One quiet trend that has recently come to light is a new practice at the Asylum Office to dismiss affirmative applications without processing them. The asylum seekers are then subject to “expedited removal” proceedings or otherwise served with a Notice to Appear in Immigration Court. Some are detained. A preliminary evaluation of these dismissals found that many were improper under the law.
Here, we’ll examine this new development, look at who is affected, and discuss how to prepare for the possibility that your case will be dismissed by the Asylum Office.
First, how do we even know this is happening? Data from USCIS shows that in the last couple years, the number of dismissals at our nation’s Asylum Offices have increased dramatically. For example, in Fiscal Year 2025, the Asylum Office dismissed 159,530 cases. This represents 88.6% of all decisions issued by the Asylum Office during that year. Some (unknown number) of these people are sent directly to Immigration Court. Others (again, an unknown number) are subject to expedited removal (ER) proceedings.
ER is a rapid deportation process where the asylum seeker must undergo a credible fear interview (CFI), which is an initial evaluation of asylum eligibility. If the applicant “passes” the CFI, he would then be referred to Immigration Court, where he would present his full claim for asylum. If he “fails” the CFI, he would be deported (subject to a very perfunctory review by an Immigration Judge). In many cases, asylum seekers in ER proceedings are detained, which makes it more difficult to pass the CFI or to win an asylum case.
In response to this trend, the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) surveyed its members, who reported 134 examples where the Asylum Office dismissed an applicant’s case and then referred the person to ER proceedings.
Switching from the Asylum Office to ER can be exceedingly traumatic. Asylum seekers who were living their lives, working and going to school, with at least some measure of stability, suddenly found themselves in imminent danger of deportation, and in some cases, detained in a remote location. They were then forced to present their protection claim without sufficient time to prepare.
Who is being affected by this new policy? The main targets for dismissal seem to be people who entered the country without a visa at the U.S.-Mexico border. In some cases, the person received a Notice to Appear (NTA) in Immigration Court upon arrival, but a court case was never initiated. In other cases, the person was permitted to enter the U.S. with humanitarian parole. Under the law, anyone who was admitted or paroled into the U.S. should not be subject to ER. Nevertheless, the AILA survey found that 45% of referred asylum seekers had entered with parole and were improperly sent to ER proceedings.
In addition to cases from the border, in my practice, I have seen a few examples where people entered the U.S. with a visa, filed affirmatively for asylum, and then had their case dismissed by the Asylum Office and referred to Immigration Court. In these cases, the person had a pending asylum case and had also applied for another type of immigration benefit, such as a Green Card based on employment. When USCIS denied the other application, it issued a Notice to Appear in Immigration Court. This, despite the person’s pending affirmative asylum application. The (relatively) good news here is that these people were not subject to ER and were not detained.
What can you do to prepare if you are an asylum seeker who potentially faces dismissal and/or ER? First, these days, every non-citizen who does not have permanent status should have a safety plan, just in case they are detained. Have a trusted friend or family member who you can contact, and who can access your immigration documents and has contact information for your lawyer. Make a plan for your children or others who depend on you (including pets!), and for your property, vehicle, and other assets.
Also, make sure your immigration case is substantially complete and ready to go. If you get detained, cases move quickly. The CFI could occur in days, and court hearings may take weeks or a few months. It is much more difficult to gather evidence and witness statements, and write an affidavit if you are in detention, and so having all that ready to go will allow you to present a stronger application. Also, it doesn’t hurt to review any forms or evidence that you already submitted, just to be sure there are no mistakes.
My favorite Founding Father Ben Franklin once advised, “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.” In that spirit, even if you do not think you are vulnerable to having your affirmative asylum case dismissed, it is a good idea to make a safety plan and to gather your evidence. With a little preparation, you will be ready to present your case at the interview, at a CFI or in Immigration Court.
Hi Jason,
Affirmative asylum filed in 2018. Called for interview this February. Just received denial and referral to the Immigration Court. The Master Calendar Hearing is this June. What are chances of being detained at the hearing? Initially arrived on Tourist Visa, no criminal record, residing in Texas.
Thank you.
I think the likelihood of being detained in court for someone who entered the US with a visa is very low. As far as I know, those people who have been detained entered at the border and – per a new policy of the Trump Administration – are subject to mandatory detention. People entered with a visa are not subject to mandatory detention. Also, while I am not keeping close track of courtroom detentions, it seems that this has been much less frequently recently. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason ;
I am an American citizen through asylum, there are inheritance procedures in my country of origin that require me to complete paperwork at my country’s consulate in the USA. Does this go against my legal status in the USA?
Thank you for your help
I do not see how that would have any effect on your status, or any reason why you would potentially face danger at the embassy. I also do not see how going to the embassy would cause the US government to conclude that your old asylum case was fake. In other words, I do not see any issues with going to your embassy to do paperwork. Take care, Jason
I got citizenship through asylum, 14 years in the USA, never went to home country. And now I need to go to see relative who is not able to travel due to health. Will I be in trouble upon return back to the USA?
It is very unlikely. DHS is stepping up their effort to de-naturalize people, but I think the chances of a problem are very low. It would not hurt to be able to explain why you went there and how you stayed safe, in the unlikely event that anyone asks you about that. Take care, Jason
Hi,My asylum was granted by judge at NYC on August 31,2023 and after waiting 1 year I applied for I485 on November,2024.It almost 17 months i applied after 1 year of waiting and almost 30 month after granted Asylum but still I don’t get any response from USCIS.Can I do Mandamus or I have to wait or I can do inquire with help of my congress man?please suggest me.thanks
Apparently, DHS has a policy to file a motion to dismiss for all mandamus cases filed in I-485 cases, and so that will make it more difficult to succeed on such a case. You may want to talk to a lawyer who does mandamus cases in NY to see if they’ve had luck lately – our firm does those in NY, but I personally do not do those cases. If you want, I can put you in touch with someone about that. Otherwise, you might try a Congressional inquiry. Sometimes that can help. You can find contact info for your Congress person if you follow the link under Resources called House of Representatives or Senate. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason, I have an affirmative pending asylum application, applied to university and one of the fields is asking for the current status – there is no option for pending asylum, I’m planning to add as Other(I don’t have any other active status), my question is – can it trigger any 🧊 alert, call in etc? Do you have experience of your clients with pending asylum studying, what is the situation currently?
I have never heard about a communication with the university like that resulting in an issue with ICE. Maybe you want to check with the International Student Office (or what the office at the school is called that helps foreign students) to see what they advise. Maybe there is a way to inform the school that you have a work permit and are eligible to attend school based on the work permit. It may be worth talking to the university about it; if nothing else, it will educate them about your status, which would probably apply to other students as well. Take care, Jason
These offices are typically very incompetent and they only know mostly about F/J visa matters. (Even that they sometimes f*ck up)
Disclosing asylum pending status to these incompetent individuals, not only will not help OP but also these incompetent individuals may leak this information to others.
e.g. if 🧊 subpoena the student office for the record, then they will be exposed. Generally, it’s safest to keep one’s immigrant status to themselves, not share with others.
I would suggest OP to keep their mouth shut as not everybody feels the same way towards asylum seekers at university.
The whole point of the foreign student office is to help foreign students, so I doubt that is a concern, and in my experience, such offices are able to provide advice to students or to refer them to a lawyer who can assist if the matter is more complex. Take care, Jason
I am only saying this because I wish for a better situation for us and also recount my observations
https://www.law.georgetown.edu/admissions-aid/international-students/
The reason I dislike such offices is their unfairness and laziness/incompetence/responsibility shifting.
So if I take GULC as an example.
The first sentence in their page says “ International Student Services is here to serve newly admitted and current F-1 and J-1 international students. We will work closely with you to advise and provide updated information about issues affecting your immigration status. Please review this information frequently and contact us if you have questions or concerns.” So immediately it tells me they don’t want to serve asylum pending and TPS, etc other foreign students. They are being exclusionary, unfair if they are intentional or…they are incompetent because they learn the F/J portion of the INA, but they couldn’t bother to learn about asylum or TPS portion of the INA. I already feel unwelcomed just by reading this first sentence.
In addition, they also have this “ International Student Advisors Do Not Provide Legal Advice
Guidance from international student advisors does not constitute legal advice and should not be construed as such. You are encouraged to consult an immigration attorney for legal guidance. U.S. immigration authorities, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of State (DOS), make determinations regarding individual immigration status and eligibility for benefits.”
Basically, this means, we are not responsible for anything that goes wrong, if anything goes wrong. We shall not be held accountable, and any complex matter, you go find your own legal counsel, we cannot help.
When I read this, I feel that 1) they can’t handle complex matters, their job scope is limited and I cannot imagine people working there are too knowledgeable of some edge-scenario cases, they may only be able to do some straightforward F-1 cases like providing I-20 or sign OPT forms. This would be a job a high school student can do. 2) They don’t want to take responsibilities, they want to CYA…How can somebody entrust them with very important immigration matters if they couldn’t even take responsibility if something goes wrong ?
So after a review of this content, it should be understandable why I don’t feel comfortable seeking them for help. In my opinion, the existence of such offices are extraneous and asylum pending students should skip them and directly search for outside legal counsel.
Ideally tho, the international students offices should serve all foreign students, documented or not, instead of narrowly focusing on F/J students.
That is my 2 cents. Do you think I have a point ?
Immigration law isn’t brain surgery. If they are familiar with the basics, they can assist with that, and if a case is more complex, they can identify that the case is complex and refer the person for more advanced help. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason, I hope you’re doing well.
I wanted to ask for your advice regarding my situation. I have an Afghan passport and U.S. permanent residency (green card) through asylum. I’m unable to travel to Afghanistan to obtain a certificate of single status, and the Afghan consulate in Canada does not issue this document to individuals who moved to the U.S. or Canada after the age of 18, instead requiring it to be obtained from Afghanistan.
From what I understand, getting married in a third country typically requires this certificate, which makes it very difficult for me.
Given this, would a Utah online marriage be a valid and safe option? If I proceed with that and then meet my spouse in a third country after our marriage, would that be sufficient for me to petition for her in the U.S.? I would really appreciate your guidance. Thank you!
I have never heard about such a certificate being needed and so I do not know about that. It may depend on the country, and I have been to weddings outside the U.S. where such a certificate was not needed (in Morocco and Nicaragua). You may want to check with a lawyer in the third country to see what is needed to get married there, as a valid marriage should work for immigration purposes, regardless of where you got married. In terms of the online Utah marriage, I have not done a case with such a marriage, and so I am not sure how difficult it would be. It is possible to do a proxy marriage, where you and your spouse are in different places, but I believe you need to provide a religious or cultural reason why you could not meet in person, and I have not done such a case before either. I would recommend you talk with a lawyer to best determine your options, as you don’t want to file (and pay for) all the forms, only to get rejected because USCIS does not like the marriage documents. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
My asylum was approved in 2024, but USCIS never issued me an A5 (asylee) EAD, so I applied for it myself. It has now been about 10 months, and I still have not received it. In the meantime, I have also applied for my green card, but it appears that the processing time may be quite long. Currently, my C08 EAD is valid through 2029. Given this, would you recommend expediting the A5 EAD? Also, do you have any insight into the current validity period USCIS is issuing for new EADs. Thanks
Unless you are from a banned country, I would expect the GC application to take 1 or 2 years, and so you should have that before 2029. Last year, USCIS reduced the validity period from 5 years to 18 months, but since it sounds like you filed before that change (in November or December 2025), I think you would still qualify for the 5-year card. Also, people with asylum are eligible to work without a work permit (see http://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/form-i-9-resources/handbook-for-employers-m-274/70-evidence-of-employment-authorization-for-certain-categories/73-refugees-and-asylees). In terms of expediting, you can try, and I wrote about expediting in general on January 29, 2020, but I expect it will not be easy to expedite the new card given that you are eligible to work even without it. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I’m a derivative Adylee and I’m eligible for citizenship. The principal and I are from different countries and I made 2 flights back to my country, now, I’m hesitant about submitting my application because of those flights home. I never stated I feared to return to my country. And the principal is from a particular social group than I’m not a part of. How risky is it for my status is to be in jeopardy because I listed those travel back my country? Should I consider hiring a lawyer?
A derivative asylee is not subject to the same rules as the principal asylee, and so your return trips should not be an issue. I do think that sometimes the USCIS officers are not aware about all the rules, and so you should be prepared to explain that you were a derivative and that you never had a fear of persecution. Also, it sounds like you never went to the country where the principal feared harm; only to your own country. Under these circumstances, I think you should be fine, though I do think you should be ready to explain about this if asked (as you did here). In terms of a lawyer, if this is the only issue, I do not think it should be needed, but it’s up to you – these days, nothing is guaranteed and a lawyer can help by reviewing the case for any issues and hopefully helping you feel more secure during the process. Take care, Jason
BREAKING: DHS confirms to @FoxNews that deceased Iranian general Soleimani’s niece first entered the U.S. in 2015 on a tourist visa, was granted asylum in 2019, then got her green card in 2021. She applied for U.S. citizenship last July, but disclosed she had traveled to Iran at least four times since getting her green card, which DHS says proves her asylum claim was fraudulent. She was arrested by ICE Los Angeles yesterday.
DHS statement to FOX:
“On April 3, 2026, ICE officers in Los Angeles arrested Hamideh Soleimani Afshar and Sarinasadat Hosseiny, the niece and grandniece of Qasem Soleimani, the late head of the Quds Force of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps who was killed by a drone strike ordered by President Trump in 2020.
“Soleimani Afshar entered the United States in June 2015 on a tourist visa. In 2019, a judge granted her asylum. In 2021, she became a green card holder under the Biden Administration. In July 2025, she filed a naturalization application where she disclosed, she traveled to Iran at least four times since being issued a green card. Her trips to Iran illustrate her asylum claims were fraudulent.
“Her daughter, Sarinasadat Hosseiny, entered the United States in July 2015 on a student visa. In 2019, a judge granted her asylum. In 2023, she became a green card holder under the Biden administration
X: is that even legal,Jason? I guess renewing Cop passport or going back to cop could be a sign of fraud but in the end the DHS has to prove that there was a fraud? Right? Just by guessing or feelings alone ain’t enough to prove that her case was fraudulent? Right? Please educate us on that
Thank you for your post. This is something I was also going to ask Jason about. Whatever your opinion maybe about those relatives or their activities; I want to focus on the legal aspect of it. It is said that the green cards were revoked by Marco Rubio. So, the Secretary of State had the authority to revoke green cards now?? Also, DHS used her travel history to assert fraud. Is this a new rule that puts everyone who gained asylum and visited their country of origin (even for a brief period of time) under fraud assumptions? Also, what about derivatives asylees? Especially those who are not from the same country as the principal Asylee? Are they fraudsters for going to their home countries? This is really confusing.
Thanks Jason,
I have not heard that Marco Rubio revoked her GC. The process to revoke asylum involved an asylum interview and then an Immigration Court hearing. The State Department can submit evidence of alleged fraud. They can also make findings that the person is a national security threat, and that would largely block the person from asylum or cause the asylum to be revoked, but even in that situation, there is still a process to actual revoke the person’s asylum status. Travel to the home country can be evidence of a fraudulent asylum case, but it depends on the facts of the case. In terms of derivatives, if the principal loses status, the derivative will also lose status and if they want to stay in the U.S., they would have to file an application of their own (for asylum or some other immigration benefit). In general, a derivative asylee can return to the home country and that would have no effect on their status. However, it may depend on the case. For example, if the principal said that the whole family was in danger in the home country, and the derivative returns, that may be evidence that the principal’s case was fraudulent. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I arrived in the U.S. in 2018 on a student visa. In 2019, I applied for and was granted asylum based on fear of persecution in my home country due to my sexual orientation (same-sex relationships are criminalized there).
In 2022, I received my green card. Since then, conditions in my home country have changed. The Islamist party previously in power was overthrown, and while same-sex relations are still technically illegal, the law is no longer strictly enforced. LGBTQ activists are also no longer targeted as they were under the former government.
Because of these changes, I felt it was relatively safe to briefly visit my home country. I went back four times, and each visit lasted less than ten days.
I will be eligible to apply for naturalization next year, and I am concerned about whether these visits could affect my case. Does my travel history pose a risk to my naturalization application or raise concerns that my asylum claim might be viewed as fraudulent? How high is the risk? What do you recommend me doing. Thanks for your guidance.
I think there is some risk, but in my experience at least, it is relatively low. If you returned after you got the GC, the legal question is whether the return trips will cause USCIS to think your original asylum case was fake. If you have good evidence for the case and can explain why you returned and how you stayed safe, you will most likely be ok. Things are changing fast, though, and it would be worth talking to a lawyer or surveying the internet closer to the date when you are ready to file to see whether things have changed. Even if it seems ok to file, you should think about how you will explain the return trips and also have some evidence (of changed country conditions, for example) to submit if USCIS requests more info. Take care, Jason
I at least know one circuit court of appeal case that the panel says if one can renew passport, that means no real sense of harm or fear.
Chi Yun-Lai v. Bondi
First, of course they mention that she got her GC under Biden but do not mention that asylum was granted under Trump. Second, returning to the home country certainly does not prove that the asylum case was fraudulent. It is evidence that the person really does not have a well-founded fear of persecution, but whether it means that the person was lying about asylum depends on the facts of the case, and there is a procedure to determine that. Sadly, this Administration does not care about due process of law. It declares murdered US citizens to be “domestic terrorists” because they were protesting ICE, and so certainly we would not expect measured or fair messaging from them when they have the opportunity to insult an asylee or a prior Administration. Take care, Jason
It seems this administration hates Joe Biden a lot, any reason why ?
I mean I feel that he hates Joe Biden even more than Hillary Clinton
Maybe because indecency hates decency? Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I came legally on a B1/B2, applied for asylum in 2018, my case was administratively closed under Biden administration, I have a valid work permit until 2019 and a REAL ID in CA, my case was reopened under Trump administration and I have an upcoming individual hearing in June of this year. I have travelled domestically many times using y REAL ID without any problems.
Recently ICE has been deployed at many airports due to the shortage of TSA staff, and I have heard rumors that they are checking the IDs and often detaining people with pending Asylum cases that are in court, is this true? Have you heard anything like that? I am flying from LAX to Houston. Any inputs would be highly appreciated.
Thanks,
Vicky
Sorry my EAD is valid untill 2029! I incorrectly wrote 2019 in myprior message.
I have not heard about ICE detaining people at the airport, and I think in a situation where you entered the U.S. with a visa and have a pending asylum case in court, the likelihood of being detained is low. However, unfortunately, you never know what will happen these days and it is good to be prepared, just in case you are detained. As discussed in the above article, try to get your case completed as much as possible and have a safety plan in the event that you are detained. Take care, Jason
My previous lawyer confirmed that I am eligible to apply for a green card through marriage, even though my case is currently in court. Thankfully, my I-130 petition has already been approved after nearly two years of waiting and it got apprved in october last year.
I recently hired a new lawyer because my former attorney was not actively handling my case—I actually filed the I-130 myself.
I checked the EOIR system, I noticed that my case do not have any upcoming hearing dates because i was meant to have an individual hearing during covid and it didnt hold, so it shows no future date for this case and its pending. My new lawyer mentioned that we may need to terminate or dismiss the removal proceedings.
She has entered her appearance as the new attorney on the case, but currently, no judge has been assigned.
My concern is whether the case will remain unassigned indefinitely, or if there are steps she should take to help move the process forward especially since there are no future hearing dates scheduled for my case? She sounds like she is waiting until the case gets assigned to a judge. Jason please advise on how to go about scenarios like this.
I wrote about the process of getting a GC in court on August 6, 2018, and maybe that would be of interest. Assuming you are eligible to get the GC in the U.S. (if you are married to a U.S. citizen, entered the country legally, and have no criminal issues or immigration fraud issues, you would likely be eligible), you can either try to get the case dismissed, so you can adjust status (get your GC) with USCIS, or you can try to get your GC with the court. I do not think you need to wait for a court date. Your lawyer should be able to file a motion to request that the case be dismissed or placed on the active docket. You might ask the lawyer about this possibility, as there may be a reason that she does not want to do that, depending on your case or the court. Take care, Jason
The AG is fired…
Now do you think this is a good or bad development for asylum seekers ?
Who do you think will replace her ?
Best!
I am not sure exactly why she was fired. She was certainly loyal to the President. I can’t imagine we will get anyone aside from someone who is completely loyal to the President and who does not see their role as an independent agency head, but rather as someone who does the President’s bidding in all circumstances. I would not expect the change to have major effects on immigration, as the BIA seems to be taking the lead in issuing restrictive decisions already, but we shall see. Take care, Jason
Is the pause on adjustment of status lifted? Or does it seems like is the 39 countries are still banned from adjusting? They talk about entry in their last update but people who are adjusting are already inside, why is that?
The latest announcement that I have seen (https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/update-on-uscis-strengthened-screening-and-vetting) does not say anything about lifting the hold on adjustment for people from the 39 banned countries, and so as far as I know, that hold is still in effect. There is a separate ban on immigrant visas from 75 countries, but that is only for people outside the U.S. who are trying to come here on an immigrant visa (i.e., with a green card). Take care, Jason
Follow up question to Greencard Pause; does AOS apply to adjusting from asylum pending to marriage GC?
If someone’s a national of the 39 countries with a pending asylum decision and gets married, files for adjustment, would their adjustment not be adjudicated right now? I read that one of the “exceptions” in the new USCIS memo for lifting the pause on applicants from “countries of concern” is if a US citizen petitions for them – technically, this case scenario should apply, right? Thanks in advance!
Based on a USCIS memo (https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-alerts/PM-602-0192-PendingApplicationsHighRiskCountries-20251202.pdf), my understanding is that all decisions for people from the 39 “banned” countries are on hold, and that includes adjustment of status based on marriage to a U.S. citizen. Whether the newest announcement ends that hold is not clear. I do think that people should still file their applications to adjust status, as we hope the hold will eventually end, either because USCIS ends it voluntarily or because a lawsuits forces them to adjudicate the pending cases. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
Someone I am close to who has health issues renewed her Medical and EBT in California by phone. She has a green card through asylum. The people on the phone asked her if she was an Iraqi kurd, if she was a prostitute, if she exchanged her food stamps to buy materials to build bombs, and said they would be sharing her information with ICE. They processed her application and said it was not guaranteed it would be accepted. That was the most normal part of it, that is fine. The other stuff was shocking to me. Especially in California. Have you seen this anywhere or heard of this kind of harassment? Of course she broke down in tears after all this. Thank you for your thoughts,
That is very disgraceful and I have not heard about that before. I would definitely recommend she contact the agency again and see if she can file a complaint about this or talk to a supervisor. She might also reach out to her CA state representative (the equivalent of a Congress person, but for the state of CA) or to a CA state anti-discrimination office (I assume there is such an office) to report the abusive behavior. If she does not want to do that directly, she may want to talk to a local immigration advocacy group to see if they can assist. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
What do you anticipate about Afghans EAD pending applications ? This is a really important issue because if we can’t work who we can at least pay our rents, provide food to our families who are entirely dependent on us. I am still using my EAD reciept which is valid for another 10 months but I am really wondering what’s gonna happen if they don’t extend work permits, and I also don’t hear any good news related to this.
I wish advocates could address more about work authorization issues.
If asylum seekers’ work rights are taken away, how do they work and support themselves
I don’t have the links easily available, but there are a lot of efforts to assist with this issue, including an effort to submit comments to the latest rule-making announcement on EADs (which I wrote about on February 25, 2026). There may also be a lawsuit related to some EAD changes, but I am not sure. Take care, Jason
I mean…
Forgive me if I sound strict but I feel that advocates, working with immigration laws all day everyday, should be able to tell before a damaging policy is coming.
Prevention is always better than a cure. If a person already has cancer, it’s gonna be difficult to be cured, and at great cost. It’s much easier to prevent or reduce cancer instances before cancer develops.
I wish more guardrails could have been put by advocates before anything bad happens.
For example, it’s only when people are wrongly deported or wrongly detained that advocates start working to remedy the situation. I think at that time, anything the advocates can do will be too little too late. Wrongful removal and detention will not be easily corrected.
Something should be done BEFORE the drastic policy to cut EAD down to 18 months, to prevent such policy from becoming announced. Rather than after this policy has already been announced and effective and then think of ways to remedy that. As I see, it seems EAD will never be back to 5 years…it’s just so sad…
I understand it’s a high standard, but immigration advocacy is not ordinary job, it’s a job with utmost responsibility and morality and one should act with the highest standard when they sign up to become immigration advocates.
Do I have a point ?
I am seeing advocates working very hard to assist in many different ways. I wonder what you are doing to assist? I would hope your own actions would be more of a concern to you than the actions of others. Take care, Jason
It is possible that the hold on Afghan (and other banned country) EAD applications has been lifted, but that is not clear. You can see the USCIS announcement here: https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/update-on-uscis-strengthened-screening-and-vetting, and this indicates that the hold is lifted for “certain employment authorization documents.” Unfortunately, we do not know what that means. We will have to see what happens with EADs for people from banned countries. The whole idea of tying EAD renewals to some nebulous “security” check is ridiculous. This is a real fraud on the part of USCIS, designed mostly to harm innocent people. Anyway, hopefully this new announcement is positive news and we will start seeing EADs being issued. Hopefully. Take care, Jason
Jason,
I just realized that I have pending unpaid speed tickets from DC. Does this matter my naturalization process?
Thanks,
Samuel
They are checking things very carefully these days and looking for reasons to deny people, and so you should take care of those tickets. I do not think you necessarily need to do that before you file the application, but you should resolve the tickets before the interview (and the sooner, the better). Also, if these somehow result in a criminal charge, you would need to inform USCIS about that. Take care, Jason
Jason,
I am about to apply for citizenship. I never changed my id address since arriving the state, but I used to love be in a leased home with my family and had a mailing address. My id address is my sister’s home to where we reside since arrival. Does it matter as an issue? Understand I should mention all the addresses. Any idea?
Thanks
Sambod
The citizenship form, N-400, asks you to list your addresses, and so you need to list your mailing addresses and addresses where you actually lived. I think it is safest to list them all. The issue is that if you submit documents that show an address that you did not list on the form, or if USCIS has information about your other addresses (maybe obtained from some publicly available source), USCIS may think you are trying to hide something, which would be bad for your application. You can list all the addresses and then explain that you have your mailing/permanent address and the other addresses where you lived. Take care, Jason
Good morning, Jason.
As I understand from the USCIS website and other sources, the asylum decision hold has been lifted, and they should begin issuing decisions for applicants who recently completed their interviews. I wanted to get your thoughts on how long it might take to receive a decision.
Also, since the officer mentioned that the decision would be sent by mail, should I primarily rely on that, or should I actively monitor the USCIS “Check Case Status” portal as well? Would you also recommend checking the EOIR portal? Thank you!
The hold seems to have been lifted for people from non-banned countries (you can see the list of banned countries here: https://www.cfr.org/articles/guide-countries-trumps-travel-ban-list). That means that the asylum office can issue decision, but it does not mean that they will do that quickly. I have heard about a few people who got decisions very recently. Some people may get decisions quickly, but others may still have to wait. If you check your case status on the USCIS website, it will tell you whether a decision is mailed. You might consider getting “informed delivery” from the US post office, as that sends you an email with a photo of your mail. I guess you can also monitor the EOIR portal, and if your case appears there, it is obviously not good news, but the USCIS website would be the better place to monitor, as you will see whether there is a decision, and then you can check the EOIR web page. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
What about the other applications like 485 or 131 for the people from 39 countries?, is the hold is lifted for them too?
As far as I know, such applications were never on hold for non-banned country people, and so I think those applications are still being processed. You can see the USCIS announcement about partially ending the hold here: https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/update-on-uscis-strengthened-screening-and-vetting. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason Dzubow,
Greetings!
Thank you for your dedication and help to this community.
I just want to ask you that what kind of questions at the interviews of an asylee status adjustment would be asked? I your professional advice is very helpful. Expecting your explanation soon.
God bless you
I went to one last week where they only asked a few questions and the entire interview took less than 10 minutes (after we waited for nearly 2 hours). The most significant questions there were about potentially giving money to a terrorist group, which was covered extensively at the asylum office. Though such a short interview is possible, it is best to prepare for a full interview, where they can ask the questions listed on the I-485 form and it is also a good idea to review your asylum case, as they can ask about that too. In addition, remember that they have visa information (your visa applications) and maybe other publicly available information about you, and so you can be asked about that. Every interview is different and so you never know quite what to expect, but if you review your I-485 and your old asylum case, and you remember not to answer questions you do not understand or where you do not know the answer or do not remember, you should be fine. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason, can you please clarify if “ In other cases, the person was permitted to enter the U.S. with humanitarian parole” also includes someone with humanitarian parole visa entering through an airport? Have you seen any such Afghan cases?
I have seen such cases, and in fact, just this morning I talked to an Afghan person who was paroled in, arrived through the airport, and filed asylum affirmatively. The case was referred to court without explanation, but the person was not detained and not subject to expedited removal. I believe there is some new litigation about the parole issue and the Trump Administration may be blocked from revoking parole, but we will have to see how that case plays out. Take care, Jason