Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in Deportation & Removal

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

by

mohamed_hassan-programming-9199585_1280The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is moving forward with a new proposal that could eliminate the 60-day grace period currently available to certain employment-based nonimmigrant workers after their employment ends.

On August 6, 2026, DHS submitted a proposed rule titled “Eliminating the Discretionary 60-day Grace Period” to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. The proposal has not yet taken effect, and the full text has not yet been released.

What Is the Current 60-Day Grace Period?

Under current regulations, certain nonimmigrant workers whose employment ends before their authorized stay expires may receive a grace period of up to 60 consecutive days, or until the expiration of their authorized stay, whichever comes first.

The protection currently applies to workers in the following classifications:

  • E-1
  • E-2
  • E-3
  • H-1B
  • H-1B1
  • L-1
  • O-1
  • TN

Their dependent family members are also covered by the provision.

The 60-day grace period gives workers valuable time after losing or leaving a job to find another employer, seek a change or extension of immigration status, or prepare to leave the United States. Workers generally cannot continue working during the grace period unless they have another independent basis for employment authorization.

Continue reading

by

gdj-ai-generated-9069946_1280President Donald Trump signed two executive orders on August 6, 2026, renewing his administration’s effort to restrict certain forms of birthright citizenship following a major Supreme Court defeat earlier this summer.

The new executive orders, “Ending Birth Tourism” and “Continuing to Protect the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,” take a narrower approach than the administration’s original 2025 birthright-citizenship order.

The action comes after the Supreme Court’s June 30 decision in Trump v. Barbara. The Court held that children born in the United States to parents who are unlawfully present or only temporarily present in the country are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and therefore are U.S. citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Executive Order Targets “Birth Tourism”

The first new order, “Ending Birth Tourism,” focuses primarily on immigration enforcement rather than directly redefining citizenship.

The order defines “birth tourism” as a foreign national entering the United States on a nonimmigrant visa for the purpose of giving birth in the United States. It also covers individuals or organizations that facilitate such travel. The administration argues that some foreign nationals misuse temporary visa classifications to enter the country specifically so their children will obtain U.S. citizenship.

The order gives the government broad authority to take measures against suspected birth-tourism activity including denying visas or admission, revoking travel authorization, removing individuals who participated in birth tourism, and potentially permanently barring individuals from entering the United States. The government may also take action against businesses or individuals that facilitate birth-tourism arrangements. Humanitarian and national-interest exceptions are permitted.

For foreign nationals traveling while pregnant, the practical impact will depend heavily on the regulations and guidance issued by the State Department and DHS, including how officers determine whether a person’s primary purpose for traveling is to give birth.

Continue reading

by

rainbowart-hat-1217913_1920The Trump administration is reportedly considering a $100,000 fee for international students who want to remain in the United States and work after graduating from an American university.

According to The Wall Street Journal, the proposal is being discussed within the Department of Homeland Security but has not been formally approved or published as a proposed regulation. Important details—including whether the student, university, or employer would pay the fee—remain unresolved.

The fee would affect students seeking employment through Optional Practical Training, commonly known as OPT. The program allows eligible F-1 students to obtain temporary employment directly related to their field of study. Standard post-completion OPT generally lasts up to 12 months, while qualifying STEM graduates may receive an additional 24-month extension.

A $100,000 charge would dramatically increase the cost of remaining in the United States after graduation. It could discourage international students from attending American universities and make it more difficult for employers in technology, finance, research, and other specialized industries to recruit graduates.

The reported proposal follows broader changes to student immigration policy, including new fixed periods of admission and extension requirements for certain F-1 students. DHS has acknowledged that international students contribute to American universities, research, innovation, and local economies, while maintaining that additional restrictions are needed to improve oversight and prevent fraud.

Continue reading

by

brittani-burns-98uYQ-KupiE-unsplash-scaled

Key Takeaways

  • The Supreme Court terminated Haiti and Syria’s TPS status on June 25th
  • Approximately, 350,000 individuals will lose their work authorization and be subject to removal
  • Affected individuals must seek alternative legal status immediately to avoid removal proceedings once the transition period ends.

On July 1, 2026, DHS and USCIS set a temporary expiration date of July 10, 2026 for work permits held by Temporary Protected Status beneficiaries from seven countries (Haiti, Syria, Burma, Yemen, Ethiopia, South Sudan, and Somalia), after a Supreme Court ruling cleared the way for the government to end those protections.

On June 25th the Supreme Court ruled that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) can move forward with ending TPS for certain countries specifically Haiti and Syria even while other smaller legal battles about those terminations continue in lower courts.

Although the deadline for some countries could still be extended while lower court cases continue, DHS has described any continued relief as temporary.

Continue reading

by

jorono-flag-2693195-scaledOn June 25, 2026, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to end Temporary Protected Status for more than 350,000 people from Haiti and Syria who have been legally living and working in the United States.

Although the ruling directly affects only TPS holders from Haiti and Syria, its impact could reach much further.

The decision may have consequences for the broader TPS program, which currently protects about 1.3 million people from more than a dozen countries.

What is TPS

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is a temporary immigration protection that allows people from certain countries to live and work legally in the United States, when it is unsafe for them to return home because of conditions like war, natural disasters, or major political instability.

The federal government determines which countries qualify for TPS and decides whether conditions in those countries justify renewing their designation.

The Ruling

The case, Mullin v. Doe, written by Justice Alito, held that courts do not have authority to review an administration’s decision to terminate TPS for a particular country. The court also rejected a constitutional claim brought by Haitian TPS holders, who argued that Haiti’s designation was ended because of racial bias. The court found that the evidence was not enough to show that racism played a motivating role in the decision.

Continue reading

by

artsybeekids-capitol-5660507-scaledThe U.S. Senate has approved legislation providing approximately $70 billion in additional funding for immigration enforcement, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Border Patrol. The measure passed by a 52-47 vote and now moves to the House of Representatives.

The bill significantly expands the administration’s immigration enforcement capabilities and provides substantial resources for detention, deportation, and border security operations through the remainder of President Trump’s term.

A major point of controversy was the bill’s inclusion of a $1.8 billion settlement fund connected to President Trump’s lawsuit over the disclosure of his tax records. Efforts to eliminate or restrict the fund failed, and the Senate ultimately passed the legislation without placing limits on how the money may be distributed.

The legislation marks one of the largest investments in federal immigration enforcement in recent years and reflects the administration’s continued focus on expanding immigration enforcement nationwide.

Continue reading

by

roszie-termination-7386579-scaledThe Department of Homeland Security has published a new proposed rule making it more difficult for certain noncitizens to obtain and maintain work authorization in the United States.

The proposal would affect humanitarian parolees, certain recipients of deferred action, individuals with final removal orders, and other noncitizens who currently qualify for Employment Authorization Documents (EADs).

The proposal would also make it more difficult for applicants with criminal histories, arrests, or admissions of criminal conduct to obtain work authorization, unless there are significant public-interest factors that justify a favorable exercise of discretion, such as cooperation with law enforcement.

If implemented, the changes would represent a significant shift away from broad access to employment authorization and toward a more restrictive, discretionary system. Many immigrants who rely on work permits to support themselves and their families could face increased uncertainty.

Continue reading

by

vilkasss-ai-generated-9817359-scaledThe U.S. Department of Justice has officially closed the San Francisco Immigration Court months earlier than expected, transferring its operations to the Concord Immigration Court.

The sudden closure has caused uncertainty for thousands of immigrants whose cases were pending in San Francisco.

Immigration courts handle deportation proceedings, asylum claims, and other immigration-related hearings.

Continue reading

by

joseph-chan-Q-730ajUcQ-unsplash-1-scaledFor years, DACA gave hundreds of thousands of young immigrants a fragile kind of security: permission to work, build lives, and avoid deportation — at least temporarily.

That security just got weaker.

On April 24, 2026, the Justice Department’s Board of Immigration Appeals issued a new precedent decision saying that DACA status alone is not enough to end deportation proceedings. The case involved Catalina “Xóchitl” Santiago, a DACA recipient whose removal case had been terminated by an immigration judge because her DACA protection was still active. DHS appealed — and won.

Continue reading