Immigration Updates: August 27, 2025

More social media vetting, “false claim” finally gets a reasonable update, and we’re losing a lot of workers over here.



making “Anti-American”meaningless



USCIS officers arenow instructed to weigh whether an applicant has engaged in either antisemitic activity or alleged anti-American activity: the latter of which seems to focus on involvement in hostile or terrorist organizations or advocacy that raises national security concerns. The guidance also expands the use of social media vetting, which is more an investigative tool than a substantive factor in the decision-making process. Whereas the social media vetting policy had previously been focused on applications for visas to enter the U.S., it will now applied to applications for benefits within the U.S. as well The upshot is that officers may now review an applicant’s online activity more broadly — posts, affiliations, memberships — and if they identify material considered “anti-American,” that information can then be used as a negative discretionary factor when deciding the case.

Of course, there’s already a blanket of grounds to deny an application for anything related to involvement in hostile or terrorist organizations or advocacy that raises national security concerns. But if “Anti-American” activity here is to refer to anything else, we’re left with no clue as to what: likely because of obvious First Amendment violations, thus meaningless either way. It’s likely another random thought generated by someone in DHS leadership, running almost unfiltered into the Policy Manual. So for now, nothing to see here, though we continue to advise refraining from any potentially antisemitic social media postings.

new drop from the OFLC



The H-2B program allows U.S. employers to hire foreign nationals for temporary non-agricultural jobs—landscaping, hospitality, seafood processing, seasonal construction, etc. Due to the high demand, urgent need, and relatively low profile, this is one category where Congress regularly authorizes supplemental visas beyond the annual cap.

To mitigate against exploitation and opaque recruitment chains, federal regulations now require employers to disclose the names and locations of the recruiters they (Mexico, Guatemala, and Jamaica are popular locations) in order to see who is involved in the pipelines. The Office of Foreign Labor Certification (OFLC, part of the Department of Labor) last week published its latest H-2B Foreign Labor Recruiter List, a quarterly catalog of the names and addresses of where employers turn when they need large seasonal workforces. Enjoy.

something good . . .

USCIS has issued Policy Alert 2025-17, updating its manual on the ground of inadmissibility for making a false claim to U.S. citizenship. There are a few findings that trigger a potential “death sentence” in immigration: a “sham marriage” and a false claim to U.S. citizenship. The former requires a fairly high burden for the USCIS investigator. The latter can be triggered by a number of innocuous, unintentional representations: an accidental marking on a job application or a DMV form, allowing an aggressive poll worker to register you to vote, and numerous others. If a USCIS officer or immigration judge decides that you allowed yourself to be represented as a U.S. citizen in most any context, you are permanently barred from most benefits, with almost no waiver available, and potentially placed into removal proceedings. Matter of Zhang, a decision from the Board of Immigration Appeals, long held that a claim doesn’t need to be made directly to an immigration official, and that the government doesn’t have to show the claim actually helped the person. A single claim, made many years ago without understanding the consequences, can effectively end a person’s path to legal status in the U.S. The new guidance doesn’t undo Zhang, but it tells officers to weigh intent, context, and quality of evidence. Was the claim knowing and deliberate, or a checked box in error? Was it material to getting a benefit reserved for citizens, or incidental? Is there solid proof, or just a vague notation in an old database? The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must now also provide “reasonable and probative” evidence before the burden shifts to the applicant. For example, imagine a lawful permanent resident who applied for a driver’s license 15 years ago and mistakenly checked the “U.S. citizen” box. Under Zhang, that error alone could have been enough to block them forever from naturalizing. Under the new guidance, an officer should now consider whether the mistake was intentional, whether it mattered to eligibility for the license (in this case, it would not have), and whether the record itself is reliable before treating it as a lifetime bar.

. . . and then the usual



Immigration is declining for the first time in 50 years (in line with a ton of data about the shrinking workforce), and we’re now asking the office workers in Defense to help, no one from Gaza will get in for medical treatment, and when Marco Rubio tried to be President, he wanted everyone to know that birthright citizenship was real.

Matthew Blaisdell, Esq.

Sunset Immigration PLLC

219 36th Street, Ste 511

Brooklyn, NY 11232

Book appointment