The war on foreign students continues, more TPS terminations and lawsuits, and DeSantis deputizes the Guard.

duration of status may not endure

The Trump administration is looking to continue some unfinished business from their first term by significantly limiting the amount of time that foreign students and exchange visitors can be present in the U.S. before they must apply to change or extend their status.

The initial attempt at changing the rule, covering all international student (including exchange visitors such as physicians) was published on September 25, 2020; however, it was not finalized by the time the Biden administration came in, and it was withdrawn. The rule would have effectively ended what is referred to as “duration of status” (or D/S)––which permits students and J-1 exchange visitors to remain in the U.S. as long as they maintain status––to four years or, in some circumstances (depending on country of origin), two years.

Requests for extensions would no longer be processed by the schools alone, but via USCIS: requiring extra scrutiny fees, processing, and delays so lengthy they could effectively prevent students from registering in time for their upcoming semesters. Moreover, students may be required to present compelling academic reasons for the extensions (including medical issues or other extraordinary circumstances), among other restrictions, such as the ability of students to effectively transition from student status to H-1B status (via “cap-gap” extensions).

Most dramatically, “unlawful presence,” a legal determination that carries significant penalties and restrictions, would be attached to students immediately following the new fixed terms, rather than after official findings of status violations.

Concerns raised at the time were that international students would be less likely to choose the U.S. as a destination due to the uncertainty surrounding their ability to remain in status, J-1 physicians in U.S. graduate medical education (already heavily regulated and monitored via SEVIS and annual reviews) would be particularly affected given their long programs, the J-1 host organizations would be less likely to sponsor students (undermining their goals of international collaboration), schools and students would take on an additional financial burden due to the need for more frequent extensions, and that CBP officers at ports of entry would effectively be doing the job of consular officers.

It’s our understanding that the new proposal largely contains the above provisions from the prior version. The proposal is being reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget, after which it will be published in the Federal Register for public comment, and then revised and published as a final rule with an effective date. More here.

In better news, some very good lawyers were able to get SEVIS terminations reversedfor their clients, with other protections to ensure that they wouldn’t suffer future harm due to the DHS errors. Those who had visas revoked by the Department of State will be pursuing a separate lawsuit.

this week in TPS terminations

As we noted a week ago today, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that it would terminate TPS for Haiti, effective August 3rd. However, a U.S. District Judge held that DHS cannot terminate a TPS designation before the expiration of the most recent extension: which, for Haiti, would expire on February 3rd, 2026. The DHS also announced the termination of TPS for Nepal, Honduras, and Nicaragua, to be effective two months from today. Work permits are automatically extended to that time. A lawsuit was immediately filed claiming that the terminations violate the Administrative Procedures Act and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Litigation will continue on both fronts for quite a while.

The net result: likely more significant economic damage.

____

less process, more horror

The National Guard will take the place of judges at Alligator Alcatraz as part of a process to expedite deportation procedures. If the immigrants’ home countries won’t take them, South Sudan, one of the world’t most isolated and dangers countries by our own acknowledgment, will.

Matthew Blaisdell, Esq.

Sunset Immigration PLLC

219 36th Street, Ste 511

Brooklyn, NY 11232

Book appointment

It’s harder to fight the fines, hundreds of thousands are about to lose their status, the immigration jails are full, and the economy is not happy.

Firstly, the exceptions to Travel Ban 2025 we mentioned last week have been given a little bit of fleshing out by way of a Department of State email response to a Congressional inquiry. As we might expect, these will not be distributed liberally.

“We anticipate that national interest exceptions will be very rare . . . The travel must advance a U.S. national interest . . . There is no application for a national interest exception. That will be considered by the consular officer during the interview.”

less adjudicating, more allegiance

Stephen Miller has been expressing his displeasure with the insufficient zeal with which ICE is arresting and detaining those without criminal records (more below), and the Trump Administration is now subtly prodding the judges to lean in their direction.

While there are no official numbers, it’s likely that most immigration judges are former ICE lawyers. It’s a natural progression. They spend their days in the same courtrooms, keep offices in the same building, work the same cases that the judges process all day long, and they continue on as employees of the federal government—now just making rulings instead of submissions. Most do their jobs quite professionally. Conversely, some come from other areas of law, a small number come from private practice or from the nonprofit sector, and a few have never had anything to do with immigration. But most are former ICE lawyers.

So it’s... something that the Acting Directors of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) system has issued a memorandum to all immigration judges instructing them to stop being so biased in favor of immigrants. In about five months, the Trump Administration has issued, give or take, 33 directives to EOIR, each of which constitutes a slight nudge moving the courts away from being neutral arbiters and administrators of justice and in the direction of serving as an enforcement mechanism—a trend we’ve touched on here, here, and here.

Continuing the trend of eliminating process in favor of punishment, a new rule provides that the civil fines for immigration violations we’ve explained recently (the largest we’ve seen is $1.8 million) will no longer provide any notice, can be sent by regular mail, and foreign nationals have less time to contest the charges. Moreover, they will now be issued by DHS (rather than DOJ). All told: less ability to timely respond and less opportunity to fight.

stuffed jails, stalled economy

On June 27th, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that Temporary Protected Status will be terminated for Haiti, meaning that an estimated 520,000 people (DHS estimates that number to be much lower) will suddenly lose their immigration status, the majority of whom probably don’t have any alternative means of maintaining their status in the U.S. Work permits will remain valid until September 2, 2025. According to the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, we can expect this to continue to act as a brake on the economy.

We might assume that a number of them will be joining the 59,000 currently in immigration detention, about half of whom have no criminal record. A Guardian analysis of ICE data estimates that there has been an “807% increase in arrests of people without criminal histories since before Donald Trump’s second inauguration this January.” At this level of overcrowding, health outcomes for both men and women are poor.

USCIS isn’t ghosting you

They just changed their number.

Matthew Blaisdell, Esq.

Sunset Immigration PLLC

219 36th Street, Ste 511

Brooklyn, NY 11232

Book appointment

How following the rules will get you arrested, what to scrub from your social media, and some more enforcement (with a lot of parenthetical explainers).

Apologies for typos; I had to skip the proofreading today.

the (immigration) cops have taken over the (immigration) courts (and everything else)

We’ve discussed the Administration’s goal of arresting 3,000 foreign nationals a day, and the practice of arresting individuals who attend their court appointments and who are (largely) applying for status. It appears there is also an even less formal, though unsurprising, policy of pressuring immigration judges to assist with this practice.

Immigration courts, as courts more generally, are intended to serve as neutral arbiters. They generally apply the relevant laws to the particular facts of a case before them, both procedurally and substantively. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), specifically, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) plays the role of prosecutor, submitting charges that a person has violated the immigration laws. The foreign national plays the role of a defendant (in immigration court, they are referred to as the “respondent”). The respondent may or may not hire a lawyer, but they are not entitled to one as they would be in criminal proceedings.

The immigration judge will review the charges, and if the respondent cannot overcome them, the judge will make a finding that the charges have been established. While at times this is a straightforward matter, the immigration laws can also be incredibly complicated, and the DHS is not always able to sustain their burden, meaning that the charges––and the case itself—are dismissed. Assuming that the charges are maintained, though, the foreign national will then have the opportunity to apply for a defense from relief, assuming that they meet the basic eligibility requirements, which are largely based on the U.S. obligations under international treaties to protect those seeking protection from persecution or torture from their home governments.

Because immigration courts are basically administrative bodies within the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), they do not have the same level of independence as the federal courts that you are more familiar with (often referred to as “Article III courts, as their independence from Congress and the President is established under Article III of the U.S. Constitution). The DOJ, on the other hand, is an agency that largely falls under the President’s authority, and the judges are appointed and overseen by the Attorney General.

On May 30, 2025, the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which you can think of as the immigration court system, issued internal guidance instructing that, when the DHS moves (requests) to dismiss a case (merely by saying the words “we move to dismiss”) the judge must immediately issue a decision on the motion. The guidance also included measure for speeding through fear-based claims, essentially providing less opportunity for the respondents (who, again, are usually without lawyers) to establish their eligibility. Individual reports are that the judges are evidencing additional clear, behind-the-scenes pressure to give in and grant the motions whenever they are made. As we’ve discussed previously, this leaves the respondents without any protection from arrest, and those who have been here for less than two years can then be placed into “expedited removal,” which affords them dramatically less opportunity to establish their claims.

The practice of showing up and arresting people while they attempt to comply with the law has been extended to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

Quick agency explainer: in 2002, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was terminated and its functions were spread across various new agencies. Most of these fall under the DHS, which itself if subdivided into USCIS (who reviews applications for benefits—meaning immigration status), ICE (who handles the enforcement of the immigration laws), and Customs and Border Protection (CBP)—the people at the airports and other “ports of entry” regulating entry into the U.S. These are all distanced from the Department of State (DOS), which staffs the embassies and processes visas. (More on them below.)

Many people who are out of status might still be able to “fix” their status by applying for certain benefits, depending on their situation. Some of these people might even have removal (deportation) orders. If someone would be eligible for a green card but-for a prior removal order, they typically have to have the order first reopened by an immigration judge by moving the court to reopen the case. The DHS can oppose these motions. What happens in the end is typically that the foreign national begins a case with USCIS and, once it reaches a particular stage (say, that USCIS has approved a marriage-based petition by deciding that the marriage is valid), then the immigration judge will decide whether to reopen the case to review the green card application in court or to reopen and then terminate (basically, to dismiss) the case so that the the foreign national can complete the application process with USCIS.

What we’ve been seeing in some, but not all, parts of the country have been ICE officers appearing at the foreign national’s USCIS interviews and arresting them on the spot, before the applications can even be reviewed. Imagine there was a law requiring you to carry a drivers license with you 24/7, and if you are found guilty of not possessing one you could be arrested and sent to a Bad Place possibly forever (for purposes of this thought experiment, let’s just say Staten Island). So you go to the DMV to fix the problem by applying for a license. You’re doing the right thing, the thing that the law requires you to do. You to to the window, get the piece of paper with a number, stare at the TV waiting to see which booth you’re supposed to go to, play around with your phone, and when your number is called you go to the appropriate window. You say “hi, I’m here to apply for my license,” but before they can accept your application an officer steps out from behind the booth and arrests you for not having the license *that you are there to get. *And you’re eating red sauce for the rest of your life.

To what do we have “rule of law” when we start losing the ability to comply with the law?

if you haven’t already scrubbed your social media

Last week we provided an update on the how the sort-of student visa ban is playing out. Someone was able to get their hands on the DOS cable from June 18th implementing the policy for “expanding screening and vetting for FMJ applicants.” What we know is that: all vetting will be done by the interviewing officer; all applicants will get a notice following the interview that their applicant is being refused for lack of information [we call this a section 221(g) notice]; the officer will take as much time as needed to review the applicant’s entire online presence—not just social media; consular posts can create their own social media account to help them investigate; applicants who set their accounts to “private” will be directed to switch them to “public” (and will be seen as being evasive); they’re looking specifically for hostility to U.S. citizens & culture, support for foreign terrorists, and anti-Semitic harassment; there are no quotas; and that consular posts should consider how much capacity they have to conduct these and should scale back the frequency of interviews accordingly.

However, some cases will be prioritized for less vetting—J-1 physicians and also international students seeking to study a university where international students constitute 15% or less of total student population. For everyone else, expect more denials citing section 214(b)—technically for those who they think will try to overstay, but really that’s just their kitchen sink clause for denying anything that they don’t want to approve. Which will be a lot of applications going forward. Given that foreign student enrollment increased last year, we can expect a sharp downturn this year, and thus much more pain for universities (and thus potential students who will be partially making up this shortfall with their tuition).

And while we don’t have much to update regarding the targeting of Chinese students implied by the May 28th announcement that we touched ona few weeks ago, there have been reports of unusual vetting at interviews, including more highly detailed information regarding the applicants’ professional background, their activities in the U.S., their source of funding, and related.

that trip to Puerto Rico . . .

There are increasing reports of ICE operations in Puerto Rico, both anecdotally, via traditional reporting, their own press releases, and Bad Bunny’s instagram. 36 more countries may be added to the travel ban if they don’t clean up their act in the next two months (though that would probably make surviving judicial scrutiny a tad more difficult). The updated procedures for nonimmigrant (temporary) visa revocations are now in the Foreign Affairs Manual, And CBP’s new app, CBP link, is to be distinguished from CBP Home, which his the app all the kids are downloading now for the new trend “self-deportation.”

Matthew Blaisdell, Esq.

Sunset Immigration PLLC

219 36th Street, Ste 511

Brooklyn, NY 11232

Book appointment

Who should think twice about traveling, what students are doing with their SEVIS terminations, why some people are getting fined a LOT of money, and a bit more.

Students and travel

Earlier this year, the Department of State (DOS) issued a Federal Register notice asserting that all federal efforts to control the movement of people, goods, services, and data across U.S. borders constitute a “foreign affairs function” exempt from the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). This would extend the DOS’ longstanding APA exemption to other federal agencies without needing to cite to clear statutory authority. If accepted, this could limit rulemaking and restrict judicial review of agency delays, including the ability to sue over delays. 

While this pronouncement went out a few months ago, it emphasizes a point that some lawyers have been making: don’t travel unless necessary. This isn’t necessarily the stance I adopt in every circumstance; every instances is different, and quite often people are unnecessarily worried due to anecdotal and incomplete evidence.

However, there are three groups in particular that might want to think through there strategies for traveling in and out of the U.S.: those subject to the new travel ban; those who would need to renew their visa at the embassy; and students who experienced prior SEVIS revocations.

We discussed travel ban 2025 last week. If you fall into one of the two bans on visa issuance, you can still apply for a visa, you just won’t get it. There is no clarification yet on what would constitute an exception in the national interest (other than their example of helping to prosecute criminal offenses). During the first Trump Administration’s travel ban, one could request an exemption at the time of the interview, and they were not impossible to receive. In the current context, however, DOS may not be feeling generous. 

However, recall that this is a ban on visa issuance: not on having a particular status. If you would otherwise be subject to the ban but already have a valid visa, you may enter. If you are already in the U.S. and in valid status, you may still apply to change or extend that status via an application to USCIS.

We also discussed the sort-of student visa ban last week. While the Administration is still targeting Harvard specifically, the global pause remains in place for issuing student visas while DOS sorts out its social media vetting procedures. 

Generally, I would expect more scrutiny for those seeking to apply for visitor visas as well. There is support for the idea that these policies will be extended to additional visa classifications going forward. And even for those with valid student visas and valid SEVIS records, one might still expect potentially lengthy questioning and device searches at customs, where one is not entitled to access to counsel or other protections that one might expect after entering the U.S. (Ports of entry are not considered to be parts of the interior U.S. When you approach customs with a visa, you are applying for permission to enter—and you are not at that moment entitled to the same protections as those who have already received permission to enter.) Therefore, it is helpful to know the policies and attitudes of the CBP operations at various airports; there can be quite a discrepancy between them.

Regarding those students whose SEVIS records were erroneously terminated by ICE, best practice is probably to avoid then seeking to fix the problem through the embassy, but instead to work with your school to reinstate the record through USCIS. Note that it should still be possible to transfer an I-20 in order to apply for a reinstated record. In the meantime, continue to comply with the terms of your F-1, but avoid working during the period of termination.

Also note that it is possible to apply to change status to-and-from visitor status, and these applications can be filed online. Moreover, applications to change to student visa status may be supplemented by premium processing--which may be necessary to comply with the academic calendar.

And expect airlines to be much tougher on travelers from such countries seeking to board. Customs and Border Protection’s Carrier Liaison Program stated that carriers (the airlines) can be fined for each affected person that they bring into the U.S.

Visa bulletin:

The July 2025 visa bulletin is out. We gave very short explainer on the bulletin in the May 21 newsletter. Applicants in all family-sponsored preference categories must use the Dates for Filing chart, while applicants in all employment-based preference categories must use the Final Action Dates chart. You can also find updates for the diversity visa program.

In other DOS-related news, you must submit your DS-160 at least two business days before your appointment for a nonimmigrant visa, you must now pay the visa fee again if it has been over 365 days or if you otherwise failed to update the barcode, and you will be turned away if the DS-160 number on the confirmation page is not an exact match of the number on the appointment notice. So double-check the confirmation number (you can updated it here), ensure that the DS-160 was submitted (here) at least two business days earlier, and contact the embassy if the barcode does not update.

status updates

The USCIS Policy Manual section for TN visas was updated in regards to requirements for filing, eligibility, certain occupations, and dependents.

Those who were paroled in visa the CHNV program (for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans) have begun receiving emailed termination notices from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) noting that their parole is terminated and their parole-based employment authorization is revoked, effective immediately.

Fines

A bill signed during an earlier enforcement era (1996) permits the government (currently, this would fall under ICE) to impose penalties of up to $500 a day to foreign nationals who have failed to depart subsequent to their final order of removal––Immigration and Nationality Act § 274D. The amount of the fine has increased each year to track inflation. The last update to this section of the federal regulations––at 8 CFR §280.53(b)(4)––occurred on May 18th, 2025, at which time the daily penalty increased to $998 per day.

After a fine is imposed, ICE must provide sufficient notification, including 30 days for the foreign national to submit a dispute. Once the fine has been issued, it can be appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

Notices of Intention to Fine (NOIF) were issued under the first Trump Administration at the end of 2018, at that time issuing penalties of up to $799 for each day (and over $291,000 for each year in the U.S. following the removal order); these were reversed by the same Administration the following year.

We are now hearing reports of fines being issued in the amount of $1.8 million. It may be that the government is actually combining two fees: one for failing to depart after a “normal” removal order, and one for failing to depart after an order of voluntary departure—which itself becomes a final order if the foreign national fails to depart within the allotted timeframe. Some speculate that, given the fact that these fines cannot be satisfied, the real motivation is to entice these individuals to appear at a time and place at which they might be detained and physically removed from the U.S.

This notion is reinforced by last week’s pronouncement that those who “self-deport” through the CBP Home App will receive forgiveness of any civil fines or penalties: in addition to the cost-free travel and $1,000 stipend that DHS has promised to those who “self-deport.”

Quickly:

There’s a great deal of pressure being brought to immigration judges to quickly get rid of cases, enabling ICE to immediately arrest individuals appearing in immigration court: a practice we’ve been discussing in the last few newsletters, and which merits a fuller discussion in a future newsletter.

ICE has been ordered to increase audits of employers’ I‑9 compliance. According to the Washington Post, since the new year, audits have increased 10x,  leading to raids in industries like meat processing, construction, hospitality, retail, and technology. These are a function of the Administration’s quota, discussed last week, of arresting 3,000 immigrants a day, largely while they are at work or attending court hearings: particularly within New York, Chicago, or L.A. The Wall Street Journal reports that the labor market might already be shrinking, and in the fact of Republican pushback, and the Administration has promised to ease up on farmers and hotel workers. But it may be the health workforce that is really at risk, where there is already a sortable of 80,000 workers, in an industry where 30% of personal care workers and 40% of health aides are foreign-born. Nursing homes are struggling to remain staffed.

That’s it for the week. Thanks for reading, and let me know if there’s anything you’d like me to cover.

Matthew Blaisdell, Esq.

Sunset Immigration PLLC

219 36th Street, Ste 511

Brooklyn, NY 11232

Book appointment

travel ban 2025

This Administration’s version of the “travel ban” took effect yesterday (Monday). Essentially, it is a ban on visa issuance (not travel, visa applications, or visa interviews) on foreign nationals from particular countries, and there are two types.

1. The full one:  no types of visas will be issued. This applies if your government is either dysfunctional or hostile and uncooperative (not including the present version of the United States). This is defined to include countries who are not effectively screening and vetting of their passport applicants, or who otherwise refuse to share information about their citizens, or who otherwise their citizens back once we try to deport them. Members of this club include Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Republic of Congo, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.
2. The partial one: no student, visitor, or exchange visitor visas will be issued, wither others somewhat restricted. This applies if too many other citizens of your country have overstayed, including citizens of Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. This does not entail that these countries all top the list of “overstays” (else there would be several European countries on this list) but it has been determined that the number of overstays is a significant factor in their decision.
3. And after the recent terrorist attack by an Egyptian national, that country might find itself on the list pending further investigation.

The caveats:

Having learned their lessons from the last time around, there are a number of limitations to the ban, making it more likely to survive legal challenges.

If you are from one of these countries, you may nevertheless not be covered by the ban, which only applies if you were: 1) outside the U.S. on June 9th; and 2) without a valid visa. If you had a visa on Monday, that will not be revoked, but future embassy appointments may be canceled. If you were outside the U.S. the embassies can also make case-by-case exceptions if your entry would advance a critical U.S. national interest: though likely that would involve something like participating in the prosecution of another immigrant.

Moreover, this ban does not apply to are: green card holders and their immediate relatives; athletes and coaches in major sporting event (basically the World Cup and Olympics); adoptees; refugees, asylees, and those with protection under the the Convention against Torture; Afghanis with Special Immigrant Visas; or those with diplomatic visas.

And note to dual-nationals: if one of your nationalities is not listed, then you are not prevented from entering via that passport.

Lastly, this policy will be reviewed after 90 days and every 180 days thereafter. Expect this review to be superficial, and expect a LOT of chaos surrounding the World Cup and Olympics.

the sort-of student visa ban

On the same day (June 4th), the Administration rolled out the highly-principled and judicious proclamation “Enhancing National Security by Addressing Risks at Harvard University." May 28th’s newsletter  touched on the Administration’s initial attempt to prevent Harvard from enrolling foreign students, and the resulting temporary restraining order (preventing the policy from being enforced) issued by the U.S. District Judge overseeing the case.

As anticipated, the proclamation suspends the entry of those with student visas seeking to begin attending Harvard, and allows the Secretary of State (currently, Marco Rubio) to revoke the visa of current Harvard students, in his discretion. As with the travel ban above, there is a “national interest” exception, and the policy will be reviewed in 90 days (so long enough to prevent students for the fall semester from arriving on time). And, as titled, this only applies to Harvard students.

Harvard filed an amended complaint the next day, and about four hours after that the TRO was extended through the next hearing on June 16th.

Meanwhile the global temporary global pause in scheduling interviews for student and exchange visitors (discussed last week) continues to proceed, pending further implementation of the Department of State’s policy for social media vetting. Those in the U.S. can still change status, and if you’re Canadian, you’re still exempt from a visa and can enter with an I-20, DS-2019, proof of SEVIS payment, funding and ties back home, and valid passport.

Everyone else can still submit DS-160 requests for an interview; consular posts will just not schedule any new appointments until the vetting procedure is in place.

Regarding Rubio’s May 28th announcement that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will revoke visas for Chinese students "with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields” (the equally measured and well-reasoned “New Visa Policies Put America First, Not China”), little remains known. For now, we assume this applies only to mainland China, but its application to Hong Kong has not been ruled out.

TPS terminations

Each week brings us to the end of more TPS programs. Cameroon’s will end on August 4th, 2025, and  Nepal’s will end on Aug 5, 2025. Work permits are automatically extended until these dates. If you are an employer, you must note both the expiration of the current work permits (June 25, 2025 for Nepal and June 7, 2025 for Cameroon) and their automatic extensions (to August 4th or 5th). More information for employers can be found here.

I-601A and registration

Section 262 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as described in 8 U.S.C. § 1302, requires noncitizens to register their presence in the U.S. with the federal government. Failure to comply may result in criminal and civil penalties, including misdemeanor prosecution, fines, and incarceration.

On January 20, 2025, the President issued an executive order (EO 14159, “Protecting the American People Against Invasion”) which, among other things, called for a new procedure requiring undocumented immigrants to register with USCIS (identified as the “Alien Registration Requirement”). We posted background documents (here and here) last month. Those with approved green card applications, DACA, TPS, or U-visa classifications will be considered registered. (Last month we provided more detail here and here.)

Once registered AND fingerprinted, DHS will issue evidence of registration, which noncitizens over the age of 18 must carry and keep in their personal possession at all times.

On February 25th, USCIS released Form G-325R for those not already considered registered, including applicants who were fingerprinted through processes not explicitly listed under the new rule.

Nevertheless, it appears some individuals with approved Forms I-601A (Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver) have been receiving notices indicating they’ve met the registration requirement. Our guess is that certain officers at the agency are conflating the fingerprinting requirement with registration. Applicants with approved I-601As should not assume they are registered unless they receive such notice.

quotas up, crime-fighting down

As mentioned last week, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller has been firing top ICE officials for allegedly failing to meet a quota of 3,000 migrant arrests per day, and that the FBI and National Guard have been deployed to join in this cause. It seems now that Miller is now threatening to fire the ICE local Field Office Directors with the lowest numbers and that 26,000 troops and federal personnel (FBI, ATF, DEA, IRS, and probably more) are being pulled away from from their regular jobs of keeping American safe in order to be dedicated to ICE’s “Operation At Large.” They’re getting somewhat closer to that goal of 3,000 by ramping up arrests at immigration and housing courts, workplaces, and homes, while also considering the conversion of military facilities into detention centers. One more time, for the record: the vast majority of these arrests have nothing to do with criminality.

And for the lawyers: my AI & Ethics CLE is been getting some positive reviews. If you have a chance to view it, LMK what you think and what related topics would be useful.

That’s it for the week. Thanks for reading, and let me know if there’s anything you’d like me to cover.

Matthew Blaisdell, Esq.

Sunset Immigration PLLC

219 36th Street, Ste 511

Brooklyn, NY 11232

Book appointment

Hi everyone,

The way removal (deportation) proceedings work is that you get a document that charges you with immigration offenses and tells you to go court on a specific date. From there, you start what is sometimes a short and sometimes a very long process where ICE is represented by lawyers and you represent yourself, unless you get a lawyer to do that for you.

The government has to prove the charges against you, and if they don’t, the case is terminated and you get back to your life. If the government does prove the charges, then you get the chance to “seek relief” by identifying a defense that might allow you to stay regardless; you might be otherwise eligible to apply for a status based based on family, employment, or a humanitarian basis. It gets really complicated, but there is a process that basically works, just as in a criminal or in any other civil context.

However, this is a government that isn’t really keen on understanding laws, or following laws, or just laws; they really would just rather skip all that. Right now, if you try to follow orders by appearing for your court hearings, they might just decide to arrest you there instead: in the elevator, in the hallways, wherever. Here in New York, Miami, and all over the U.S.

The trick they’re getting the most mileage from is to get you to show and, once you’re there, suddenly decide that they changed their mind and do not want to pursue the charges, getting the case dismissed, depriving you of the opportunity to seek a defense and allowing them to just grab you, then move you around the country so that your family and lawyers can’t find you.

Or, if they don’t even want to bother with “changing their mind,” they might just deport you while the hearings continue, then ask the judge to end the case once they’ve dropped you off in a Salvadoran prison: regardless of whether you you are from El Salvador, or have anything to do with El Salvador. And no, this has nothing to do with convictions.

As a last resort, should the judge decide not to play along, ICE can merely decide that you’re a flight risk or public safety threat and take you into custody, which has the effect of scaring some from attending their hearing: which then results in removal order, allowing ICE to detain and deport you at any time, in any place. 

Apparently, current ICE staff is not executing this scheme fast enough. As we’ve mentioned, the National Guard has been recruited to the purpose, and the FBI is on their way as well.

We’re attaching a flyer here from the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) to help you avoid this type of scenario. 

This week’s self-harm update:

The administration continues to do what it can to prevent pretty much anyone born abroad from subsidizing our schools with their money. We referenced earlier the announcement of a policy to halt processing of student visas at U.S. embassies so that they can review social media postings on “national security” and “foreign policy” grounds, and apparently cables to the embassies from the Department of State (DOS) have gone out to that effect.

Per AILA (DOS spelling errors included):

The cable directs consular officers to maintain “extra vigilance and to comprehensively review and screen every visa applicant for potential security and non-security related ineligibilities including to assess whether the applicant poses a threat to U.S. national security.” The cable singles out Harvard, stating that the purpose of the new vetting instructions is “to address the acute concerns of violence and anti-Semitism at Harvard University.” The cable states that it applies not only to students but any nonimmigrant visa applicant intending to travel to Harvard for any reason, including “prospective students, students, faculty, employees, contractors, guest speakersk [sic], and tourists.” It also states “implementation of this ALDAC [cable] will also serve as a pilot of expanded screening and vetting of visa applicants.  This pilot will be expanded over time.” (emphasis added).

Notably, the cable points out that “lack of any online presence” or making social media accounts private “may be reflective of evasiveness and call into question the applicant’s credibility.”  . . .  The cable also notes that any online presence should be reviewed, not just social media. Note that while this so-called “pilot” currently applies to Harvard-related visa applications, it may be expanded to other types/categories/universities/businesses.

And if you’re a Chinese student currently here on a valid student visa, they might just revoke it entirely, without anything to do with social media. 

For the employers:

E-Verify employers have been getting very vague emails from Homeland Security alleging that the employer may have a number of unauthorized workers, without providing much guidance by way of what the employer is supposed to verify this or what ot do about it. We encourage any employer receiving these to identify who their E-Verify administrator is and to reach out to immigration and/or employment counsel.

And USCIS is partnering with the the Social Security Administration to verify U.S. citizenship and immigration status by checking a social security number within the the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) program.

Also, fees going up. Again.

That’s it for the week. Thanks for reading, and let me know if there’s anything you’d like me to cover.

Matthew Blaisdell, Esq.

Sunset Immigration PLLC

219 36th Street, Ste 511

Brooklyn, NY 11232

Book appointment

Hi everyone:

Last week we provided a fact sheet on student visa revocations, and DHS’ initiative to more closely vet students and travelers for their social media history.

Shortly after that newsletter, the Trump Administration attempted to revoke visas for Harvard’s international students based on the same antisemitism concerns,*** affecting over 7,000 students: 27% of Harvard’s enrollment. About 24 hours later, Harvard  filed a temporary restraining order (TRO) to halt the revocations nationwide. The TRO was granted very shortly thereafter and will stay in place while the case proceeds, with the next hearing scheduled for May 29.

The university’s lawsuit contends that the government’s actions are retaliatory, violating their First Amendment free speech Fifth Amendment due process rights. The court’s decision allows Harvard to continue enrolling international students while the case proceeds, with a follow-up hearing on the order scheduled for May 29. Updates from Harvard can be found here. The ACLU has filed challenges across the country on behalf of students, in addition to numerous other lawsuits filed by students. 

In addition to targeting Harvard’s ability to enroll international students, the administration has directed federal agencies to cancel around $100 million in contracts with the university, as well as suspending over $2.6 billion in federal research grants, all of which are also being challenged in litigation.

Turns out Germany is happy to take them, though. 

*** Legally, the action was a revocation of Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visitor (aka SEVIS) Program certification, which is administered by ICE. A revocation of a visa is a different action taken by either the U.S. Department of State or Customs and Border Protection. Practically speaking, however, the actions have the same result: terminating the person’s ability to enter into, or to remain in, the U.S. under the classification of academic student or exchange visitor.

Also: if you are in immigration court, don’t read this flyer, and keep an eye out for ICE; USCIS updated it’s guidance on employment documents for Venezuelans under TPS (ending TPS and work permits under the 2023 designation); and the administration can’t keep removing people to Sudan without finding out if they’re actually supposed to be removed. But the President would still like to hand out a few extra green cards: or rather, gold cards.

And stuff about me for the lawyers: we wrote about why we wrote about legal reform; my Lawline CLEs of H-1B alternatives and immigration pathways for students are live; and AI & Ethics will be presented live on Friday. 

That’s it for the week. Thanks for reading, and let me know if there’s anything you’d like me to cover.

MB

Matthew Blaisdell, Esq.

Sunset Immigration PLLC

219 36th Street, Ste 511

Brooklyn, NY 11232

Book appointment

Hi everyone,

This week’s post is enforcement-oriented, as that’s where the focus of the Trump Administration has been.

For those interested in visa availability for June, or the results of the diversity visa lottery, please scroll to the bottom.

Cheers!

If you really must be posting political stuff on social media . . .

“To protect Americans,” the Department of Homeland Security (specifically: USCIS, Customs and Border Protection, and ICE) is now looking at your social media activity for anything that “indicates an alien endorsing, espousing, promoting, or supporting antisemitic terrorism, antisemitic terrorist organizations, or other antisemitic activity as a negative factor in any USCIS discretionary analysis when adjudicating immigration benefit requests.”

We’ve seen them interpret ‘antisemitism’ very broadly when going after international students—attempting to revoke student visas and green cards, grabbing them off the street to detain them and move them around the country, etc.––for offenses involving reposting a friend’s articles, sitting at a protest, walking in a protest, and writing opinion pieces in newspapers.

One might assume that they’ll be equally ambitious in denying applications and revoking visas at the border (including airports).

The USCIS release, with links to the executive orders, can be found here.

Venezuela & Afghanistan

The U.S. Supreme Court issued an order preventing the Trump Administration from using highly-expedited procedures under the Alien Enemies Act remove individuals (in this case, Venezuelans) while litigation over this use of the Act continues. The Administration may, of course, continue to use normal procedures to charge, arrest, detain, and initiate proceedings in Immigration Court, and eventually remove individual from Venezuela or anywhere else.

Afghanistan has been removed from the designation of Temporary Protected Status.

Work permits valid through November 20, 2023 or May 20, 2025, will be extended through July 14, 2025.

In other enforcement-related news

The National Guard may be coming to town, and ICE may be waiting for you at church, but birthright citizenship is not going anywhere.

Did you play the diversity lottery?

If you applied, check here for results. More about the program here and here.

Where you are in the line this month

If you are the beneficiary of a ‘preference petition’ for a green card, there is usually a wait, because there are a limited number of visas issued each year for each category and country—and when demand outstrips supply, there is a queue. (The new visas are all allocated at the start of the fiscal year on October 1st.)

There are no limits on the number of visas for immediate relatives of U.S. citizens––spouses, parents, or minor children––so a visa is always available. If this is you, you can ignore this conversation entirely. But for everyone else, the U.S. Department of State publishes a Visa Bulletin that tells you when you can file your application for a green card.

When the category and country are labeled as “current,” that means that a visa is available and the application can be filed. For those who will be applying for their green card at a U.S. embassy, they look at the chart to see whether there is a “C” in the box for their category & country. If not, they look at the date provided, and only if their petition was approved before that date will they be considered as current (and thus able to set up their appointment at the embassy).

However, for those in the U.S. who are eligible to apply for adjustment of status, there are instead two charts that determine when you’re able to file your applications:

1. Final Action Dates (Chart A): This tells you when USCIS or the consulate can actually approve your green card. This is the chart that will normally determine when you can file your application. 2. Dates for Filing (Chart B): When USCIS estimates that there are ‘extra’ visas available to they can submit the application ‘early’ according to the dates on this chart: even if the application can’t be approved yet.

Essentially, you check each month to see whether USCIS has determined that you must use Chart A or Chart B when applying for adjustment.

Per the June 2025 visa bulletin, if a family-based petition was filed for you, you will use the dates for filing chart. If it was an employment-based petition, you’ll use the final action dates chart.

In terms of progress, the line for most employment-based categories moved forward slightly, though most other categories largely stayed the same. July typically sees more movement as the agencies begin cycling through the remaining green card before the end of the fiscal year on September 30th. However, given the very high demand in several categories, it would not be surprising if most of the lines remain the same or actually get longer (“retrogress”).

One of these days we’ll write a proper introduction to using the visa bulletin, which is a great deal more complicated than I’ve explained. Until then, read CLINIC’s explainer here, and USCIS’ discussion of then June filing dates here.

For the lawyers

My colleague Michele Carney and I published an article in the AILA Law Journal on how states are changing their regulations about who can practice law, and how (also why, where, and anything you might want to know). This is Part 1; Part 2 will focus on the extent to which technological developments will significantly accelerate these developments.

For those looking for CLE credits, I have a few new courses on Lawline, including Alternatives to the H-1B Visa in 2025, next Tuesday my CLE Immigration Pathways from Studies to Employment will go live, and on May 30th I’ll present on AI and Ethics in Legal Practice. Looking for more ethics credits? My update to Walking the Line: Professionalism, Ethics, and Limits of Zealous Advocacy is also live. If there are any topics related to immigration or ethics you’d like me to cover, please let me know.

That’s it for the week. Thanks for reading!

MB

______________________

Matthew Blaisdell, Esq.
Sunset Immigration PLLC
219 36th Street, Ste 511
Brooklyn, NY 11232
Book appointment

What should I know about traveling in-and-out of the U.S.?

I’m an employer. What should I know about I-9 compliance?

What is the alien registration requirement? (See also here.)

This is where we share updates, insights, and resources for clients, collaborators, and the broader immigration community. …

We’re always listening. If there’s a topic you'd like us to explore, please get in touch.