Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in Work Visas

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

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

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

succo-hammer-1675156_1280In another rapid development surrounding the controversial $100,000 H-1B consular processing fee, a federal court has temporarily allowed U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to continue collecting the fee while the government’s appeal moves forward.

Employers and foreign workers should prepare for continued uncertainty as the litigation unfolds.

What Happened?

On June 8, 2026, a federal district court in Massachusetts struck down USCIS’s implementation of the $100,000 H-1B fee, finding significant legal issues with the policy. However, just four days later, on June 12, 2026, the same court temporarily paused its ruling after the government filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

As a result, USCIS currently retains the authority to continue collecting the $100,000 fee for qualifying H-1B petitions involving consular notification while the appellate court reviews the case.

The government must formally request a stay from the First Circuit by June 18, 2026, for the temporary reinstatement to remain in effect.

The appeal is pending in State of California, et al. v. Mullin, et al., No. 26-1699 (1st Cir. June 12, 2026).

Continue reading

by

markus-spiske-RX-BevgxSXs-unsplash-scaledIn a policy memorandum released today, just ahead of the Memorial Day holiday, the Trump administration announced that temporary visa holders seeking green cards should leave the United States and complete their immigration process through consular processing in their home countries.

But is adjustment of status completely off the table? No. While the government has made clear that individuals intending to immigrate to the United States are generally expected to pursue immigrant visas abroad, adjustment of status remains a discretionary pathway to a green card.

When deciding whether to exercise discretion to grant adjustment of status in the United States, USCIS officers will apply a “totality of the circumstances” analysis, weighing both favorable and unfavorable factors before reaching a decision.

Overview

For decades, Adjustment of Status has been one of the most reliable pathways to apply for a green card for immigrants already living in the U.S., who entered the country lawfully. This process has involved filing the I-485, remaining in the country while the green card case is pending, waiting for an interview, and receiving a final approval.

The ability to apply for adjustment of status has not been taken away with today’s announcement, however, the sense of security that applicants once had has been blurred.

The Policy Memorandum

In its policy memorandum, the government stressed that individuals admitted to the United States on temporary visas (tourist, student, work visas, etc.) are generally expected to leave the country rather than pursue Adjustment of Status from inside the U.S.

Instead, those wishing to remain in the U.S. permanently are expected to apply for an immigrant visa from abroad. But today’s announcement does not prevent those who qualify from seeking adjustment of status, although applicants should exercise greater caution and understand that certain factors may negatively affect their chances of approval.

Continue reading

by

vilkasss-ai-generated-8894582-scaledU.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is reportedly increasing scrutiny of EB-5 immigrant investor applications filed by individuals with ties to certain Chinese technology companies and institutions.

Recent cases suggest that adjudicators are looking beyond traditional EB-5 requirements—such as lawful source of funds and job creation—and are instead placing greater emphasis on national security concerns, including potential connections to Chinese companies involved in telecommunications, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and data infrastructure.

Applicants who have worked for or are affiliated with major firms and universities associated with China’s tech ecosystem may face additional background checks and requests for detailed disclosures about their employment history, organizational roles, and any perceived government or military links.

Continue reading

by

fernandozhiminaicela-stethoscope-4280497-scaled

The Trump administration has quietly reversed a policy that threatened the jobs and immigration status of thousands of foreign doctors working in the United States.

Doctors from countries impacted by the administration’s expanded travel ban will once again be allowed to continue processing visa applications, work permits, and green card cases.

Earlier this year, the Department of Homeland Security implemented a freeze on immigration benefits for nationals from 39 countries. The policy placed many foreign physicians in legal limbo, forcing some hospitals to place doctors on administrative leave while others faced the possibility of losing their ability to work entirely.

The administration has now confirmed that applications associated with medical physicians will continue processing, exempting doctors from the immigration freeze. The change was made quietly, without a formal public announcement.

The update appeared on the USCIS webpage outlining its enhanced screening and vetting procedures which now indicates doctors are no longer subject to adjudicative processing holds:

“Internal Review Process

USCIS established an internal process for lifting holds on individual or group cases, requiring comprehensive review by multiple offices. Holds have been lifted for aliens vetted through Operation PARRIS, certain petitions filed by U.S. citizens, intercountry adoption forms, certain rescheduled oath ceremonies, statutory and regulatory decision issuance, refugee registrations for South African citizens/nationals, certain special immigrant visa petitions, certain employment authorization documents, and asylum applications from non high-risk countries, and applications associated with medical physicians….”

Continue reading

by

d4rkwzd-recruitment-6838250_1280The Trump administration has introduced a new visa screening policy at consulate interviews that could make it harder for people with potential asylum claims to enter the United States.

According to the Washington Post, consular officers are now directed to ask nonimmigrant visa applicants whether they have been persecuted in their home country, or fear harm if they return.

That question may sound harmless, but the consequences are significant. If an applicant says they have suffered harm/mistreatment in their country, or fear harm/mistreatment in returning home, their visa could be denied. If they say they do not fear returning to their home country and later apply for asylum in the United States, the government may use that earlier answer against them. This creates a serious dilemma for people who may genuinely need protection in the future.

The policy appears designed to screen potential asylum claims before an applicant ever reaches U.S. soil. Under U.S. asylum law, a person generally must be physically present in the United States or arrive at a U.S. border to request asylum. By using the visa process to flag and deny applicants who may later seek protection, the government could stop some individuals from ever getting the chance to present their asylum claims.

This change could especially affect people from countries facing political violence, religious persecution, war, government abuse, or targeted discrimination. Students, tourists, workers, and business visitors may all face difficult questions if they have legitimate reasons to travel to the U.S. on temporary visas but also fear returning home.

Continue reading

by

popmelon-ai-generated-8647282-scaledA newly proposed rule from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) could significantly reshape the cost and strategy of hiring foreign talent through the H-1B and PERM programs.

The proposal, aimed at increasing wage protections for U.S. workers, is expected to drive up salary requirements—adding what some are calling “sticker shock” for employers.

What the Proposed Rule Does

The DOL’s proposal focuses on revising how prevailing wages are calculated across H-1B, H-1B1, E-3, and PERM programs. Instead of relying on lower wage percentiles, the rule would shift wage levels upward to better reflect actual market compensation.

Under the current system, wages are divided into four levels based on experience. The proposal would significantly raise each level—for example, entry-level wages would move from the 17th percentile to the 34th percentile, with similar increases across all tiers.

The DOL’s stated goal is to ensure foreign workers are paid comparably to similarly situated U.S. workers and to eliminate incentives for employers to hire lower-cost foreign labor.

Continue reading