesn’t merit grant, they may skip the interview entirely.

Can my case be sent directly to immigration court?

Yes. Under the rule, certain cases will go straight to EOIR. If that happens, USCIS will issue a Notice to Appear in immigration court. Your asylum proceedings will then continue before an Immigration Judge.

Does the new rule increase my risk of removal?

Potentially. In immigration court, the government’s goal is to order removal unless you can convince the judge otherwise. Without a USCIS interview, you lose the advantage of the non-adversarial asylum office process. However, you still have full access to the asylum and withholding process in court. To minimize risk, make sure to apply for work authorization (if eligible) to lawfully stay in the U.S. while your case is pending, and attend every court hearing. Legal representation is crucial in court.

What should I do if I receive a notice from USCIS or immigration court?

Read it carefully and act quickly. If USCIS sends any request (like an RFE or interview notice), comply by the deadline. If you get an NTA from USCIS, you have to attend your immigration court hearing. In both cases, consider contacting an attorney immediately to make sure your rights are protected and your case is presented fully.

Should I speak with an immigration attorney?

Yes. Immigration law is complicated, and these new changes make it more confusing. An attorney (or accredited representative) can explain how the rule affects you, help you gather evidence, represent you in court, and ensure you meet all deadlines. The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki has experience with asylum cases and can help asylum applicants nationwide.

Final thoughts

The new USCIS rule is a major shift in asylum policy. It’s understandable to feel anxious if you have a case in limbo. The intention is to speed up the system, but it also means you may move from a USCIS interview to a court hearing sooner than expected. Stay organized: keep copies of all documents, respond to USCIS quickly, and don’t miss any deadlines. Every asylum case is different, so apply these changes to your situation with care. Remember that laws and rules can change, and the asylum process often has unexpected turns. This blog is for informational purposes and does not replace legal advice. If you have an asylum application pending or are considering applying, keep informed about updates, and do not hesitate to seek legal help to navigate this evolving process.

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki

At The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki, we understand how confusing and stressful immigration updates can be. Our firm, based in New York and New Jersey, serves clients nationwide and worldwide. If you or a loved one have an asylum application pending or need to file one, we are here to help. Our experienced immigration attorneys can review your case under the new rules, advise you on gathering strong evidence, and represent you before USCIS or the immigration court. Don’t go it alone. Reach out to us for a consultation to discuss your asylum options and next steps. Staying ahead of these changes and having the right guidance can make a big difference in your immigration journey. We’re here to give you the clear answers and support you need during this transition.

DHS Finalizes Elimination of “Duration of Status” for F, J, and I Visa Holders

2026-07-29T08:47:52Z

Table of Contents

DHS Finalizes Elimination of “Duration of Status” for F, J, and I Visa Holders

Key Takeaways

What Was the “Duration of Status” (D/S) Policy?

What Has DHS Changed and Why?

Who Is Affected by the New Rule?

What Does This Mean for Maintaining Lawful Status?

What Should Current Visa Holders Do Now?

What Could Happen If You Don’t Comply with the New Rule?

Frequently Asked Questions

Final Thoughts

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki

When F‑1 students, J‑1 exchange visitors, and I‑visa media representatives enter the U.S., they have long been admitted “for Duration of Status” (D/S), meaning they could stay as long as they maintained their visa conditions.

This summer, DHS announced a final rule replacing that open-ended system with fixed admission periods. The change takes effect September 15, 2026. Starting then, F, J, and I visa holders (and their dependents) will receive a specific “Admit Until Date” on their I‑94 records instead of D/S. They must track that date carefully and file for extensions if needed to avoid falling out of status.

Below, we break down the key points of this new rule, who it affects, and what it means for students and exchange visitors planning their stay in the U.S.

Key Takeaways

Effective date: The final rule was published July 17, 2026, and goes into effect on September 15, 2026 (60 days after publication).
End of D/S: “Duration of Status” is eliminated for F-1 students, J-1 exchange visitors/scholars, I-visa media reps, and their dependents. They will be admitted for a fixed period instead of open-ended status.
Fixed periods: For new F and J admissions, the period will match the program length up to a 4-year cap (measured from program start) plus applicable grace days. I‑visa media reps will get up to 240 days (90 days for PRC passport holders).
Grace period: The F-1 post-completion grace period is cut from 60 days to 30 days. Nonimmigrants must depart or change/extend status within that 30-day window.
Extensions required: If a student’s program lasts longer than their fixed admission, they must file a USCIS extension-of-stay (Form I-539) before the I‑94 expires. USCIS may collect fingerprints or other biometrics for these applications.
Unlawful presence: Once the fixed admission period ends, the individual will begin accruing unlawful presence if they remain in the U.S. without an approved extension. This could trigger three- or ten-year bars if departure is delayed beyond a short grace period.
Who’s affected: New and continuing F-1 and J-1 visa holders and their F-2/J-2 dependents, plus I-visa media reps, even if already in the U.S. under D/S. (The rule’s application may vary for those already here.)

These changes represent a major restructuring of the F, J, and I visa programs. Families and employers that sponsor these visa holders, as well as schools and program sponsors, should prepare now for the transition to fixed admission dates and formal extension applications.

What Was the “Duration of Status” (D/S) Policy?

Under the D/S system, most international students and exchange visitors did not have a specific end date on their I-94. Instead, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) admitted them for “Duration of Status.”

In practice, an F-1 or J-1 stayed valid as long as they followed the rules of their visa—staying enrolled full-time, making normal academic progress, and maintaining a valid SEVIS record. Their I-20 or DS-2019 could be extended by the school or sponsor if their program ran long, without having to apply to USCIS each time.

For over 30 years, this framework allowed a lot of flexibility. For example, an F-1 student who completed a degree and then did authorized OPT or STEM OPT could simply continue without refiling. A J-1 scholar extending their research could just extend their DS-2019 in SEVIS. The key point was that the visa holder’s status dictated how long they could stay, not a printed date.

What Has DHS Changed and Why?

DHS has finalized a rule titled “Establishing a Fixed Time Period of Admission and an Extension of Stay Procedure” that strikes all references to “duration of status” for F, J, and I nonimmigrants.

Effective September 15, 2026, most F-1 students, J-1 exchange visitors (including students, scholars, and J-1 trainees), and I-visa media representatives will get an Admit Until Date (AUD) on their I-94. In other words, the government will set a firm expiration date for their authorized stay, instead of tying it to program requirements.

Why the change? DHS determined that the D/S framework lacked sufficient oversight. Officials argued that fixed admission periods bring F, J, and I categories in line with other visas, making it clearer when status ends. The final rule aims to tighten compliance: once the fixed period expires, the individual must either extend or leave. Under the old system, some critics said students or visitors could stay indefinitely by extending I-20s or DS-2019s without timely filing. The new policy closes that loophole.

Admission periods: For newly arriving F and J visitors, DHS will generally grant up to four years of stay per admission (or the program length, if shorter). This four-year clock starts on the program start date (not the arrival date), and excludes the pre-arrival and post-completion grace days. If an F-1 student’s degree is longer than four years, they would need to extend their stay after four years. For I visa media reps, a fixed period of up to 240 days will be set (with PRC passport holders limited to 90 days). As before, extensions are available if someone needs more time.

Grace periods: The rule also shortens the usual F-1 post-completion grace period from 60 days to 30 days. That means an F-1 student who finishes coursework or authorized training must depart or take legal action within 30 days, not 60. These changes ensure that everyone’s allowed stay ends on a predictable date.

DHS did not change the basic eligibility rules for F-1 or J-1 status. The academic program lengths, course requirements, and visa qualifications stay the same. This is a change to admission mechanics and compliance, not to who can qualify for a visa.

Who Is Affected by the New Rule?

F‑1 Students (and F‑2 dependents): All new and continuing F‑1 nonimmigrant students will fall under the new fixed-period system starting September 15, 2026. This includes undergraduates, graduates, scholars in study programs, and their spouses/children (F-2).
J‑1 Exchange Visitors (and J‑2 dependents): All J‑1 categories are included – students, professors, researchers, short-term scholars, trainees, au pairs, etc., and their J-2 dependents. Existing J-1 participants in the U.S. at the effective date will also be subject to the new rules (for example, when re-entering or extending).
I‑Visa Media Representatives: Persons in I-visa status (journalists, reporters from foreign press) are included. Their admission periods will be capped (generally 240 days, 90 for PRC nationals) and they must extend if needed.

This rule applies nationwide, including students attending schools in New York, New Jersey, or any other state. The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki serves clients all across the country (NY and NJ included) on these issues.

In practice, almost anyone with an active F-1, J-1, or I visa (or dependent status) in the U.S. will need to pay attention. If you hold one of these visas, check how long your Form I-94 admission is, and anticipate that it may be shorter under the new rule than your academic program or training period. Schools and sponsors should warn affected students and visitors so they can plan ahead.

What Does This Mean for Maintaining Lawful Status?

Under D/S, students often worried only about maintaining enrollment or valid documentation. With fixed periods, the actual expiration date on your I-94 becomes critical. If you stay beyond that date without authorization, you will accrue unlawful presence (even if your I-20/DS-2019 is still valid). This can have serious consequences, such as triggering bans on re-entry.

A few key points:

Check your I-94 “Admit Until Date”: The stamp or electronic record will show a concrete end date. From that day forward, you are no longer authorized unless you have extended your stay. Keep it in your calendar!
Extensions of Stay (EOS): If your studies or exchange program last longer than the I-94 admits you, file Form I-539 before the end date. After the fixed period ends, you will have to use the new USCIS extension process. File early — USCIS processing can take months. Timely extension filings allow F-1 students to continue studying and J-1s to continue authorized activities while the case is pending.
Grace Period Compliance: Students no longer have 60 days automatically after program end. If your I-94 expires (plus the 30-day grace) and you do nothing, you fall out of status. Plan any moves or transitions (like OPT, another program, or travel) well in advance.
Change of Level or School: Under D/S, students often changed majors or schools via SEVIS updates. The new rule still allows transfers and changes of educational level within status, but USCIS may require you to also extend your I-94 if the new program would go beyond your current admission period. Consult your DSO about timing any SEVIS transfers.
Unlawful Presence: For the first time, F, J, and I nonimmigrants will start accruing unlawful presence as soon as their admission expires, unless they have an approved extension. In other categories, unlawful presence triggers bars at 180 days or one year overstay. The same will apply here. So if a student’s I-94 ends and they stay another 6 months without legal status, they could face a 3-year ban. Another 6 months beyond that would lead to a 10-year bar.

In short, monitor the clock. Under the new policy, falling out of status could happen quietly if you miss the date. It’s not enough that your school’s paperwork is valid — your admission date on the I-94 is what DHS will use.

What Should Current Visa Holders Do Now?

Review Your Records: Log into your CBP I-94 and note the “Admit Until Date” on your current record. Compare it to your SEVIS end date. If the I-94 is shorter than your program end date, start planning for an extension now.
Plan Extensions Early: If your program or training will run past the I-94 date (including any 30-day grace), file Form I-539 in advance. This gives USCIS time to process and keeps you in status while pending. Remember that biometrics (fingerprints/photos) may be required with this filing.
Talk to Your School or Sponsor: International offices at universities, and J-1 program sponsors, should be discussing these changes. Ask your school’s DSO or RA about how this affects your specific case. They may help adjust your I-20/DS-2019 end date or ensure you know the steps for extensions. Many campuses are already preparing guidance and webinars on the new rule.
Avoid Out-of-Status Travel: If you travel internationally after the rule’s effective date, you will return with a new fixed admission period on your I-94. Make sure to coordinate travel with your remaining authorized time; accidentally re-entering with an expired SEVIS record or without an extension approval can trigger unlawful presence immediately.
Use Grace Period Wisely: If you complete your program, remember you now have only 30 days to depart or change/extend status. Use that time to wrap up affairs or file any post-completion OPT, Academic Training, or new program petitions.
Seek Legal Advice: These rule changes are complex. If you have any doubt, consult an immigration attorney or a trusted advisor at your school. The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki (in New York/NJ) can answer questions about maintaining status under the new rule. Early planning can prevent a lot of headache down the road.

The bottom line: Be proactive. Don’t assume you can continue indefinitely without USCIS filings. Mark your calendar for any fixed dates, and act before they arrive.

What Could Happen If You Don’t Comply with the New Rule?

Failure to follow the new rules could have serious consequences:

Accrual of Unlawful Presence: Once your I-94 Admit Until Date passes, staying in the U.S. without an approved extension means you are unlawfully present. Even a few days of overstay can be risky. If you pass 180 days unlawfully present, then leave, you trigger a 3-year ban. If you reach 1 year of unlawful presence, you face a 10-year bar. This is stricter than the old system, which generally only counted unlawful presence after a status violation was formally found.
Violation of Status: Falling out of status can also mean losing eligibility for benefits. For instance, if you leave the U.S. after overstaying, you may be denied re-entry or future visas. Overstaying can even end OPT or Academic Training prematurely.
Problems with Future Applications: Any immigration application (like a future green card petition or nonimmigrant extension) will have to account for gaps in lawful status. A gap can require a waiver or lead to denial.
Removal (Deportation) Risks: In extreme cases, knowingly staying past your authorized date can expose you to removal proceedings. The new rule clarifies that no exception (like the old flexible D/S) applies after the date passes.

The rule change is meant to prevent “status abuse,” but it means everyone must be more diligent. The Department of Homeland Security has stressed that the fixed-period framework will eliminate confusion about when status expires. If you don’t take the new admission date seriously, you may inadvertently break the law.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Does this affect me if I’m already in the U.S. now? Yes. If you are in F, J, or I status on September 15, 2026, the new rule will apply to you. You won’t immediately get a new I-94 unless you depart and re-enter, but if you stay beyond your current admission or need to change/extend, the new rules kick in. For example, if you complete your program in 2027, you’ll have only a 30-day grace, not 60.
Q: Can I still extend my stay after program end? Yes, but you must use the new USCIS extension procedure (Form I-539) and submit before your fixed Admit Until Date expires. Don’t wait until the last minute – USCIS processing times can be long.
Q: What if my program is longer than 4 years? If your degree exceeds four years, DHS will not admit you beyond four years without intervention. You would need to file for an extension before hitting that cap to cover the remainder of your program.
Q: How are OPT and Academic Training handled? Authorized practical training is still allowed, but it must fit within your fixed admission. If your OPT would extend beyond the I-94 date, you must extend your stay first. Conversely, if you file a timely extension, you can continue working while the extension is pending. (If you depart the U.S., be careful: re-entry will cut your I-94 to match your I-20 end date plus 30-day grace.)
Q: Should I talk to an immigration lawyer?Absolutely. This rule is a major shift. Consulting an attorney can help you understand how it applies to your exact situation — especially if you have concerns about maintaining status or planning an international move. The attorneys at Anne Z. Sedki can assist nationwide (including New York and New Jersey) with immigration strategy under the new regulations.

Final Thoughts

The elimination of the “Duration of Status” policy is a landmark change. It means that F, J, and I visa holders can no longer be “self-managing” their admission period solely through school or sponsor paperwork. Instead, the U.S. government will set a firm end date that everyone must obey. This adds paperwork and deadlines, but also clarity: everyone will know exactly when their authorized stay expires.

Staying legal will require planning. The good news is that USCIS emphasizes that students and scholars may continue their studies, training, or work while an on-time extension is pending. But to take advantage of that, you must act early. Keep your I-20/DS-2019 updated, file any extensions on time, and watch the calendar.

These changes are intended to prevent surprise violations and ensure everyone’s status is properly authorized. It may feel daunting, but being informed is the first step.

Disclaimer: This blog is for informational purposes and not legal advice.

If you have questions about how the new fixed admission periods affect your particular case, or if you need help filing extensions or planning your next steps, consider reaching out.

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki

Navigating immigration policy changes is challenging. At The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki, our attorneys help students, scholars, and professionals understand new rules and stay in compliance.

We serve clients in New York, New Jersey, and nationwide. If you need guidance on maintaining status under the new Duration-of-Status rule — or any other visa or immigration issue — our team is here to help. Contact us today to schedule a consultation and protect your lawful stay.

The future may be complicated, but you don’t have to go it alone. We’re ready to work with you to keep your dreams on track in the U.S.

USCIS Rescinds 2022 Public Charge Rule and Restores a Stricter Policy

2026-07-21T07:13:41Z

Table of Contents

USCIS Rescinds 2022 Public Charge Rule and Restores a Stricter Policy

What is the new public charge rule from USCIS?

Key differences: 2022 rule vs. new rule

When does the new rule take effect?

Who is affected by the new public charge regulation?

Public charge factors USCIS will consider under the new rule

How the stricter public charge policy impacts green card applications

What applicants should do now to prepare

Final thoughts

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced a major change to the “public charge” rule. Under this new policy, immigration officers regain broader authority to consider an applicant’s use of government benefits when deciding green card and visa cases.

This could affect many would-be permanent residents, so it’s important to understand how the new public charge rule works. We’ll explain what the updated policy says, how it differs from the 2022 Biden-era rule, who it applies to, and what steps applicants should take to prepare.

What is the new public charge rule from USCIS?

The Department of Homeland Security (USCIS) has issued a final rule rescinding the 2022 public charge regulation. The 2022 rule – implemented under the Biden administration – had narrowly defined “public charge” to include mostly cash welfare and long-term institutional care. Under that rule, programs like SNAP (food stamps), Medicaid, and housing assistance generally could not be considered against an applicant. In contrast, the new policy restores the broader standard used during Trump’s first administration. DHS will again look at an immigrant’s entire situation on a case-by-case basis. In practical terms, USCIS officers will review all relevant facts of a case, not just the limited benefits covered in 2022. As CBS News explains, the final rule “restores the broader discretion USCIS had during the first Trump administration,” allowing officers to consider factors such as an applicant’s age, health, family status, assets, financial resources, education, skills and whether they have received means-tested government benefits. In other words, officers will make “individualized, fact-specific public charge inadmissibility determinations, based on the totality of the alien’s circumstances”. Put simply, the new rule represents a return to the old, broader approach. USCIS now has authority to ask about and weigh many kinds of benefits and conditions when deciding if someone might become a public charge.

Key differences: 2022 rule vs. new rule

Here are the main differences between the old (2022) policy and the new one:

Scope of benefits considered: Under the 2022 rule, officers were only supposed to count “public cash assistance for income maintenance” (like TANF or SSI) and long-term institutional care. Non-cash programs (Medicaid, SNAP, housing vouchers, etc.) were off-limits. The new rule removes those restrictions. Now, as the final rule makes clear, officers can consider “means-tested taxpayer-funded benefits” of any kind. In practice, this means food stamps, Medicaid, housing subsidies and similar programs can again factor into the analysis if received by an applicant.
Factors and standards: The 2022 rule strictly limited officers to a set list of factors (five statutory factors plus two additional ones) and did not allow any other evidence. By contrast, the new rule emphasizes a “totality of circumstances” approach. Officers will consider the statutory factors set by law (age, health, family status, financial resources, education/skills, and required affidavits of support) and any other relevant information about the applicant. For example, USCIS says officers will weigh things like current income or employment, assets (savings or property), debts, and the support of any sponsors, in addition to benefits received. The new rule does not list specific positive or negative factors; instead, it tells officers to use their “good judgment and discretion” in evaluating each case. This is a broad contrast to 2022, which rigidly “straitjacketed” the public charge test to only certain categories of benefits.
Definition of “public charge”: The 2022 rule effectively mirrored the old 1999 guidance: someone who relies primarily on government cash assistance or long-term institutional care. The new rule restores the policy that any alien who is likely “at any time” to become dependent on public resources can be found inadmissible. In practical terms, this expands the definition beyond just cash assistance. It means that frequent use of SNAP, Medicaid, housing aid or similar programs could be seen as a sign of dependence. As CBS News notes, officers will even look at whether the person has received any “means-tested” benefits and use that to judge their ability to support themselves.
Impact on forms and filings: USCIS has announced that the new policy will take effect on September 18, 2026. Importantly, USCIS will revise the Green Card application (Form I-485) to reflect the new rule. Any adjustment applications filed on the old form on or after that date will be rejected. In practice, there will be a short gap between publication and enforcement: USCIS says it won’t start applying the new framework for 60 days after it’s finalized, to give time to update forms and guidance.

In summary, the new public charge rule is much broader than the 2022 version. It lets USCIS consider more kinds of benefits and more aspects of each applicant’s situation.

When does the new rule take effect?

USCIS formally published the final rule on July 20, 2026. According to the agency, the policy will take effect on September 18, 2026. Practically speaking, USCIS will not immediately apply the new public charge framework on July 20. Instead, the rule specifies a 60-day delay so that USCIS can update its forms and procedures (this pushes the “operational” date into September). What does this mean for applications? Essentially:

Any green card applications postmarked or submitted on or after September 18, 2026 will be reviewed under the new rule. USCIS will require a new Form I-485. If you file on or after the effective date with the old form, USCIS will reject it.
For applications already filed before the new rule goes into effect, USCIS has said it will only count benefits received after the rule is operational (except for certain cash benefits). In other words, any SNAP, Medicaid, or housing aid the applicant used before the rule’s effective date generally will not count against them. (Cash welfare and long-term care benefits used before the effective date can still be reviewed, since those were always part of the test.)

In short, expect the new public charge framework to govern all filings dated mid-September 2026 and beyond. Applicants who file earlier in 2026 should be aware of these transition rules and ensure they use the correct forms.

Who is affected by the new public charge regulation?

The public charge ground of inadmissibility applies to most people applying for immigrant visas or green cards. That means:

Immigrant visas: Applicants abroad seeking permanent residency at a U.S. consulate will face the public charge test at their interview with a consular officer.
Adjustment of status applicants: People already in the U.S. applying to adjust status to permanent resident (Form I-485) will be screened by USCIS officers under this rule.

The rule does not apply to U.S. citizens, green card renewals, or naturalization (citizenship) applications. It also does not apply to most nonimmigrant visas (like tourist, student, or H-1B work visas) when they are first issued, although DHS has proposed a separate rule for nonimmigrant extension/changes of status. In practice, any permanent-residence applicant must consider this test. Some categories of immigrants are exempt from the public charge ground by law. Refugees and asylees, for example, are not subject to public charge. The same goes for certain humanitarian categories: Special Immigrant Juveniles (trafficked children), victims of human trafficking (T visas), victims of certain crimes (U visas), and self-petitioners under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) are exempt. (These exemptions will continue unchanged.) In short: if you are applying for a green card or immigrant visa and you are not in one of the exempt groups above, the public charge test will apply to your case under the new rule. This is the case whether you’re applying in New York, New Jersey, or anywhere else in the world.

Public charge factors USCIS will consider under the new rule

USCIS will evaluate each applicant’s case holistically. In general, immigration law requires officers to look at certain minimum factors (age, health, family status, financial resources/assets, and education/skills). Under the 2022 rule those were the only factors listed. With the new rule’s broad discretion, officers will still consider those statutory factors, and more. According to USCIS guidance, officers will examine all relevant evidence in the “totality of the circumstances.” Key considerations include:

Age and health. Younger and working-age applicants are generally favored, while very old or incapacitated applicants may raise concerns (unless they have strong support or assets). Chronic health problems may negatively impact self-sufficiency.
Family status. Single applicants with no dependents generally have a lower risk. Supporting a large family or having dependents can be seen as a higher risk if it strains finances.
Financial situation. Income from work or assets like savings, property or investments are positive. Lack of steady income or high debt can be negative. USCIS will examine pay stubs, tax returns, bank statements, etc.
Education and skills. Applicants with college degrees or professional skills (and especially a job offer in the U.S.) are viewed as more self-sufficient. Lower education or language barriers could hurt an applicant’s ability to support themselves.
Receipt of public benefits. Critically, officers will now look at any means-tested public benefit use by the applicant. This includes SNAP (food stamps), Medicaid or other government-paid health care, public housing or rental assistance, and similar programs. Under the new rule, use of these benefits can be counted as evidence of reliance on government support. (USCIS has clarified that benefits received solely by family members are not automatically the applicant’s benefits – but they may still be considered insofar as they affect the household’s finances.)
Affidavit of support and sponsorship. If you are a family- or employment-based applicant, your sponsor must typically submit Form I-864 (Affidavit of Support). A legally enforceable affidavit from a financially strong sponsor is a “heavily weighted positive factor” that can offset other negative factors. Conversely, a missing or insufficient sponsor could be a negative.

USCIS instructs officers to weigh positive and negative factors together. No single factor automatically results in denial. An applicant “must at least demonstrate the ability to support [themselves]” and not become primarily dependent on aid. The new rule simply gives officers wider range to consider things. As the rule notes, under this broader review “officers will more accurately assess an alien’s likelihood at any time of becoming a public charge”.

How the stricter public charge policy impacts green card applications

In practice, this tougher public charge test means that some applicants who previously would have had no problem may now face extra scrutiny. Any green card seeker who has recently used means-tested public benefits may be more closely examined. Immigration attorneys anticipate more Requests for Evidence (RFEs) on the topic of financial responsibility. Applicants may be asked to provide updated job letters, tax returns, bank statements and sponsor affidavits to prove they are self-sufficient. It’s important to put this in context, though. During the period of 2020–2024, formal public-charge denials were extremely rare. DHS reported only 41 to 95 denial decisions per year on adjustment applications. Even under the Trump-era public charge rule (2019–2020), very few cases were ultimately denied; most applications with benefit use were eventually approved once applicants posted a bond or provided more documentation. That said, the new policy could deter some immigrants from using benefits, even those they qualify for. Experts worry that qualified families may fear accessing food, health, or housing assistance, concerned it might jeopardize their case. The Biden administration’s 2022 rule explicitly sought to avoid such “chilling effects,” but the Trump administration argues the stricter rule is needed to protect taxpayer resources. Time will tell how USCIS implements these changes in the field. For now, applicants should be prepared for a more thorough financial review. If you are using any public benefits, recognize that those benefits could factor into your green card case. However, recall that the law still requires a case-by-case decision. Citizenship attorneys often point out that if you can demonstrate steady work, income, and family or sponsor support, the outcome can still be favorable. The new rule does not ban immigrants from getting a green card – it just raises the bar for demonstrating self-sufficiency.

What applicants should do now to prepare

If you are planning to apply for a green card or immigrant visa in the coming months, here are some steps to consider:

Gather evidence of self-sufficiency. Collect pay stubs, tax returns, bank statements, and any documentation of savings or property. An updated letter from your employer describing your income and position can help. If you have assets (like a car, home equity or investments), make a list. These show that you have the means to support yourself.
Secure a strong sponsor if required. If your category requires an Affidavit of Support (Form I-864), make sure your sponsor meets the income requirements. A sponsor with a high income or substantial assets can help outweigh concerns about your finances. Verify that the affidavit is complete and properly signed, and gather supporting documents (IRS transcripts, W-2s, etc.) for your sponsor.
Review your benefit use. Be aware of any current benefits you’re receiving. While the new rule allows these to be considered, the law also considers when the benefits were used. If you applied for a green card before Sept 18, 2026, USCIS will only look at benefits received after that date (except for cash welfare). If possible, delay or limit new means-tested benefit enrollment until after your green card case is decided.
Stay informed and use the right forms.Watch for USCIS updates. By September 2026, the agency will release a new I-485 form that reflects the rule change. Do not file with an old form after the rule’s effective date or USCIS will reject your application. Also check for any new policy guidance or instructions from USCIS or the Department of State about public charge.
Consult an immigration attorney. Given the complexity and the high stakes, it’s wise to seek legal advice. An experienced attorney (for example, in our Garden City, NY or New Jersey office) can review your case specifics, help prepare strong evidence, and flag any issues before you file. Every applicant’s situation is different, and professional guidance can make a big difference in how you address the public charge test.

Remember: changes in the rule do not mean you are automatically in trouble. Many applicants who use certain benefits can still qualify for green cards, especially if they have other strong factors. The key is to proactively address any concerns and present a complete picture of your situation.

Final thoughts

The new public charge rule marks a significant shift in U.S. immigration policy. It underscores a philosophy that immigrants should prove they will be self-supporting. For many immigrants and families, this may feel daunting. But it is important to stay calm and prepared. USCIS still evaluates each case individually. Having a well-documented, realistic application goes a long way. If you or your family are applying for a green card, don’t panic over this rule change. Instead, use it as an opportunity to double-check your application package, gather strong supporting evidence, and clarify any areas of concern in advance. And remember that hardships like unemployment or illness are understood — the test is about likelihood and support, not penalizing people for past events beyond their control. We also want to emphasize that this blog is for informational purposes and does not replace legal advice. Immigration law is always evolving, and each person’s situation is unique. If you have questions about how the new public charge policy affects your case, or if you’re preparing a green card application, it’s best to talk to a qualified immigration attorney.

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki

At The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki, our team of experienced immigration lawyers is here to help you navigate these changes. Based in New York and New Jersey (we serve clients nationwide and worldwide), we have helped thousands of families and individuals through complex immigration processes. We understand how stressful this new public charge policy can be, and we can guide you on how to document your case effectively. If you’re concerned about the public charge rule or any other immigration issue, reach out for a personalized consultation. Whether it’s answering your questions, reviewing your financial documents, or representing you in an adjustment or visa interview, we can provide the support you need. The path to a green card may have gotten a little more complicated, but you don’t have to walk it alone. Contact The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki today, and let us help you build the strongest possible application under the new rules.

USCIS further extends TPS work permits for Haiti, Syria & others

2026-07-15T03:57:07Z

Not long ago, we told you that Haiti’s and Syria’s TPS beneficiaries got an extra two weeks of work authorization through July 10, 2026. We have new news: USCIS has again extended those deadlines—and added several other countries—while litigation continues. Think of it as another short reprieve in a marathon court fight. This update means many TPS holders can breathe a bit easier for now. Let’s dive into what’s changed and what it means for affected workers and employers.

What’s the new TPS EAD extension?

USCIS just announced that for certain TPS holders, Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) will now remain valid beyond July 10. Specifically, DHS and USCIS have set new expiration dates per the ongoing court orders. Nationals of Haiti, Syria, Burma (Myanmar), Somalia, Yemen, Ethiopia, and South Sudan get extra time.

Haiti TPS EADs are now valid through July 24, 2026.
TPS EADs for Burma, Somalia, Yemen, Syria, Ethiopia, and South Sudan are now valid through July 17, 2026.

In practical terms, if you have a valid TPS-based work permit from one of those countries, USCIS has automatically extended it until the dates above. Employers should treat those EADs as valid through July 17 or July 24 (see below) despite what the card says.

Which countries are included?

The automatic extension covers TPS holders from the following designated countries:

Haiti
Syria
Burma (Myanmar)
Somalia
Yemen
Ethiopia
South Sudan

These match the jurisdictions where federal courts have kept injunctions in place after the Supreme Court’s decision on June 25, 2026 (Mullin v. Doe). Because the TPS termination plans for these countries are still being litigated, DHS gave another brief extension while the courts continue to sort it out. (Notably, other TPS countries – like El Salvador, Honduras, Nepal, Nicaragua, etc. – are not part of this update, since those designations are ongoing with separate timelines.)

What’s the new expiration date?

Every extended EAD now has one of two new “valid through” dates:

July 17, 2026 – for TPS work permits from Burma, Somalia, South Sudan, Syria, Yemen, and Ethiopia.
July 24, 2026 – for TPS work permits from Haiti.

The July 17 date applies uniformly to all listed expiration dates for those six countries, and July 24 for Haiti. (USCIS guidance tells employers to use those dates on Form I-9 and E-Verify for all these beneficiaries.) Importantly, those dates are not final. They’re placeholders while the lower courts keep hearing the cases. USCIS has described them as “limited relief” until the courts act further. We could see the dates change again, or the programs wind down – so stay tuned.

Who qualifies for the extended work authorization?

The extension applies to anyone who: (1) currently has TPS for one of the above countries and (2) holds a valid TPS-based EAD that would have expired on or before the new dates. In practice, that means:

Your TPS nationality is Haiti, Syria, Burma (Myanmar), Somalia, Yemen, Ethiopia, or South Sudan; and
You already had a TPS EAD issued under category A-12 (initial TPS grant) or C-19 (renewal) for one of those countries; and
That EAD’s original expiration date fell in the window covered by these orders (for example, an EAD dated Feb. 3, 2026, for Haiti, or Sept. 30, 2025, for Syria).

If all of the above are true, USCIS has automatically extended your work authorization through the new date. You do not need to file a new I-765 renewal just because of this extension.

How can I check if my EAD is extended?

You should consult the country-specific TPS pages on the USCIS website, or official updates on I-9 Central and E-Verify. USCIS posted alerts for each country (Haiti, Syria, etc.) on July 10, 2026. Those alerts list exactly which EAD expiration dates are extended and what to enter on the I-9 form. For example, one USCIS notice instructs employers that for TPS holders from Burma, Ethiopia, Somalia, South Sudan, Syria, and Yemen:

In Section 1 of Form I-9, write “as per court order” under document expiration;
In Section 2, put July 17, 2026 with a note like “TPS EAD extension”.

For Haiti, the instruction is the same except you put July 24, 2026 in Section 2. If your employer uses E-Verify, use those same dates in the E-Verify case. If your EAD’s country and dates match those USCIS lists, that’s how you know it was covered by the extension. If you’re unsure, you can also check with USCIS customer service, an immigration attorney, or an authorized representative.

Next steps for TPS holders (and employers)

Even with this extension, uncertainty remains. Here are some practical points:

Keep using your EAD. If your current EAD is extended, you can legally continue working through the new date (July 17 or 24). Employers should accept it for Form I-9 and should not terminate employment because of the old printed date.
Stay informed. This is a moving target. The lower courts may issue rulings soon. USCIS could set yet another extension, or (worst case) end TPS if the injunctions lift. Watch the USCIS website and trusted sources for updates.
Prepare for contingencies. Think about your long-term plans. If TPS ends, you’ll need another immigration status to stay employed in the U.S. You might explore other visa options (like family-based petitions or work visas), asylum or special visas if eligible, or apply for a green card if possible. Planning ahead can save headaches later.
Employers should verify carefully.Employers can follow USCIS’s guidance: keep a record of the Form I-9 or E-Verify page showing the extended date and court order note. Avoid forcing employees off payroll unless and until the official guidance changes.
Consult an attorney if needed. Given the fast pace of changes, having legal advice can be a big help. Lawyers can assess your specific situation (or that of your employees) and suggest what actions to take next.

Remember, TPS itself remains in effect for these countries until the courts finally resolve the termination cases. This extension simply pushes out the work permit expiration a bit.

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki — Here to help

If you or someone you know is a TPS beneficiary from Haiti, Syria, or any of the affected countries and you have questions about your work permit or legal status, we’re here for you. Our experienced immigration attorneys in New York and New Jersey stay on top of these developments every day. Navigating TPS and its deadlines can be confusing, especially when the rules change quickly. The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki has helped countless individuals and families through TPS-related challenges and other immigration issues. Whether it’s understanding the latest USCIS notices or exploring alternatives if TPS ends, we can guide you step by step. Contact us today for a consultation to discuss your case. We can review your status, explain how this extension impacts you, and outline your options moving forward. Our goal is to give you clarity and confidence — not just today, but for the future of your case. Stay safe, stay informed, and remember you’re not alone in this process. We’ll continue monitoring all TPS updates closely, and we’ll keep you updated as soon as there’s more news.

USCIS Extends Validity of TPS EADs for Haiti and Syria

2026-07-07T06:56:38Z

USCIS has just announced a brief extension of work permits (EADs) for Haitians and Syrians holding Temporary Protected Status. Any TPS-based EAD for Haiti or Syria that was set to expire will now remain valid through July 10, 2026. This comes on the heels of the Supreme Court’s June 25, 2026 decision in Mullin v. Doe, which allowed the government to go ahead with plans to terminate TPS for Haiti and Syria. Until the courts fully sort out the litigation, USCIS is treating Haitian and Syrian TPS beneficiaries’ existing employment authorization as extended to that July 10 date.

Background to this extension

Originally, DHS had slated Haiti’s TPS to end on February 3, 2026 and Syria’s on November 21, 2025. Both termination plans were immediately challenged in court. In early February 2026 a U.S. District Judge in Washington, D.C., issued a stay blocking Haiti’s termination, which meant Haitian TPS holders kept living and working lawfully past the February cutoff. Similarly, in November 2025 a New York court postponed the termination of Syria’s TPS, delaying what would have been the Nov. 21, 2025 deadline. Both lawsuits eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which on June 25, 2026 held that TPS terminations are largely not subject to judicial review and lifted the stays. In Mullin v. Doe, a 6–3 majority affirmed that courts cannot enjoin DHS’s decision to end a TPS designation, even on constitutional grounds. In practice, that means the prior court orders that had paused the TPS terminations no longer block DHS from moving forward.

Why USCIS is extending TPS work permits

Because the litigation is still pending, USCIS has effectively told employers and beneficiaries that the TPS holders get a “brief reprieve.” In a July 1, 2026 USCIS notice, the agency explained that it had been using a generic July 1, 2026 expiration on TPS EADs (“placeholder” dates) while litigation was unresolved. Now, USCIS has deleted the old placeholder date and set July 10, 2026 as the new EAD expiration date for all current TPS-based work permits for Haiti and Syria. In other words, until July 10th, employers should treat those EADs as valid. The official guidance stresses that this is limited relief pending the outcome of the court cases. USCIS has reminded everyone to “check the USCIS TPS Haiti (or Syria) webpage regularly for updates,” since the July 10 date could change if judges act. For now, however, the beneficiaries’ work permits have been extended by rule of court.

When do TPS designations and work authorization expire?

As of the July 1 notice, the EADs are now valid through July 10, 2026. That is not a final, permanent expiration – it’s a placeholder extension. If the courts ultimately side with DHS on ending TPS, USCIS could allow the EADs to expire on that date (or set another one). If a court restores the stays or vacates DHS’s termination decisions, the EADs could be extended further. For the moment, no Haitian or Syrian TPS EAD will expire before July 10, 2026. The July 10 date is reflected in USCIS guidance and in I-9/E-Verify instructions. USCIS has advised employees and employers that “July 10, 2026”should be entered as the expiration date on Form I-9 and in E-Verify. (The employee may write “as per court order” or similar wording in Section 1.) Until that date, Syrian and Haitian TPS recipients continue to enjoy protected status and lawful work authorization.

Which TPS EAD categories are affected by the extension?

The USCIS extension covers the TPS work permits (Form I-766) themselves. In practical terms, this means:

For Haiti: Any Haitian TPS beneficiary holding an EAD (Form I-766) with category code A-12 or C-19 now has that EAD valid through July 10, 2026. These are the codes used for Haiti’s original and redesignated TPS.
For Syria: Similarly, Syrian TPS EADs (which also bear the TPS category A-12, and sometimes C-19 if applicable) are treated as valid through July 10, 2026.

In short, if your EAD card says it’s for TPS Haiti or TPS Syria (with the usual category codes), you’re covered by this extension. USCIS has instructed that “TPS Haiti beneficiaries will keep their status and employment authorization” and any valid EAD they hold is extended. The same logic applies to Syria’s TPS beneficiaries.

What the TPS extension means

The upshot of this extension is straightforward: Haitian and Syrian TPS holders can keep working through at least July 10, 2026. There is no gap in work authorization until that date. All other benefits of TPS – like being protected from removal and eligible for certain government benefits – remain in place for now (the Supreme Court did not cancel TPS immediately, it only refused to block its termination). For employees, this means:

You do not need a new EAD or re-verification yet. Your current EAD is still valid.
You can remain legally employed, receive paychecks, and use that EAD for I-9 verification up to July 10, 2026.
Make sure to keep your TPS application and EAD documentation in order and respond promptly if USCIS or DHS sends any notices.

For employers, USCIS’s I-9 guidance tells you to treat these extensions like a court-ordered continued authorization. Specifically:

In Section 2 of Form I-9, record “07/10/2026” as the new expiration date for the EAD.
In Section 1 or the Additional Information field, you can note “TPS EAD extended per July 1, 2026 USCIS guidance.” This shows that you are following the temporary rules.
For E-Verify (in the states that use it), enter the expiration date as 07/10/2026. The system will accept it as valid.
Do not terminate an employee just because their original EAD date passed – under this guidance their work permit is still valid. Continue to pay TPS workers and provide benefits as usual.

In effect, USCIS has told employers that Haitian and Syrian TPS workers “remain employment-authorized” while this litigation plays out. Think of the extension as giving everyone time to plan for whatever comes after July 10. Until then, these employees are legal, and no new I-9 paperwork is needed beyond the date change. Employers should still be ready for any further updates – but the key takeaway is that no one loses their work authorization before the new July 10, 2026 date.

Employer Checklist

Task	Action Item
Verify EAD Status	Check TPS employees’ EAD cards. If they have TPS category codes (A-12/C-19) and were expiring on 7/1/2026, treat them as valid through 7/10/2026.
Update I-9 Records	In Form I-9 Section 2, write “7/10/2026” as the EAD expiration date. In the Additional Info, note the USCIS extension guidance.
E-Verify Entry	When creating or updating an E-Verify case, input 07/10/2026 as the expiration date as instructed.
Retain Documentation	Keep a copy of the USCIS TPS extension notice or save links to it. Attach it or make a note in the employee’s I-9 files.
Monitor Updates	Continue watching for court rulings or USCIS announcements. If the July 10 date changes, update records accordingly.

What happens next?

This July 10 extension is not the end of the story, just the latest development. In the coming weeks and months, the lower courts will respond to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Possible scenarios include:

No change: The lawsuits might remain open and no court modifies the hold; DHS might finalize termination notices with later effective dates. In that case, TPS status (and work authorization) could indeed end around or after July 10. Beneficiaries should be prepared for that possibility.
Further litigation: Plaintiffs could seek rehearing or pursue remaining constitutional claims. Any new court orders could prolong the EAD validity again.
Policy changes: If the Administration decides to legislatively or administratively save TPS again (through extensions, new designations, or special rules), TPS beneficiaries might get longer protection.

For now, we recommend all Haitian and Syrian TPS holders use this extra time to explore alternative options. For example, they might: apply for asylum, seek family-based or employment-based visas, apply for green cards if eligible, or pursue any other immigration benefits that could provide a more permanent status. They should also gather any documentation (marriage certificates, job offers, etc.) that might support such alternative filings. Nearing July 10, one should be ready to act quickly if TPS is lifted. If EADs expire on that date, TPS holders who cannot change status would lose work authorization and could become removable. USCIS often allows a grace period or voluntary departure period after TPS termination (typically 6 or 12 months), but do not count on more time without a court order or new policy. Stay in close touch with immigration counsel.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Is my TPS still valid after this extension? A: Legally, your TPS status remains in place for now. USCIS explicitly said Haitian (and Syrian) TPS beneficiaries “keep their status and employment authorization” for the time being. The extension means you should continue to have TPS benefits (work authorization, safety from deportation, etc.) at least through July 10, 2026.
Q: My EAD card expired before July 10—can I still work? A: If your EAD had an expiration earlier than July 10, 2026, and it falls under the Haitian or Syrian TPS categories (A12/C19), then yes, USCIS treats it as valid through July 10. The government’s guidance is effectively that no covered TPS EAD is invalidated before July 10.
Q: What should my employer put on my Form I-9? A: Employers should enter 07/10/2026 as your EAD expiration date on Form I-9 (or E-Verify). The employee can write “as per court order” or similar language if needed. This reflects the USCIS guidance that the EAD is extended.
Q: Will the courts change the extension date? A: Possibly. The July 10 date is what DHS/USCIS has chosen for now, but it depends on the ongoing litigation. If a court reinstates a stay or if DHS voluntarily extends protections again, USCIS could push the date further. Likewise, if the lower courts allow termination to go forward immediately, USCIS could say that July 10 is final. Keep an eye on official announcements.
Q: What should I do in the meantime? A:Continue working and living as you have been. Use this time to check other immigration paths (asylum applications, family petitions, etc.) and prepare for the possibility that TPS may end. Contact a qualified immigration attorney if you have specific questions – for example, whether you might qualify for a visa, green card, or asylum.

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki, with offices in New York and New Jersey, help immigrants navigate complex immigration issues, including TPS and asylum cases. If you have TPS (from Haiti, Syria, or elsewhere) and need legal advice, our experienced attorneys can review your situation and discuss options. We understand these fast-changing developments and can help you prepare. To discuss your case or schedule a consultation, please contact our team – our New York and New Jersey offices are here to assist you through this process.

Can You Lose U.S. Citizenship After Naturalization? What You Need to Know

2026-06-23T07:19:30Z

Recent news reports have highlighted a new push by the Justice Department under the Trump administration to strip citizenship from naturalized Americans. Officials have announced plans to file hundreds of denaturalization cases against people accused of fraud or concealed crimes in their immigration history. This has raised alarm among immigrants: can your hard-won U.S. citizenship be taken away? The short answer is yes, but only under very specific legal circumstances. This article explains when and how citizenship can be revoked after naturalization, and what protections naturalized citizens have.

Can a Naturalized U.S. Citizen Lose Citizenship?

Yes, but only if the government successfully proves that the naturalization was unlawfully obtained. The key statute is 8 U.S.C. §1451(a), which says citizenship can be revoked (and the certificate canceled) if it was “illegally procured” or procured by “concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation”. In plain terms, this means the government must show you lied or hid something important on your citizenship application (or committed some disqualifying act) in a way that directly led to your approval. By contrast, simply being a criminal or paying taxes does not affect citizenship. In fact, experts note that the law sets a very high bar for denaturalization. The courts have explained that citizenship is a “precious” right, so any doubt is resolved in favor of the citizen. It’s important to distinguish denaturalization from losing citizenship by choice. A person can voluntarily give up citizenship (for example, by formally renouncing it at a U.S. consulate), but that’s a separate, intentional process under 8 U.S.C. §1481, not what we’re discussing here. We’re focused on involuntary loss – the government stripping someone of citizenship. The only way to lose naturalized citizenship is through an official process called denaturalization – essentially undoing the naturalization order. Unlike a criminal proceeding, it is a civil action brought by the government.

Reasons U.S. Citizenship Can Be Revoked

The law and court decisions list only a few narrow grounds. In summary, citizenship can be revoked if you fraudulently obtained it, meaning:

Fraud or Willful Misrepresentation on the Application. This is the most common ground. It means you lied about something material when applying for naturalization. For example, claiming you have no criminal record when you do, lying about your marital status, or submitting fake documents. Even omissions can count if they were intentional. Under immigration law, failing to disclose an arrest or criminal conviction can be considered concealment of a material fact. The courts have held that if the lie or omission had a “natural tendency” to mislead officials, it is material. The government must also show that the fraud was what “procured” your citizenship – in other words, that without the lie you would not have been eligible at that time. (If you truly were eligible despite an innocent mistake, you may have a defense against denaturalization.)
Concealment of Material Facts (Intentional). This overlaps with the above but emphasizes hiding information. For example, if you were convicted of a crime before naturalization but deliberately failed to mention it on your application or during the interview, that can be a basis for denaturalization. Immigration law treats someone who “conceals” such facts as having illegally procured citizenship. Again, the omission must be willful and about something material to eligibility.
Procurement Through Fraudulent Marriage or Documents. If your citizenship was obtained as a result of a sham marriage or fraudulent immigration paperwork, that is inherently fraudulent. For instance, if you only got permanent residency or citizenship because of a fake marriage, the government can challenge that entire process as fraud. (This would generally fall under the fraud/misrepresentation category.)
Criminal Convictions Tied to Citizenship Fraud. Separate from the civil process, there is a criminal law (8 U.S.C. §1425) that makes it a felony to procure someone’s citizenship illegally. If someone is convicted under this law, the conviction itself automatically voids the naturalization. In practice, the government usually proceeds civilly (under §1451) rather than criminally, but it’s an alternate path.

The recent DOJ announcements have highlighted cases involving very serious allegations – for example, individuals accused of war crimes, terrorism, sex offenses, or other major crimes that were not disclosed on their applications. These fit the criteria above (falsehoods or concealment). But under current priorities, even less dramatic fraud can be targeted. Ultimately, the revocation process is meant for unlawful procurements of citizenship.

Does Committing a Crime Automatically Cause Loss of Citizenship?

No – that is a common misconception. Having a criminal record, by itself, does not strip you of U.S. citizenship. Once you are naturalized, you enjoy the same legal protections as other citizens, including protection against punitive loss of citizenship simply for bad conduct. For example, being convicted of theft, assault, or even murder after naturalization does not automatically revoke citizenship. In fact, U.S. law lists only a few very specific actions that cause voluntary loss of nationality (such as treason, serving in a foreign army after age 18, or formally renouncing citizenship). Those don’t apply to ordinary crimes. What matters for denaturalization is whether there was fraud at the time of naturalization. If you lied about or hid criminal activity on your immigration forms, that could qualify. But a crime committed after you became a citizen won’t retroactively invalidate the Oath you took, unless it reveals you were never eligible in the first place. Denaturalization cases have historically been “rare” and the law imposes a high bar for revoking citizenship. Courts require the government to prove fraud by clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence, a much higher standard than normal civil cases. In practice, only deliberate and material misstatements or illegal acts connected to the naturalization process will trigger it.

How the Denaturalization Process Actually Works

If authorities believe someone obtained citizenship unlawfully, the process moves step by step:

Investigation by USCIS or DHS. Usually, the State Department or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will discover the issue. This might come from a tip, new evidence, or review of the person’s file. USCIS has a small Denaturalization Division that evaluates cases of suspected fraud or concealment.
Referral to the Justice Department. If USCIS finds credible evidence that naturalization was procured illegally, it refers the matter to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), specifically the Civil Division or a U.S. Attorney’s Office.
Filing a Civil Complaint. Unlike a criminal trial, denaturalization is generally a civil action. The DOJ files a “Complaint for Denaturalization” in the federal district court where the person lives. The complaint must be filed “upon affidavit showing good cause” that citizenship should be revoked. Essentially, the government lays out its evidence and legal basis under 8 U.S.C. §1451.
Formal Court Proceedings. Once the complaint is filed, a judge will schedule a hearing or trial similar to other civil cases. The naturalized citizen (defendant) is entitled to notice, a chance to respond, present evidence, and cross-examine witnesses. The Department of Justice essentially acts as the plaintiff. Because citizenship is at stake, the judge usually carefully reviews the evidence. As mentioned, the government bears the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence.
1. Clear and Convincing Standard: This means the facts must be highly probable and not in doubt. It is a strong standard requiring solid documentation (certificates, sworn statements, criminal records, etc.).
Criminal Proceedings (Alternate Path). In some cases, the government may choose a criminal route by indicting the person under 18 U.S.C. §1425 for procuring citizenship illegally. If convicted in criminal court, the law treats the conviction as automatically revoking citizenship. In such a criminal case, the defendant has the usual criminal rights (though no guaranteed lawyer), and any appeal would follow the criminal process.
Final Court Decision. If the judge (or jury, if one is used) is convinced the citizenship was obtained illegally, the court will enter an order of denaturalization. This order cancels the person’s Certificate of Naturalization and declares the individual is no longer a U.S. citizen.

The DOJ has made denaturalization a top priority. In June 2025, DOJ released a policy memo instructing its attorneys to “prioritize and maximally pursue denaturalization proceedings in all cases permitted by law and supported by the evidence”. A year later, DOJ officials announce that they have already filed more cases than in years past and plan to file hundreds more within a few months. Many of these new cases target serious allegations (e.g. undisclosed felonies or terrorism ties), but technically any qualifying fraud case can be pursued under the law.

What Rights Does a Naturalized Citizen Have During the Process?

A person facing denaturalization retains most of the usual legal protections, though it is important to remember this is a civil action. Key points about rights and due process:

Right to Legal Representation. You can hire an attorney to defend you (and it’s wise to do so). However, there is no right to a government-appointed lawyer in these civil proceedings. You are responsible for your own legal defense if you cannot afford counsel.
Right to Hear and Be Heard. In a civil denaturalization case, you must receive formal notice (a summons and complaint). You have the right to attend the court hearing, see the evidence against you, and present your own evidence and witnesses. You can challenge the government’s proof of fraud or misrepresentation. The courts emphasize giving the individual a fair opportunity to contest the allegations.
Burden of Proof on Government. As noted, the DOJ must meet the “clear and convincing” standard. In practice, courts construe any doubtful facts in favor of the defendant. This is an important protection: the benefit of any uncertainty goes to the person whose citizenship is being challenged, not to the government.
Right to Appeal. If the court orders denaturalization, you can appeal the decision to the Federal Court of Appeals and, ultimately, to the Supreme Court (though Supreme Court review is rare). Any delay in final outcome keeps your citizenship intact until all appeals are exhausted.

What Happens After Someone Is Denaturalized?

If the court finds for the government, the individual’s U.S. citizenship is formally revoked. The Certificate of Naturalization is voided, and the person is no longer an American citizen. In effect, the person “reverts” to whatever immigration status they had before becoming a citizen. Typically, that means lawful permanent resident (green card) status, if it still exists. The court decision usually specifies the former status. However, returning to permanent residency does not guarantee staying in the U.S. In many denaturalization cases, the grounds (fraud or a serious criminal issue) are also grounds for deportation. For example, if a green card holder lied about a violent crime to get citizenship, once denaturalized they may be immediately placed in removal proceedings. So losing citizenship often triggers deportation actions. Even if deportation is not pursued, the person will need to treat any travel documents or permissions as if they were no longer citizens. Practically, losing citizenship means giving up key rights and privileges:

You can no longer vote in U.S. elections or hold most public office.
Your U.S. passport becomes invalid. To travel you would need whatever nonimmigrant or immigrant visa status you’re eligible for.
Any government jobs or benefits that required citizenship would no longer be available.
You may face difficulty re-entering the U.S. if you leave.

Importantly, family members are generally not directly affected by one person’s denaturalization. For example, children who are U.S. citizens (by birth or naturalization) remain citizens. Spouses do not lose their own status. (However, if your U.S. citizenship was the basis for a family petition, that petition could be in jeopardy, but that’s a separate immigration matter.) In short, denaturalization can dramatically alter someone’s life, but it does not create new penalties for innocent relatives. As DOJ officials have emphasized, this power is meant to “maintain the integrity of the naturalization program” by ensuring that people who obtained citizenship unlawfully do not continue to enjoy it. In practice it is a rare outcome, but one with serious consequences for the individuals involved.

Bottom Line: How Naturalized Citizens Can Protect Their Status

For most naturalized citizens, denaturalization is an unlikely scenario. It requires significant deception or wrongdoing at the time of becoming a citizen. Still, in the current environment of increased scrutiny, it pays to be cautious. Here are some practical takeaways:

Be Truthful on All Immigration Forms.Always provide complete and accurate information when filing for a visa, green card, or citizenship. Even a seemingly minor omission (such as a decades-old arrest) can later be portrayed as material if discovered. Immigration authorities and courts will interpret deceit or willful omissions very strictly.
Keep Good Records and Documentation.Maintain copies of your naturalization application, application supplements, and supporting documents. If in the future someone questions your case, having documentation can help prove you were eligible. For example, keep police clearance certificates, court dispositions, or other records that show any past issues were lawfully resolved.
Respond Promptly to Government Notices. If you ever receive a letter or notice from USCIS, DOJ, or ICE about your case, don’t ignore it. Failing to respond or appear at a hearing could default the outcome against you. Always seek legal advice immediately if you get correspondence about denaturalization or related issues.
Consult an Attorney if You Have Concerns.If you have any doubts about information in your file – for example, you did not disclose something on your form, or you had a questionable sponsor – it is wise to consult an immigration lawyer. An expert can assess your risk, advise whether any remedial steps (like preemptive waivers or clarifications) are needed, and represent you if issues arise. The Justice Department’s current policy encourages aggressive action, but a skilled attorney can also vigorously defend your case.

Remember that the burden is on the government to prove fraud, not on you to prove your innocence. Courts allow defenses such as showing you were in fact eligible for citizenship despite any technical misstatements. If everything in your naturalization application is honest and well-documented, you generally have little to fear – even if the government investigates. The framers of the Immigration and Nationality Act intended that citizenship would not be taken lightly. Even though the process now garners headlines, denaturalization remains a relatively rare measure that faces high legal hurdles. The best protection is to treat citizenship as the privilege it is, applied for with integrity.

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki

If you have questions about your citizenship status – whether you are applying for the first time or have concerns about the information in your file – our experienced immigration team can help. From offices in New York and New Jersey, we assist clients throughout the United States in all aspects of immigration law, including naturalization, waivers, and denaturalization defense. We stay up-to-date on federal policies and court cases to give you clear, practical advice. If you’re unsure about how recent denaturalization news might affect you, it’s wise to seek guidance sooner rather than later. Your citizenship is one of the most important legal protections you have. We’re here to help make sure it stays secure. Contact the Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki today for a consultation about your situation.

First Time Applying for U.S. Asylum? Here’s the Process and Timeline

2026-06-16T10:50:19Z

If you’ve fled persecution and are now in the U.S., applying for asylum can be your path to safety—but it’s a complex process. We’ll break it down step by step, from eligibility through the final decision, including expected wait times.

What Is Asylum and Who Qualifies?

In the U.S., asylum is a form of protection for people already in the country (or at a border) who meet the definition of a refugee. In other words, you must show you were (or will be) persecuted on account of one of five protected grounds: your race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. For example, if you faced violence or threats in your home country because of your ethnicity or political beliefs, you may qualify. There’s a one-year filing deadline: you generally must submit an asylum application (Form I-589) within one year of your last entry into the U.S.. If you miss that deadline, your case will need a strong exception (such as changed country conditions or other special circumstances), because failing to file on time normally bars the claim. Also note there are certain bars to asylum (for example, if you committed certain crimes or persecuted others, you’d be ineligible). Key points on eligibility: You must be physically in the U.S. or at a U.S. port of entry; you must show a well-founded fear of persecution on a protected ground; and you must apply (with limited exceptions) within one year of arrival. Importantly, you should gather evidence that supports your story – such as identity documents, police or medical reports of attacks, affidavits from witnesses, news articles or human rights reports about your home country, and any other proof of threats you faced. Your own detailed declaration (written in first person) will also be critical to explain what happened and why you’re afraid to go back.

What is The First Step in the Asylum Process?

File Form I-589

The first concrete step is to file Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal. If you are not already in removal proceedings, you file this affirmative asylum application with USCIS (United States Citizenship & Immigration Services). USCIS allows filing online or by mail. (If you are already in immigration court, you would instead file with the court, but “first-time” applicants typically go the affirmative route.) The form must be fully completed in English. Include your passport or other ID, your family details (including spouse/children, even if abroad), and your entire life story relevant to the claim. Be thorough: list every detail of harm or fear you experienced, no matter how small it seems, and clearly tie it to one of the protected grounds. Along with the form, you must now pay a $100 asylum filing fee (this fee started in July 2025). USCIS provides a credit card or check/money order option (instructions are on the form). Make sure to use the correct lockbox address for asylum filings (USCIS posts this on its website) or the online portal.

Supporting documents

You should attach evidence and documentation to back up your claim. Common inclusions are: copies of passports or ID cards; birth certificates; marriage certificates; any police reports or medical records showing harm; letters from family or friends; newspapers or NGO reports about persecution in your country; photos of injuries or symbols of your protected group; and country condition reports from places like the State Department or UNHCR. We recommend organizing exhibits in a logical order with an index. A good rule is: if it helps explain or prove part of your story, include it. One frequent mistake is not submitting obvious support (e.g. omitting a police report or witness statement) – remember, the burden is on you to corroborate your story.

Common filing mistakes (to avoid)

Forgetting to sign or date the form, leaving blank fields, or failing to translate non-English documents are basic errors that can cause delays. Inconsistent or incomplete information (like giving different details on the form vs. your declaration) can hurt credibility. Also, be sure to name all dependent family members (spouse/children) and include required fields like your U.S. address. If you write a separate declaration, keep it in first person (“I” statements) and stick to facts—do not include hearsay or exaggerated language.

What Happens After You Submit Your Application?

Once USCIS receives your I-589 package, they will issue a receipt notice (Form I-797C) confirming they got it. You’ll soon be scheduled for a biometrics appointment (fingerprints and photo) at a USCIS Application Support Center – usually that happens within a few weeks of filing. Attend the biometrics appointment with your appointment notice and ID. USCIS will also conduct background and security checks after collecting your biometrics. It’s important to keep USCIS updated if you move. Use Form AR-11 or the online portal to give your new address; missing a notice because of a move can be disastrous. After biometrics, your case essentially “sits in line” for an interview. USCIS may send Requests for Evidence (RFEs) if something on your application needs clarification or is missing. Respond carefully and promptly if you get an RFE.

Applying for a Work Permit.

150 days after filing your I-589, you become eligible to apply for an Employment Authorization Document (EAD or work permit).In practice, you would file Form I-765 (Choice category (c)(8) for asylum applicants). However, note that USCIS has been extremely backlogged on asylum EADs: as of 2026, many applicants waited years (over 1,200 days in some reports) for these work permits. Still, it’s worth filing at day 150, because once approved an EAD lets you work legally. Remember, by law USCIS can’t issue the EAD until 180 days after your I-589 was filed. (As of 2026, USCIS even temporarily suspended taking new asylum EAD applications because of delays, though renewals are still accepted.)

The Asylum Interview: What to Expect

Eventually USCIS will schedule you for an affirmative asylum interview – this is the most critical step. Scheduling can take a very long time. Offices in, say, Dallas or Phoenix might be somewhat faster than busier ones like New York or San Francisco. In many cases, people waited several years between filing and interview. In fact, USCIS has been using a “last in, first out” interview method: newer cases get scheduled earlier, supposedly to deter weak applications. In short, if you filed years ago, it’s not unusual to still be waiting. When your interview notice arrives, it will list the date, time, and location (usually a local USCIS asylum office) as well as what to bring. On interview day, dress professionally. Bring original documents that you included (passports, birth certificates, police reports, etc.) so the officer can review them. Also bring a government photo ID. You and any attorney or representatives will sit with the asylum officer (interpreters are allowed if needed, but USCIS must provide and swear them in).

Typical interview questions

The officer’s goal is to verify your story and credibility. They will often start with basics: confirming your identity (name, DOB, family), your arrival date, and how you entered the U.S. In fact, they will ask about your entry date and check if you filed within one year. Then they’ll dive into your claim. Expect questions like: “Why are you seeking asylum?”, “What happened to you in [home country]?”, and “Who harmed you or threatened you, and why?” They may quiz you on details from your written statement to ensure consistency. Officers often use specific “test” questions to check credibility. For example, they might ask detailed questions about your claimed religion or social group to see if you truly understand it (e.g. “Who is the leader of your church? What is one practice of your faith?”). They may ask about geography or recent events in your country. They also routinely ask yes/no screening questions about bars to asylum, such as any criminal history or whether you were ever part of any armed group or terrorist organization. It’s crucial to answer truthfully. If there are inconsistencies or gaps, be honest (“I don’t remember” or “I’m not sure”) rather than guessing – honesty is critical. The asylum officer will carefully note your answers (and any emotional reactions, like crying). At the end of the interview, your lawyer (if you have one) typically gets a chance to ask clarifying questions or make a brief closing statement. The officer will then let you know when and where to get the decision – often at the same office in a few weeks or months.

How Long Does the Asylum Process Take?

Prepare for a long wait. As of 2026, asylum processing times are measured in years, not months. In a recent analysis, the average affirmative asylum case took over 6 years from filing to decision. That’s true even if your case is straightforward. A main reason is sheer volume: USCIS saw a record backlog and massive intake (for example, about 454,000 asylum applications in FY2023 alone). Several factors affect how long your case might take:

Which asylum office handles you. Some offices (typically in areas with fewer cases) are faster. Others, like New York or Los Angeles, can have multi-year backlogs.
Case age. USCIS uses a sort of “last in, first out” (LIFO) system for interviews. Surprisingly, that means newer cases get interview dates sooner than older ones. This is meant to deter applicants from filing weak cases just to get temporary benefits. The side effect is older cases often wait the longest.
Meeting the one-year deadline. If you filed late, USCIS will issue a Notice of Intent to Deny and will need an explanation (an exception claim). This adds extra review time.
Requests for Evidence (RFEs). If USCIS asks for more documents, your case will pause until you respond. Common RFE reasons include missing documents, unclear statements, or translation issues.
Security checks. The FBI conducts background checks on every asylum applicant. Depending on your country of origin, these can add extra delays.
If referred to court. (See below.) If your case goes into removal proceedings, you enter a separate, often even slower process.

Because of these delays, it’s vital to file correctly the first time and prepare thoroughly. Any mistakes or missing info can trigger RFEs or denials that send your case to immigration court, adding years more to wait.

Possible Outcomes and What Happens Next

After the interview (or shortly after), USCIS will send a written decision. There are a few possibilities:

Approval: If USCIS grants your asylum, you officially become an asylee. This means you can remain and work legally in the U.S.. As an asylee, you’ll be eligible for a Social Security number and may apply for a Refugee Travel Document (so you can visit abroad safely). Importantly, after one year in asylee status, you can apply to adjust to lawful permanent resident (get a green card) by filing Form I-485 (and there is no filing fee for asylees). After another four years as a permanent resident, you can apply for U.S. citizenship. Also, your spouse and unmarried children (if listed on your original application, or added via Form I-730 within two years) can get derivative asylee status, meaning they too can live and eventually become green-card holders.
Referral to Immigration Court: If USCIS does not grant asylum and you have no other legal status, they will refer your case to an immigration judge (defensive asylum). This doesn’t mean you’ve lost your claim—it means you’ll have another chance to seek asylum in removal proceedings. In immigration court, the process restarts: you’ll get a notice to appear, go through Master Calendar hearings, and eventually a full merits hearing where you testify before a judge. Be aware that court backlogs can be very long (many applicants wait years for a final hearing). If the judge ultimately denies your asylum, you may have an appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). But often if your case reaches court, you should work closely with an attorney for the defense process.
Denial: If USCIS denies your asylum and you have some other status (say, a visa or pending green card), they might simply close the asylum file. In that case, you could consider other immigration options. If denied and you have no status, you’ll usually be in court as above.

Throughout, keep track of deadlines (for example, appeals to AAO or BIA must be filed quickly). Also, once your asylum is pending or granted, USCIS cannot remove you to your home country.

What This Means for You & Next Steps

Applying for asylum is not just filling out a form – it involves telling a compelling, credible story under very close scrutiny. Stay organized: keep copies of everything you file, attend all appointments, and keep your address updated. Continue gathering any new evidence or news about your country, especially if your case stretches out. Don’t travel outside the U.S. without first consulting a lawyer, as reentry could be complicated. In practice, the asylum process is lengthy and often uncertain. You should prepare for a multi-year wait and think ahead: for example, file the work permit at 150 days, and check USCIS processing times periodically. Consider whether you meet any exceptions (like “changed circumstances”) if you filed late. If you have trusted family or community, lean on them for support during the wait. Above all, double-check everything before filing. A thorough, well-documented application is your best chance to avoid delays or RFEs. Stay consistent in your story (your interview answers should match your written application). If possible, get help from a qualified attorney or accredited representative to review your paperwork.

Let The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki Help

Navigating asylum law and paperwork can be overwhelming — especially if English isn’t your first language or you’re not familiar with U.S. procedures. We’re here for you. At The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki, our team in New York and New Jersey has helped many asylum seekers and immigrants secure legal status. We can assist with preparing your I-589, gathering evidence, representing you at the interview or in court, and planning your next steps. Don’t wait until it’s too late: if you’re ready to apply for asylum or have questions about eligibility, deadlines, or strategy, reach out for a consultation. Our experienced immigration attorneys will explain your options clearly, help you avoid common pitfalls, and work to keep your family together. Remember — every asylum case is unique, and small errors can cause big setbacks. Let us help guide you through the process from New York or New Jersey.

39 Countries Win: US Judge Rules Suspension of Immigration Benefits Unlawful

2026-06-09T04:26:44Z

If you’re from one of the 39 countries targeted by the policy (for example, Afghanistan, Iran, Nigeria, Somalia, or Venezuela), this decision is big news! A federal judge struck down a Trump-era policy that froze immigration benefits for people born in those countries. That means USCIS can no longer leave applicants hanging indefinitely just because of their birthplace. This blog explains what happened, what the court decided, and what it means for your case.

What events led to the Court’s decision?

In 2025, the administration expanded its travel bans to cover 39 countries. Those proclamations targeted many nations in Africa, Asia and Latin America. After a high-profile incident involving an Afghan national, USCIS began enforcing stricter rules at home. In late 2025, USCIS told officers to treat an applicant’s country of birth as a negative factor. Then on Dec. 2, 2025, USCIS issued a memo halting decisions on asylum cases and pausing other benefits for nationals of the listed countries. A Jan. 1, 2026 memo extended the pause to the expanded country list. The net effect was that USCIS froze processing of almost all immigration benefits for people born in those 39 countries. That includes:

Green cards (Adjustment of Status) – applications could not be approved.
Work permits (Employment Authorization Documents) – final approvals were halted.
Naturalization (citizenship) – oath ceremonies were canceled or delayed.
Asylum and withholding-of-removal – cases were put on hold.
Other USCIS benefits – any application USCIS administers could be affected.

Thousands of immigrants who had followed all the steps suddenly found their cases stuck. This led advocacy groups and unions to sue in early 2026, arguing that USCIS had no authority to stop lawful applications solely because of nationality.

Details of the Judge’s decision

On June 5, 2026, U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell Jr. ruled these USCIS pauses unlawful and vacated the policies. He struck down the four key directives listed above. McConnell pointed out that these applicants had “done everything the right way” under the law, yet were still left in “indeterminate legal limbo” because of where they were born. In his words, USCIS’s hold on their cases “cannot be attributed to anything that these individuals did wrong; rather, it arises solely by the happenstance of their birth”. The court made clear the agency had overstepped the law by singling out immigrants based on country of origin.

Who benefits from the Court’s decision?

This ruling directly helps anyone from those 39 countries with a pending USCIS application. If USCIS had paused your green card, work permit, asylum claim, or citizenship application, your case can now move forward. Experts say the decision affects hundreds of thousands of people. Jorge Loweree of the American Immigration Council hailed it as “an enormous victory for hundreds of thousands of people that have been stuck in limbo”. For example, if your citizenship ceremony was canceled under the old policy, it should now be rescheduled. Note: this only covers applications filed in the U.S.under USCIS jurisdiction. It does not restore visas for people abroad or reopen consular processing. Those travel bans remain in effect.

Does the Court’s decision lift the travel ban?

No. This court order only applies to USCIS’s internal processing. The presidential travel bans remain unchanged. In other words, consular visa interviews and entry restrictions for the listed countries are still in place. The ruling simply means USCIS can no longer add its own separate delay for those countries. If you are abroad subject to a ban, you must still follow the existing visa rules.

What the court ruling means for the government

Legally, the freeze is over: USCIS must resume deciding the affected cases. In reality, however, DHS is expected to appeal the ruling and may ask the courts to stay the decision. If a stay is granted, the pause would technically continue until an appeal is resolved. If not, USCIS will have to update its policy manual and instruct officers to restart processing. Either way, USCIS will likely issue new guidance. Keep an eye on agency announcements – they will explain how quickly (and in what order) pending cases will be handled.

What the court ruling means for you and next steps

If your case was frozen, this is welcome news. Your application should no longer be on hold. USCIS is required to reopen processing, but it may not happen overnight. Here’s what you can do:

Monitor your case status. Check USCIS’s online portal regularly for updates.
Contact your attorney. If you have a lawyer, let them know about the ruling and ask what steps to take.
Prepare your paperwork. USCIS might ask for updated documents or signatures as they resume work. Keep everything current.
Follow up on interviews. If your naturalization or visa interview was canceled, expect it to be rescheduled.
Maintain valid status. If you’re in the U.S., make sure your visa or work authorization remains up to date.
Avoid travel. Don’t assume you can leave and return yet; the travel bans still apply.

The freeze has been lifted, but processing will take time. Use this interval to get organized. Your application is back in play, but patience and preparation are crucial. If you feel uncertain, reach out to an immigration attorney for guidance.

Conclusion

This ruling is a win for immigrants stuck in limbo. The judge made it clear that people who followed the rules deserve decisions on their cases. That should bring relief after a frustrating delay. At the same time, remember that the government may appeal, so keep an eye on future developments. You don’t have to handle this alone. The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki has helped many clients in New York, New Jersey and nationwide with complex immigration cases. We can review how this decision affects your situation and guide you on next steps. While this blog isn’t legal advice, think of us as your immigration ally: if you need personalized help, reach out to our expert immigration attorneys. The bottom line: your application should no longer be on ice. With the country-based pause invalidated, USCIS must (at least in theory) move your case forward. Keep your documents in order, stay informed, and lean on expert guidance to get through this final stretch.

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki

At The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki, our experienced immigration attorneys assist individuals, families and employers with all immigration matters — from green cards and work visas to citizenship and humanitarian cases. We have offices in New York and New Jersey and represent clients across the U.S. If this ruling affects you or if you have any immigration questions, please reach out to us. Schedule a consultation and let us help you find the right path forward.

USCIS to Grant Adjustment of Status Only in “Extraordinary” Cases, at Agency Discretion

2026-06-03T10:38:49Z

In a sweeping new policy announced on May 22, 2026, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) signaled that most green card applicants in the United States will now have to pursue consular processing abroad unless they qualify for “extraordinary” relief. Adjustment of Status (AOS) – the in‑country green card process – has long been one of two primary pathways to lawful permanent residence. USCIS says it is simply returning to the original intent of immigration law, which envisioned consular processing as the default route for nonimmigrants seeking green cards. We’ll explain what changed, why USCIS is doing this, and what it means for applicants.

Background to This Policy

Adjustment of status has been a well-established pathway for people already in the U.S. to obtain a green card without leaving the country. Under Section 245(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), an applicant may have their status adjusted if they entered legally and have an available visa number. However, it has always been “a matter of discretion and administrative grace,” not a guaranteed right. In other words, USCIS can approve or deny AOS applications even when statutory requirements are met. The new USCIS policy memo and accompanying bulletin emphasize that Adjustment of Status was never meant to replace consular processing. USCIS notes that Congress treated AOS as an exception to the normal visa process abroad. In announcing the policy, DHS/USCIS stated that, going forward, “an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances”. USCIS says this is not a change in law, but a reaffirmation of existing law and precedent – essentially a reminder to officers that consular processing abroad is the rule. However, this policy is a significant change in practice. In recent years many spouses, workers, and others in the U.S. have routinely adjusted status in-country. The memo makes it clear that such approvals are now meant only for truly exceptional cases. While USCIS frames the shift as a return to the law’s intent, applicants and lawyers have been taken aback by how sharply the balance has been tilted toward consular processing.

How USCIS Discretion May Be Applied

Under the new guidelines, every AOS application will be reviewed with much closer scrutiny. USCIS officers are directed to “consider all relevant factors and information on a case-by-case basis” to determine if approving Adjustment of Status is appropriate. The memo itself reminds officers that AOS is discretionary and “extraordinary” in nature. In concrete terms, this means both negative factors and positive equities in an applicant’s situation will be weighed. On the negative side, USCIS will look carefully at any violations of immigration law. For example, officers will check for past or current fraud in the visa or immigration process, any misuse of status(such as working without authorization or holding one visa status while secretly pursuing a green card in violation of visa terms), and any failure to maintain lawful status or depart when required. In fact, the memo explicitly advises that an applicant’s failure to leave at the end of their authorized stay is a serious adverse factor, especially if it appears they planned to remain permanently without consular processing. USCIS also instructed officers to document this review: denials based on unfavorable discretion now must include a written analysis of both the positive and negative factors. On the positive side, applicants can still point to significant equities in their favor. USCIS will consider things like family and community ties in the U.S., length of lawful residence and continuous status, employment history, community service, and any hardship to the applicant or loved ones if the application is denied. A history of U.S. service (like military service or other contributions) or strong employment ties may also count. The big change is this: merely having no negative factors is not enough. The new policy stresses that an applicant needs “unusual or even outstanding equities” to overcome any adverse factors. Simply qualifying technically (with a visa number and admissibility) no longer guarantees approval. Even lawful dual-intent nonimmigrants (H-1B, L-1, etc.) will still need to demonstrate why they merit approval; the memo acknowledges dual intent but warns that status alone won’t suffice. In practical terms, expect that USCIS will issue Requests for Evidence (RFEs) or interview questions probing why you didn’t go consular and what positive factors justify your case. If you have strong reasons (medical needs, urgent U.S. support obligations, etc.), be prepared to document them thoroughly. USCIS may also focus on questions like whether you could have applied overseas, ties overseas, and what bar to reentry you might face if you left.

What Counts as an “Extraordinary Case”?

USCIS hasn’t provided a precise checklist of what qualifies as “extraordinary,” which leaves some uncertainty. The memo itself mainly says that AOS approval is reserved for cases where granting it is in the “best interest” of the United States under compelling circumstances. The key phrase in the memo is that unusual or outstanding equities are required to overcome any negative factors. By implication, ordinary cases – like a student or worker who entered with a visa and later got married – will likely not meet this high bar unless there are other compelling reasons. Extraordinary might include severe health emergencies, evidence of serious danger if sent back, or perhaps cases where leaving the U.S. would trigger harsh legal bars to reentry (for example, a prior unlawful presence bar). Immigration advocates are watching whether USCIS will clarify this.Officers will likely ask why you cannot process at a consulate, so applicants should be ready to explain any exceptional hardship or legal issues. Importantly, USCIS itself expects to issue further guidance. The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) notes that USCIS “will issue further guidance on how this policy will be applied,” and that it is already anticipating litigation on this policy. In practice, “extraordinary” is a case-by-case judgment. Until USCIS spells it out, applicants and attorneys must prepare for worst-case.

Does the Policy Eliminate Adjustment of Status?

No. Adjustment of Status remains a legal option for eligible applicants – USCIS has not abolished it. Rather, the policy memo makes approval discretionary and rare. USCIS spokesmen and experts have emphasized that the memo does not prohibit filing an AOS application. It only affects the decision phase. In fact, the memo and USCIS guidance repeatedly stress that the statutory criteria in INA §245 remain the same. The change is purely in how officers apply discretion. In technical terms, USCIS acknowledges that if you meet the eligibility rules, you can still apply (even pending applicants can keep their cases alive). However, you now must overcome a higher threshold. In short, think of it this way: USCIS now sees AOS as an “extraordinary relief” that you must earn with compelling circumstances, rather than a routine benefit. But the path remains open for those who can meet that standard.

What Else Does the Policy Say?

Aside from the high-level shift, the policy memo covers a few important details:

Scope: The policy applies to most family- and employment-based AOS categories, including diversity visas, where consular processing is the norm. It specifically excludes certain statutory programs where AOS is mandatory and not discretionary. For example, refugees adjusting after one year, and immigrants under NACARA (Central American Relief) or HRIFA (Haitian Refugee Fairness) are unaffected.
Dual Intent: USCIS reaffirms that holding a dual-intent visa (like H‑1B or L‑1) is not incompatible with applying for AOS. But the memo clarifies that maintaining status, by itself, doesn’t guarantee approval. The officer will still assess the totality of your history.
Written Decisions: Going forward, the memo requires that any denial based on the exercise of discretion must include a detailed written explanation of the positive and negative factors. This transparency could help applicants understand why their case was refused and could assist in appeals.
Agency Rationale: USCIS has publicly framed the policy as a resource management move. The agency claims this frees up USCIS to focus on other priorities (like asylum, crime victims, and naturalization) and encourages nonimmigrants to follow the system “as intended”. It also argues that requiring consular processing reduces the chance that visa denials are ignored and people “slip into the shadows”. Critics say this rationale ignores the human cost.
Legal Challenges: The policy is already drawing legal scrutiny. For example, AILA released a policy brief warning that this new emphasis on discretion “raises significant legal, policy, and practical concerns”. It’s a developing situation: applicants should stay tuned for any clarifications or court decisions.

In sum, the memo makes no changes to law or fees, but it changes USCIS’s internal approach. It is effective immediately (see next section), and applies to any cases already filed or filed from now on.

When Does the Policy Take Effect?

According to USCIS, the new policy is already in effect as of the memo’s release. Because it is a restatement of “longstanding” policy, USCIS says it applies immediately to pending and new cases. That means if you filed an I-485 before May 22, 2026, the officer reviewing your case will use this higher scrutiny standard. Officers may issue RFEs asking for more evidence of positive factors or question why you did not apply through a U.S. consulate. If your case is scheduled for interview, be prepared to address these new concerns in person. The AILA notes that USCIS will likely provide further guidance soon, but meanwhile, applicants should not assume any grace period. If you intend to file an AOS, do so knowing the memo is in place. Those already in the U.S. awaiting a green card may want to review their options for consular processing now, in case it becomes necessary. In short: The policy took effect immediately on publication and is being applied to current cases. Stay informed of USCIS announcements, and expect that your case may take longer or be sent abroad unless you qualify as “extraordinary.”

What This Means for You (Next Steps)

We know this announcement can be overwhelming. If you were hoping to finish your green card process inside the U.S., you’re probably frustrated and worried. Rest assured, many applicants are in the same boat. The most important thing now is to stay calm and plan your next steps carefully.

Review Your Case: Talk to your immigration lawyer (if you have one) as soon as possible. Review your eligibility: are you in a category still affected by the policy? Do you fall under one of the exempt categories?
Gather Evidence: If you decide to stick with Adjustment of Status, prepare to show your strongest positive factors. Gather documentation of your U.S. family ties, long-term residence, employment, community service, or any special circumstances. Letters from employers, doctors, community leaders, or family members can help illustrate why your case is exceptional.
Consular Processing Option: Consider whether it makes sense to pursue consular processing abroad. In many cases, applicants could choose to leave the U.S. and attend a green card interview at a U.S. consulate in their home country. This route may ultimately be faster now that AOS is disfavored. However, think carefully – leaving the U.S. triggers re-entry rules and may incur additional wait times or bars, depending on your status history. If you have overstayed or violated status, consular processing could also be risky due to potential reentry bars.
Prepare for RFEs or Interviews: If your I-485 is pending, watch for any new USCIS requests for information. Be ready to respond quickly. In an interview, you may be asked why you can’t go consular and what in your background justifies staying. Answer honestly but confidently, emphasizing facts.
Know Your Tolerance for Risk: Every case is different. If you have vital reasons to stay in the U.S. (family needs, job offers, ongoing studies), discuss these with your attorney. On the other hand, if you have flexibility to travel, consular processing could reduce uncertainty.
Emotional Impact: This policy may cause stress – families facing separation and career plans thrown off-track. We understand. For now, focus on facts and next steps. Remember that AOS is still possible if your situation is truly compelling.

The takeaway is that you need to look beyond just processing time. Faster consular processing may sometimes become the “safer” route, but in some cases staying for AOS could make sense if your equities are strong. It depends entirely on your goals and circumstances. Below, our head immigration attorney Anne Sedki shares her thoughts on what this policy means for applicants.

Our Immigration Expert’s Take

“Imagine finally reaching the last step of your green card process after years of waiting, only to be told you must leave the United States, abandon your job, separate from your family, and risk being unable to return. As an immigration attorney, I find the new USCIS policy requiring adjustment of status applicants to return to their home countries for immigrant visa processing deeply alarming. Adjustment of status exists because Congress intended eligible individuals already in the U.S. to complete the process here, without unnecessary family separation and disruption to their lives. This policy does not just create inconvenience. It threatens jobs, separates families, interrupts stability, and places thousands of people into uncertainty after years of following the legal process. For some, leaving the U.S. could even trigger bars to reentry or lengthy consular delays abroad. Immigration law should not punish people who complied with the system. Behind every case is a family, a career, and a future hanging in the balance. I fully expect this policy to face significant legal challenges and litigation in federal court in the near future.” – Anne Z. Sedki, Managing Attorney, The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki Attorney Sedki’s words capture the very real anxieties clients are feeling. No one should have to choose between their green card dreams and keeping their life intact. Our office is closely watching court developments on this issue.

Key Takeaways

Adjustment of Status Is Still Allowed, But Rare. USCIS will now treat in‑country green card applications as “extraordinary relief”. Only applicants with compelling, unusual circumstances are likely to succeed.
Consular Processing is the Default. Nonimmigrants in the U.S. are generally expected to return to their home countries and apply for their green cards at a U.S. consulate, per USCIS’s new policy.
Higher Scrutiny on Each Case. Officers will balance positive vs. negative factors in each application. Even lawful status (like H-1B) alone no longer guarantees approval.
No Legal Ban – But a Tougher Battle. The memo does not change the law or ban filings. You can still apply if eligible, but you’ll need extraordinary evidence to succeed. Technical eligibility by itself isn’t enough.
Immediate Effect. The policy took effect immediately (May 2026) and applies to pending and new cases. If your I-485 is pending, prepare for added questions or RFEs.
Seek Legal Guidance. Given the uncertainty, consult an experienced immigration attorney. You’ll need help deciding whether to pursue AOS or switch to consular processing, and how to build the strongest case under this new standard.

If you have questions about how this USCIS policy affects your green card plans, or if you need help preparing your application or response, don’t wait. Call The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki today. Our experienced immigration attorneys in New York and New Jersey serve clients nationwide. We can review your unique situation and advise the best course of action – whether it’s proving your case for AOS or guiding you through consular processing. Immigration law is complex and always changing, but you don’t have to navigate it alone. Reach out now to schedule a confidential consultation.

The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki

At The Law Offices of Anne Z. Sedki, our immigration practice has helped clients with every stage of the green card process. We know New York and New Jersey law, and we know USCIS policy inside and out. Whether you need to adjust status here or apply overseas, our team is here to provide personalized guidance. Don’t let confusion and delays derail your life plans. Contact us – our skilled attorneys are ready to answer your questions and help you understand your options under this new policy. Disclaimer: This blog is for general information only and is not legal advice. If you have an immigration case, please consult a licensed attorney about your specific circumstances.