Visa Lawyer Blog

by

tilixia-summer-money-8023328_1280On September 14th a coalition of states and major U.S. cities filed federal lawsuits challenging the Trump administration’s new public charge rule, giving immigration officers broader discretion when deciding whether certain immigrants may be denied admission or lawful permanent residence.

The rule took effect on Friday, September 18, 2026, and applies to applications for admission made on or after that date and adjustment-of-status applications filed on or after September 18.

What Changed?

The Department of Homeland Security rescinded the narrower public charge regulations adopted in 2022.

Under the new rule, immigration officers must consider at least five factors when deciding whether an applicant is likely to become a public charge: the applicant’s age; health; family status; assets, resources, and financial condition; and education and skills. Officers may also consider employment history and prospects, a required Affidavit of Support, and other information relevant to the applicant’s ability to remain financially self-sufficient.

The rule also significantly expands the public benefits that may be considered. For benefits received on or after September 18, 2026, officers may consider an applicant’s application for, approval for, or receipt of any means-tested public benefit, including programs such as Medicaid and SNAP.

Receipt of public benefits alone does not automatically result in a public charge finding; officers must evaluate the applicant’s circumstances as a whole.

The administration says the change restores necessary discretion and better reflects federal immigration law and policies encouraging immigrant self-sufficiency.

Continue reading

by

creativecanvasdesign-student-10443989_1280On September 14th a federal judge temporarily blocked a Trump administration rule that would have placed fixed limits on how long certain international students, exchange visitors, and foreign journalists could remain in the United States.

The Department of Homeland Security rule was scheduled to take effect on September 15, 2026 that would have replaced the longstanding “duration of status” system with fixed admission periods.

Under the rule, most F-1 students and J-1 exchange visitors would have been limited to four years, while foreign journalists in I status would generally have been limited to 240 days. Individuals needing additional time would have been required to request an extension from DHS.

Currently, many F-1 and J-1 visa holders are admitted for “duration of status,” commonly shown as D/S, allowing them to remain in the United States as long as they continue complying with the requirements of their immigration status and authorized program.

Why Did the Court Block the Rule?

On September 14, U.S. District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV ruled that the plaintiffs had shown a substantial likelihood of succeeding in their challenge under the Administrative Procedure Act.

The government argued the new restrictions were needed to address fraud, abuse, and national-security concerns. The court found that it had not adequately connected the fixed time limits to those concerns and had not sufficiently addressed alternatives or objections raised during the rulemaking process.

Continue reading

by

roszie-termination-7386583_1280DHS has officially published a proposed rule that would eliminate the 60-day grace period currently available to certain nonimmigrant workers after their employment ends.

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published in the Federal Register on September 11, 2026. The proposal would affect workers in E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, O-1, and TN status, as well as their dependent family members.

Old Rule

Under current rules, eligible workers may receive a grace period of up to 60 days after their employment ends, or until the expiration of their authorized stay, whichever is shorter. This period can give workers time to find a new employer, change immigration status, or make arrangements to leave the United States.

New Proposal

DHS is proposing to eliminate this protection. If the rule is finalized as written, affected workers would generally be considered out of status beginning the day after their qualifying employment ends unless they have another lawful basis to remain in the United States.

DHS states that the change would more closely tie a worker’s immigration status to the employment that supports that status and reduce the administrative burden associated with determining whether the grace period applies.

Importantly, this is only a proposed rule. The current 60-day grace period remains in effect at this time.

The public comment period is open through November 10, 2026. After reviewing public comments, DHS may modify the proposal and issue a final rule.

Continue reading

by

openclipart-vectors-poland-151461_1280-1In this blog post we bring you some important developments impacting visa applicants in September.

First, the U.S. government has resumed immigrant visa processing for applicants in Hungary and Poland, while processing restrictions remain in place in a number of other countries.

The broader pause was connected to changes in how the Department of State evaluates applicants under the public charge rules and additional training for consular officers.

Continue reading

by

 

sharijo-cv-4043315-scaledThe U.S. Department of State has resumed the issuance of Diversity Visas following a federal court order in Medani et al. v. Trump et al. According to the State Department, visa issuance has resumed as of August 28, 2026, ending the suspension that had been in place since December 2025.

The December 2025 suspension had temporarily stopped U.S. Embassies and Consulates from issuing Diversity Visas while the government reviewed screening and vetting procedures. The court order now requires the State Department to resume processing and issuing affected visas.

Why This Matters for DV-2026 Applicants

Timing is especially important for DV-2026 applicants because Diversity Visas generally must be issued by September 30, 2026. If a visa number is not issued by the end of the fiscal year, the opportunity may be lost.

Applicants with pending cases should continue monitoring their case status, attend any scheduled interviews, and respond quickly to requests from the U.S. Embassy or Consulate.

If you have a pending DV-2026 case and are concerned about the September 30 deadline, contact an immigration attorney as soon as possible to discuss how the court order and resumed visa issuance may affect your case.

Continue reading

by

marek-studzinski-vUIUHWK3LFc-unsplash-scaledThe cost of sponsoring an H-1B worker could soon change dramatically.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has proposed a new $103,265 fee for H-1B cap-subject petitions—on top of the government filing fees employers already pay.

The proposal was published in the Federal Register on August 25, 2026.

Who Would Have to Pay?

The proposed six-figure fee would apply to H-1B petitions subject to the annual cap, including beneficiaries selected under the 20,000-visa U.S. advanced degree exemption.

Importantly, the fee would apply whether the petition requests:

  • Change of status inside the United States; or
  • Consular notification for an H-1B visa abroad.

The $103,265 payment would be due when the employer files the H-1B petition—not during the initial H-1B registration process.

Who Would Not Be Affected?

The proposal is limited to cap-subject cases.

Cap-exempt H-1B petitions would not be subject to the new fee. This generally includes H-1B extensions and qualifying petitions filed by cap-exempt organizations, such as certain universities, nonprofit research organizations, and governmental research organizations.

Continue reading

by

blessing-ri-mBRtqyC_Iq0-unsplash-scaled

We are pleased to report that the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs has published the September 2026 Visa Bulletin.

In this blog post, we breakdown the movement of the employment-based and family-sponsored categories in the coming month.

Adjustment of Status Chart

For adjustment of status filings to permanent residence in the month of September, USCIS will continue using the Dates for Filing Chart for family-sponsored categories only.

For employment-based categories, USCIS will also continue using the Final Action Dates Chart.

Highlights of the September 2026 Visa Bulletin

At a Glance

What can we expect to see in the month of September?

Employment-Based Categories

Final Action Advancements

  • No changes except for EB-4 which will advance 2 months to December 15, 2022
  • EB-2 India and EB-5 India remain unavailable
  • The State Department warns that the EB-2, EB-1 India, and EB-5 unreserved categories may become unavailable before the end of September, with availability resuming when the new fiscal year starts in October.

Dates for Filing Advancements

  • No changes from August Visa Bulletin

Family-Sponsored Categories

Final Action Advancements

F-1 Unmarried Sons and Daughters of U.S. Citizens

  • Mexico will advance 1 month to January 1, 2008
  • Worldwide, China, and India will advance 13 months to January 22, 2020

F-2A Spouses and Children of Permanent Residents

  • Mexico will advance 1 month to August 22, 2025
  • All other countries will advance 1 month to August 22, 2026

F-2B Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 years of age or older) of Permanent Residents

  • Worldwide, China, India will advance 1 year and 7 months to August 22, 2019

Continue reading

by

kreatikar-globe-3411506_1280-1On August 21, 2026, a federal judge struck down the Trump administration policy that blocked immigrant visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries, allowing the green card process to resume for thousands of family- and employment-based green card applicants.

The policy, which took effect in January 2026, directed U.S. consulates to pause immigrant visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries identified by the State Department as presenting a higher risk of relying on public benefits.

These countries included:

Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, The Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyz Republic, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Pakistan, Republic of the Congo, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, and Yemen.

Although applicants could continue submitting documents and attending interviews, many could not actually receive their immigrant visas solely because of their nationality.

Continue reading

by

igor-lolatto-TdwYsTmA2Bc-unsplash-scaledThe public charge rule is changing again, and this time USCIS will be allowed to look at a much wider range of government benefits.

But before you panic about Medicaid, SNAP, housing assistance, or other benefits, ask one question first:

Does the public charge rule even apply to you?

In this blog post, we break this down so you don’t have to.

When does the public charge rule take effect?

The new USCIS guidance takes effect September 18, 2026, and applies to Forms I-485 postmarked or electronically submitted on or after that date.

Here is the easiest way to figure out where you stand.

Step 1: Are You Even Subject to the Public Charge Rule?

Public charge does not apply to every immigrant.

As a general rule, most people applying to become permanent residents are subject to public charge rules, unless Congress has specifically exempted your immigration category.

You Are Generally Subject to Public Charge If You Are Applying for a Green Card Through:

Immigration Category Public Charge?
Spouse of a U.S. citizen YES
Parent of a U.S. citizen YES
Child of a U.S. citizen YES
Family-preference categories F1, F2A, F2B, F3 or F4 YES
K-1 fiancé(e) adjusting status YES
Employment-based EB-1 YES
Employment-based EB-2, including many NIW applicants YES
Employment-based EB-3 YES
EB-4 applicants unless separately exempt Generally YES
EB-5 investors YES
Diversity Visa adjustment YES

In other words, being sponsored by your U.S. citizen spouse does not exempt you. Neither does having an approved employment petition or qualifying for an EB-2 National Interest Waiver.

Continue reading

by

ironhorse71-tourist-8183867_1280Recent developments in U.S. immigration law and immigration enforcement have changed the risks associated with both international and domestic travel for certain noncitizens.

This does not mean that all travel is unsafe or that every person with a pending immigration case should avoid traveling.

However, beginning August 13, 2026, your immigration history, current status, prior periods of unlawful presence, and pending applications may significantly affect whether travel is advisable.

For this reason, individuals with unresolved immigration-status issues should carefully review their circumstances before making any travel plans on or after August 13th.

Major Change to International Travel With Advance Parole

One of the most significant recent developments involves Advance Parole.

Advance Parole is a travel document that may allow certain noncitizens—including some applicants with a pending Form I-485 Application to Adjust Status—to temporarily leave the United States and regain admission using advance parole after temporary foreign travel.

For years, many applicants relied on the rule established in Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly, 25 I&N Dec. 771 (BIA 2012), which generally held that temporary international travel under Advance Parole was not considered a “departure” for purposes of the unlawful-presence bar addressed in that case.

That rule has now changed.

On August 13, 2026, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) issued its precedential decision in Matter of Delcarmen-Lara, 29 I&N Dec. 830 (BIA 2026). The BIA expressly overruled Arrabally and Yerrabelly and held that leaving the United States pursuant to Advance Parole can constitute a “departure” under INA § 212(a)(9)(B).

This is an important change because departure from the United States can trigger serious immigration consequences for individuals who previously accumulated unlawful presence.

Continue reading