FGI UPDATES: THIS WEEK’S SUMMARY OF US IMMIGRATION NEWS

August 14, 2026

President Trump Signs New Executive Orders on Birthright Citizenship and Birth Tourism

President Trump has signed two Executive Orders (EOs) addressing U.S. citizenship for children born in the United States and efforts to prevent so-called “birth tourism.” One EO identifies categories of children born in the United States who, under the Administration’s interpretation, would not receive U.S. citizenship at birth when neither parent is a U.S. citizen. The second directs the Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and State (DOS) to take steps to restrict the issuance or validity of visas and admission of foreign nationals who enter the United States for the purpose of giving birth or who facilitate such activity. The orders follow a recent Supreme Court decision that upheld the longstanding framework of birthright citizenship, making litigation over the new citizenship-related EO likely.

Key Points

New Birthright Citizenship Exceptions: The first EO identifies categories of children who would not be considered U.S. citizens at birth if neither parent is a U.S. citizen. These categories include children whose parents are designated “alien enemies,” certain foreign government employees, individuals whose parents engaged in commercial transactions or fraud to obtain citizenship, and certain children born in U.S. territories or territorial waters.
Broader Interpretation of Existing Exceptions: The EO goes beyond the narrow exceptions that have historically been recognized, particularly the exception involving children of certain foreign diplomats. It also interprets the historical concept of an “alien enemy” more broadly to include members of designated foreign terrorist organizations and specially designated global terrorists, rather than primarily referring to children born in U.S. territory occupied by a foreign invading force.
Federal Documentation Restrictions: Federal agencies would be prohibited from documenting individuals covered by the EO as U.S. citizens and from accepting state or local documents that recognize those individuals as citizens. Executive agencies are also required to issue guidance implementing the order within 30 days.
Birth Tourism Restrictions: The second EO directs DHS and DOS to develop policies and regulations aimed at restricting “birth tourism,” including potentially denying or revoking visas, refusing admission to the United States, or removing foreign nationals who enter or assist others in entering the country for the purpose of giving birth. Federal agencies are also directed to provide DHS and DOS with information needed to enforce the new policies.
Connection to Recent Supreme Court Litigation: The new orders were issued only weeks after the Supreme Court struck down an earlier Trump EO seeking to limit birthright citizenship and reaffirmed the longstanding principle that children born in the United States generally acquire citizenship at birth, including children of parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present. The Court recognized a narrow exception for children of foreign diplomats, and the new EO’s broader approach is therefore likely to face legal challenges.

What Employers Need to Know

Potential Impact on Foreign Employees: Employers should be aware that employees and their family members could face additional immigration scrutiny if they are affected by the new birthright citizenship or birth tourism policies. The orders could become particularly relevant when foreign employees travel internationally with family members or when employees seek immigration benefits for children born in the United States.
Increased Visa and Admission Scrutiny: DHS and DOS may increase scrutiny of visa applicants and foreign nationals seeking admission if the agencies implement the birth tourism EO through new regulations, guidance, or enforcement policies. Employers should therefore consider the potential immigration consequences when planning international travel for employees or their accompanying family members.
Monitor Family-Based Immigration Issues: The citizenship status of a child can affect future immigration planning for a foreign national family. Employers assisting employees with immigration matters should monitor developments because changes to how citizenship is documented or recognized could create additional complications for affected families.
No Immediate Resolution of the Legal Issues: The new citizenship-related EO does not eliminate the legal uncertainty surrounding birthright citizenship because the order expands exceptions beyond those traditionally recognized. Employers should avoid treating the EO as establishing a settled change in citizenship law while litigation and implementation remain pending.

Looking Ahead

Expected Litigation: The EO establishing broader exceptions to birthright citizenship is likely to be challenged in federal court because it attempts to expand categories of people who historically have been considered U.S. citizens at birth. The outcome of that litigation will determine whether and how the Administration can implement the policy.
New DHS and DOS Guidance: DHS and DOS are expected to develop regulations, policies, and guidance addressing birth tourism and the treatment of affected foreign nationals. These measures could increase scrutiny during visa adjudication and inspection at U.S. ports of entry.
Potential Enforcement Expansion: The Administration has already indicated an interest in combating birth tourism, and the new EO builds on earlier efforts, including the Department of Justice’s stated intention to prioritize prosecution of birth tourism schemes. Future enforcement could therefore extend beyond visa processing to investigations and other immigration consequences.
Continuing Uncertainty: The practical effect of both EOs will depend on implementing guidance, agency action, and court decisions. Employers, foreign nationals, and immigration professionals should closely monitor developments before making assumptions about how the new policies will affect individual cases.

The two Executive Orders represent another significant attempt by the Trump Administration to change how the United States approaches birthright citizenship and birth tourism. While the Administration seeks to establish broader exceptions to citizenship and impose additional restrictions on individuals involved in birth tourism, the citizenship EO goes beyond longstanding interpretations of the law and is likely to face substantial legal challenges. For employers and foreign employees, the most immediate concern is the possibility of increased visas, admission, and immigration scrutiny, making continued monitoring of DHS and DOS implementation efforts particularly important.

SOURCE: www.nytimes.com/2026/08/06/us/politics/trump-birthright-citizenship-tourism.html

BIA Ruling Means Advance Parole Travel Can Trigger Unlawful Presence Bars for Certain Foreign Nationals

The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has issued a significant decision changing how international travel on advance parole is treated for individuals who have accrued unlawful presence in the United States. In Matter of Delcarmen-Lara, 29 I&N Dec. 830 (BIA Aug. 13, 2026), the BIA ruled that traveling abroad on advance parole can trigger the three- or ten-year unlawful presence bar if the individual accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence before departing. The decision overturns a 2012 BIA precedent that had treated advance parole travel differently and had allowed certain individuals with unlawful presence to travel internationally without triggering these bars.

Key Points

BIA Overturns Prior Precedent: The BIA ruled that international travel on advance parole constitutes a departure from the United States for purposes of the unlawful presence bars. This decision overturns Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly, a 2012 BIA decision that provided protection to individuals traveling on advance parole.
Three- and Ten-Year Bars: Under the law, a person who departs the United States after accruing more than 180 days but less than one year of unlawful presence can face a three-year bar, while a person who accrued one year or more can face a ten-year bar. A waiver may be available in certain circumstances.
Who Accrues Unlawful Presence: For purposes of these bars, unlawful presence generally includes remaining in the United States after the expiration of an authorized period of admission, entering the country without inspection, or being found to have violated status by USCIS or an immigration judge in certain immigration proceedings. The new ruling therefore affects individuals whose immigration histories include sufficient periods of unlawful presence.
Advance Parole No Longer Provides the Same Protection: Since the 2012 Arrabally and Yerrabelly decision, individuals with unlawful presence have generally been able to use advance parole for international travel without triggering the three- or ten-year bars. The new BIA decision eliminates that protection for future travel by individuals who have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence.
Prospective Application: The BIA’s new interpretation applies prospectively, meaning travel on advance parole that occurred before August 13, 2026, will not be treated as having triggered the unlawful presence of bars under this new interpretation. Travel occurring after the decision, however, can trigger the applicable bar if the individual had accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence before departing.

What Employers Need to Know

Review Employee Travel Plans: Employers should be particularly cautious when employees with pending immigration cases or prior periods of unlawful presence request international travel using advance parole. Employees who have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence may now face a three- or ten-year bar as a result of that trip.
Identify Affected Immigration Categories: The decision may significantly affect foreign nationals who have or are eligible for advance parole based on a pending adjustment of status or asylum application, approved DACA, or Temporary Protected Status (TPS). Employers should identify affected employees before approving or encouraging international travel.
Coordinate With Immigration Counsel: Employees who are uncertain whether they have accrued enough unlawful presence to trigger a bar should obtain individualized immigration advice before traveling. Employers should consider coordinating with immigration counsel when an employee’s international travel could affect a pending immigration benefit or future ability to remain in the United States.
Consider Business Continuity: A three- or ten-year inadmissibility bar could substantially interfere with an employee’s ability to obtain or maintain immigration status and could disrupt the employee’s ability to perform work in the United States. Employers may therefore need to reassess travel plans for affected employees and consider the potential workforce consequences before international travel occurs.

Looking Ahead

Implementation Will Be Closely Watched: The BIA decision represents a major change in the government’s interpretation of advance parole and unlawful presence. Further guidance may be issued as USCIS, the Department of State, and other agencies to implement the new interpretation.
Existing Cases May Require Reassessment: Individuals who currently hold advance parole or have pending adjustment, asylum, DACA, or TPS-related matters may need to reconsider planned international travel. Immigration counsel will need to evaluate whether a particular individual’s prior immigration history creates a three- or ten-year bar before travel takes place.
Potential Litigation and Further Developments: Because the decision reverses more than a decade of precedent, its interpretation and implementation may receive significant legal and administrative scrutiny. Fragomen has indicated that it is monitoring implementation of the decision and will provide additional updates as warranted.
Advance Parole Planning Becomes More Complicated: Advance parole can no longer automatically be viewed as a safe mechanism for international travel by individuals with significant unlawful presence. Going forward, determining whether travel is advisable will require closer examination of the individual’s immigration history, the amount of unlawful presence accrued, and the immigration benefit being pursued.

The BIA’s August 13, 2026, decision represents a major shift in the treatment of advance parole travel for individuals with unlawful presence. By overruling Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly, the BIA has established that future travel on advance parole can trigger the three- or ten-year unlawful presence bars when an individual has accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence before departing the United States. Although the ruling is prospective and therefore does not apply to qualifying advance parole travel that occurred before August 13, 2026, employers and foreign nationals should carefully review planned travel and obtain immigration counsel before departure where unlawful presence may be an issue.

SOURCES: www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/foreign-labor/news

Advance Appointments Required for Passport Pickup at U.S. Embassy and Consulates in China

Effective August 1, 2026, the U.S. Embassy and Consulates in China introduced a new requirement for applicants who choose free passport pickup at designated standard collection locations. Applicants must now schedule an appointment in advance after receiving an email confirming that their passport or other document is ready for pickup. The new procedure applies to collection sites in Beijing, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Shenyang, and Wuhan and includes specific requirements regarding the identity of the person collecting the passport, appointment timing, QR codes, and deadlines for collecting passports.

Key Points

Advance Appointment Required: Applicants using the standard free passport collection service in Beijing, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Shenyang, or Wuhan must schedule an appointment before picking up their passport. The appointment can only be scheduled after the applicant receives an email confirming that the document is ready for pickup, and collection appointments are available from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. each day.
Collector Information Must Match: The person collecting the passport must be identified when the appointment is scheduled, including the last six digits of that person’s identification number. Chinese nationals must provide their National ID Card number, while non-Chinese nationals must provide their passport number, and the passport will not be released if the collector’s identification information does not match the appointment record.
QR Code and Individual Appointments: A QR code is generated after the appointment is successfully scheduled and must be presented when collecting the passport. A separate appointment is required for each UID (Unique Identification) number, and confirmed appointments cannot be canceled or rescheduled.
Strict Appointment Timing: Applicants who arrive more than 30 minutes late will have their appointment canceled and will need to schedule a new appointment. This means applicants should carefully plan their travel to the collection location and allow enough time before the appointment deadline.
30-Day Collection Period: Passports will be held for 30 days beginning on the date of the first email notifying the applicant that the document is ready for pickup. Any passport that remains unclaimed after that period will be returned to the U.S. Embassy or Consulate.

What Employers Need to Know

Employees Traveling to China: Employers with employees who are completing U.S. visa processing in China should be aware that collecting a passport now requires additional advance planning. Employees should not assume that they can simply visit a designated collection site after receiving notification that their passport is available.
Travel and Work Planning: Employees may need to coordinate passport pickup appointments with planned travel dates and return-to-work schedules. Because passports can be held for only 30 days after the initial pickup notification, employees should monitor their notifications and arrange collection promptly.
Third-Party Collection: If someone other than the applicant collects the passport, that person’s identification information must be used when scheduling the appointment. Employers and employees should therefore confirm in advance who will collect the passport and ensure that the correct identification information is entered into the appointment system.
Potential Travel Delays: Failure to schedule an appointment, arriving more than 30 minutes late, or providing identification information that does not match the appointment record could prevent the passport from being released. These issues could delay an employee’s ability to return to the United States and potentially affect work schedules or business travel plans.

Looking Ahead

Closer Attention to Consular Procedures: The new appointment requirement adds another procedural step to U.S. visa processing in China. Applicants and employers should continue monitoring U.S. Embassy and Consulate procedures because consular processing requirements can change with limited notice.
Greater Importance of Advance Planning: Employees completing visa processing in China will need to account for passport collection procedures when planning their international travel. Appointment availability, collection deadlines, and the identity of the person collecting the passport should all be considered when establishing travel schedules.
Potential Operational Impact: Although the new requirement concerns passport collection rather than visa adjudication itself, administrative delays could still affect employees’ ability to travel internationally and return to the United States. Employers with employees who regularly travel between the United States and China may therefore need to build additional flexibility into travel and immigration planning.
Continued Monitoring Recommended: The U.S. Embassy and Consulates in China may modify passport collection procedures or other consular requirements in the future. Employers and employees should verify the current procedures before beginning or completing visa processing in China.

The new passport pickup procedure in China creates an additional step for individuals completing U.S. visa processing and using standard passport collection services. Since August 1, 2026, applicants must schedule an appointment after receiving confirmation that their passport is ready, provide matching collector information, present the resulting QR code, and collect the passport within 30 days. For employees traveling internationally for work, careful attention to these requirements will be important because missed appointments, identification mismatches, or delayed collection could interfere with passport retrieval and potentially affect planned travel and return-to-work schedules.

SOURCE: www.ustraveldocs.com/cn/en/nonimmigrant-visa

USCIS Immigration Processing Slows Further as Backlogs and Denial Rates Rise

New data from the American Immigration Council shows that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) processing slowed significantly during the first quarter of fiscal year (FY) 2026. The agency’s pending caseload increased to 11.3 million cases, while the number of applications processed fell sharply compared with the same period in FY2025. At the same time, average backlog clearance times nearly doubled, and denial rates increased across many immigration categories. Employment-based cases were particularly affected, with substantial increases in denial rates for EB-1, EB-1A extraordinary ability, and EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW) petitions.

Key Points

Backlog Reaches Record Level: The USCIS backlog increased by more than 1.6 million cases, or 16.5%, between FY2025 Q1 and FY2026 Q1, rising from 9.7 million to 11.3 million pending applications and petitions. During the same period, USCIS received 33.6% fewer applications and completed 40.8% fewer cases than it did during FY2025 Q1.
Processing Falls Behind Filings: USCIS completed fewer cases than it received during FY2026 Q1, marking the eleventh consecutive quarter in which its efficiency ratio remained below 1. The agency completed approximately 86 applications for every 100 it received, meaning the backlog continued to grow despite lower filing volumes.
Employment Authorization Delays Increase: The pending backlog for Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization, increased by 446,650 cases, or 38%. For applicants with pending adjustment of status cases, the I-765 backlog nearly tripled from 154,469 to 461,884 cases, while completions fell by almost half.
Wait Times Have Lengthened: Across all USCIS forms, the average time required to clear the backlog nearly doubled, increasing from 9.4 months in FY2025 Q1 to 18.6 months in FY2026 Q1. The calendar-year average also increased from 8.9 months in 2024 to 14.4 months in 2025, representing a 61.8% increase.
Denial Rates Are Rising: The overall denial rate increased from 8.9% to 12.2%, indicating a harder adjudication environment. Employment-based cases experienced especially large increases, with the overall EB-1 denial rate rising from 13.9% to 30.1%, EB-1A denials increasing from 25.3% to 52.5%, and EB-2 NIW denials rising from 37.3% to 57.4%.

What Employers Need to Know

Expect Longer Processing Times: Employers should anticipate that immigration benefits may take substantially longer to process, even when overall filing volumes decline. Longer USCIS processing times can affect employment authorization, adjustment of status, and other immigration-related planning.
Plan for EAD Delays: Employers should pay particular attention to employees relying on employment authorization documents because the pending I-765 backlog has grown substantially. Delays may be especially significant for employees with pending adjustment of status applications, where the backlog nearly tripled during the period examined.
Prepare Stronger Employment-Based Filings: The sharp increase in denial rates for EB-1, EB-1A, and EB-2 NIW petitions suggest that employers and foreign nationals should expect greater scrutiny of employment-based cases. Petitioners should ensure that filings contain strong evidence addressing every applicable eligibility requirement and clearly explain how the evidence supports the requested classification.
Build Additional Time into Immigration Planning: Employers should account for longer adjudication periods when planning employee onboarding, international travel, extensions, adjustment of status, and work authorization. Immigration timelines that previously appeared predictable may now require additional time and contingency planning.

Looking Ahead

Backlogs May Continue Growing: Unless USCIS increases the number of cases it completes relative to the number it receives, the pending caseload may continue to grow. The fact that the efficiency ratio has remained below 1 for eleven consecutive quarters indicates that the current slowdown is not simply a short-term fluctuation.
Greater Adjudication Scrutiny: Rising denial rates, particularly in employment-based categories, could signal a continuing shift toward more demanding adjudications. If these trends continue, employers and foreign nationals may need to devote greater attention to documentary support and eligibility arguments before filing.
Employment-Based Cases Require Close Monitoring: The increases in EB-1, EB-1A, and EB-2 NIW denial rates are particularly significant for highly skilled workers, researchers, physicians, entrepreneurs, and other professionals seeking employment-based immigration. Continued monitoring of USCIS data will be important for identifying whether these higher denial rates represent a temporary development or a longer-term trend.
USCIS Trends May Remain Difficult: The American Immigration Council’s data shows that the slowdown extends beyond a single quarter, with calendar-year comparisons for 2024 and 2025 showing fewer receipts, more pending cases, higher denial rates, and longer processing times. The Council plans to continue tracking these metrics as additional USCIS data becomes available.

The latest USCIS data points to a broad deterioration in immigration processing, characterized by growing backlogs, longer waits, fewer completed cases, and higher denial rates. For employers, the most important consequences are the need to anticipate longer processing timelines and prepare more carefully documented employment-based petitions, particularly in categories such as EB-1A and EB-2 NIW where denial rates have increased dramatically. If these trends continue, employers and foreign nationals should expect USCIS adjudications to remain slower and more demanding throughout FY2026.

SOURCE: www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/blog/uscis-immigration-processing-trends-2026/

OFLC Releases Public Disclosure Data and Selected Program Statistics for Q3 of Fiscal Yeaer 2026

The U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Office of Foreign Labor Certification (OFLC) has released its public disclosure data and selected program statistics for the third quarter of fiscal year 2026. The information covers employer applications for prevailing wage determinations and labor certifications under the PERM, Labor Condition Application (LCA) programs for H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 workers, H-2A, H-2B, CW-1, and other prevailing wage programs. The newly released disclosure files include all final determinations issued by OFLC between October 1, 2025, and June 30, 2026, providing employers, attorneys, researchers, and other stakeholders with detailed information about activity across the major foreign labor certification programs.

Key Points

Q3 Data Released: OFLC has published comprehensive public disclosure data covering the first three quarters of fiscal year 2026, or the period from October 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026. The data includes final determinations issued for PERM, LCA, H-2A, H-2B, CW-1, and prevailing wage programs.
Major Immigration Programs Covered: The disclosure data includes PERM applications as well as LCAs filed for H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 workers. It also covers H-2A, H-2B, CW-1, and prevailing wage determinations, giving stakeholders a broad view of DOL’s foreign labor certification activity.
Detailed Case Information: OFLC’s public disclosure files contain selected information extracted from employer applications and OFLC’s case-management systems. The agency also provides corresponding record layouts explaining the available data elements, allowing users to better understand and analyze the information.
Selected Program Statistics: In addition to the underlying disclosure files, OFLC has released selected statistics for Q3 of FY 2026 for each of the covered programs. These statistics are designed to provide key information about program activity and are updated quarterly.
Public Transparency: OFLC explains that its program data is intended to provide useful information to Congress, researchers, media organizations, industry associations, worker advocacy organizations, and the general public. The quarterly releases are part of DOL’s broader commitment to making employment-based immigration program information publicly available.

What Employers Need To Know

Review Program Trends: Employers that regularly use PERM, H-1B, H-1B1, E-3, H-2A, H-2B, CW-1, or prevailing wage programs can use the Q3 data to evaluate broader filing and adjudication trends. The information may be particularly useful when planning future filings or assessing activity within a particular immigration program.
Understand Prevailing Wage Activity: The release includes data relating to prevailing wage determinations, which are important to both permanent and temporary employment-based immigration cases. Employers should continue monitoring OFLC wage information because prevailing wage requirements can directly affect the preparation and timing of immigration filings.
Use the Disclosure Data Strategically: The detailed data can help employers and immigration professionals examine DOL activity beyond the individual cases they are handling. Comparing quarterly releases may provide useful insight into changes in filing volume, determinations, and activity across the different foreign labor programs.
Maintain Current Filing Practices: Although the disclosure release itself does not announce a new substantive requirement for employers, it reinforces the importance of following current OFLC procedures and using accurate information in foreign labor filings. Employers should continue monitoring OFLC announcements and program guidance for separate changes affecting their immigration cases.

Looking Ahead

Quarterly Data Will Continue: OFLC regularly publishes selected statistics and disclosure data on a quarterly basis. Future releases will provide additional information that can be compared with the FY 2026 Q3 data to identify longer-term trends in foreign labor certification activity.
Greater Use of Government Data: As OFLC continues making detailed program information publicly available, employers and immigration professionals may increasingly use the data to evaluate filing patterns and understand DOL activity. This information can provide additional context when making employment-based immigration planning decisions.
Program Trends May Affect Planning: Changes in the quarterly data could help identify activity shifts across PERM, LCA, H-2A, H-2B, CW-1, and prevailing wage programs. Employers should therefore consider reviewing the data periodically rather than treating each quarterly release as an isolated report.
Continued Monitoring Recommended: OFLC continues to issue separate announcements concerning forms, filing procedures, prevailing wages, webinars, and other program requirements. Employers should monitor OFLC updates in addition to reviewing the quarterly statistics because the two sources provide different types of information about the agency’s activities.

The Q3 FY 2026 OFLC disclosure release provides an important snapshot of DOL’s foreign labor certification activity from October 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026. While the release does not itself create a new immigration requirement, the detailed information covering PERM, LCA, H-2A, H-2B, CW-1, and prevailing wage programs can help employers and immigration professionals better understand DOL activity and identify developing trends. Employers should continue to monitor these quarterly releases alongside OFLC’s separate procedural and policy announcements when planning employment-based immigration filings.

SOURCE: www.dol.gov/agencies/eta/foreign-labor/news

Department of Homeland Security Proposes Eliminating the 60-Day Nonimmigrant Grace Period

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is reviewing a proposed regulation that would eliminate the 60-day grace period currently available to certain nonimmigrant workers whose employment ends before their authorized period of stay expires. The grace period, created in 2016 and effective beginning in 2017, allows certain workers and their dependents time to find new employment, change immigration status, or prepare to leave the United States after employment ends. The proposal is currently under review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and would not take effect immediately; if it clears review, DHS would publish the proposal in the Federal Register for a 30- to 60-day public comment period, followed by a potentially lengthy process to finalize the regulation.

Key Points

Current 60-Day Grace Period: The existing rule allows E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, O-1 and TN workers, along with their dependents, to remain in valid nonimmigrant status for up to 60 days after employment ends. The grace period is limited to the shorter of 60 days or the worker’s I-94 expiration date and is generally available once during each authorized petition validity period.
Purpose of the Grace Period: The grace period was created to reduce the immigration consequences of an unexpected or voluntary loss of employment. It gives workers an opportunity to find another job in the same immigration category, change status without leaving the United States, or make arrangements to depart the country.
Potential Elimination: If DHS finalizes the proposed rule, workers whose employment ends before their authorized stay expires would generally no longer receive the 60-day protection. They and their dependents could be considered out of status immediately and would generally need to leave the United States unless USCIS exercises discretion to forgive the lapse in status.
Broad Range of Affected Workers: The proposed change could affect workers across several major employment-based nonimmigrant categories, including H-1B, L-1, O-1, E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B1 and TN classifications. Because the grace period applies regardless of whether employment ends voluntarily or involuntarily, the change could affect workers who lose their jobs through layoffs as well as those who voluntarily leave employment.
DHS Retains Discretion: Under the current regulations, DHS already has authority to refuse or shorten the 60-day grace period, although it has rarely exercised that authority. The proposed regulation would instead remove the general grace-period protection itself, potentially creating much greater consequences when employment ends.

What Employers Need to Know

Faster Immigration Action May Be Necessary: Employers could face significant pressure to begin immigration processing immediately when a foreign national’s employment ends if the grace period is eliminated. The ability to wait several weeks before pursuing a new petition or other immigration strategy could largely disappear.
Layoffs Could Create Immediate Immigration Consequences: Employees affected by layoffs or other involuntary employment terminations could be required to depart the United States immediately rather than using the grace period to find another employer. Employers should therefore consider immigration consequences as part of workforce reductions involving nonimmigrant employees.
Workforce Planning Will Become More Important: Employers may need to identify potential immigration options before terminating an affected employee’s employment, particularly where the employee may be eligible for a transfer, change of status, or another employment-based classification. Advance planning could become critical because the proposed rule could leave substantially less time to preserve a worker’s ability to remain in the United States.
Dependents Could Also Be Affected: The proposed elimination would affect the dependents of the principal worker as well as the principal nonimmigrant. Employers assisting employees with immigration matters should therefore consider the potential consequences for spouses and children when employment ends.
Employers Should Consider Commenting: If the proposal is published, employers and business organizations will have an opportunity to submit comments during the 30- to 60-day public comment period. Employer feedback could help demonstrate how eliminating the grace period would affect workforce mobility, hiring, layoffs, and business operations.

Looking Ahead

OMB Review Comes First: The proposal remains under OMB review and must clear that process before it can be published for public comment. The review could take several months or more, meaning the 60-day grace period remains in place unless and until a final regulation changes the current rules.
Public Comment Period: If the proposal is approved for publication, DHS is expected to provide a 30- to 60-day period for employers, workers, and other interested parties to submit comments. The comments could influence the final regulation and give the business community an opportunity to explain the practical consequences of eliminating the grace period.
Final Rule Could Take Months: Publication of a proposed rule would not immediately eliminate the grace period because DHS would still need to review comments and issue a final regulation. According to Fragomen, finalization typically takes several months, meaning there could be a substantial period between publication of the proposal and any effective date.
Potential Shift in Employer Strategy: If the grace period ultimately disappears, employers may need to treat the end of employment for affected nonimmigrants as an immediate immigration event rather than one that allows for a two-month transition period. This could lead to faster transfers, status changes, departures, and other immigration planning for affected workers.

The proposed elimination of the 60-day nonimmigrant grace period would represent a major change to the way employers and foreign workers manage the end of employment. Although the proposal is still under OMB review and is not currently in effect, its potential impact is significant because affected workers could lose the ability to remain in the United States while searching for new employment or pursuing another immigration option. Employers should closely monitor the proposal, evaluate how the change could affect their foreign-national workforce, and be prepared to participate in the public comment process if the rule is formally published.

SOURCE: www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eoDetails?rrid=1495412

USCIS To Require Electronic Filing of Forms to Strengthen National Security

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it will require electronic filing for certain immigration forms as part of a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) effort to strengthen national security and improve the efficiency of immigration processing. The change is intended to reduce reliance on paper filings, improve the quality and accessibility of immigration data, and allow USCIS to use more consistent electronic systems for screening and adjudication. USCIS announced the change on August 10, 2026, and indicated that additional information about implementation and the specific forms affected will be provided as the transition moves forward.

Key Points

Electronic Filing Requirement: USCIS is moving toward mandatory electronic submission of covered immigration forms rather than allowing applicants and petitioners to routinely submit paper versions. The agency describes the change as part of a broader effort to modernize immigration processing and strengthen national security.
National Security Focus: DHS states that electronic filing will provide USCIS with more reliable and accessible information that can be used for identity verification, background checks, fraud detection, and other national security screening. Moving information into electronic systems is expected to make it easier for the government to identify potential risks and inconsistencies.
Improved Data Quality: Electronic filing is intended to reduce problems associated with manually processing paper forms, including incomplete information, data-entry errors, and delays in transferring information into USCIS systems. More consistent electronic data may also allow USCIS to process and review cases more efficiently.
Transition From Paper-Based Processing: The announcement represents another step in USCIS’s continuing transition toward a primarily electronic immigration system. USCIS will provide additional information concerning which forms will be subject to mandatory electronic filing and when the requirements will take effect.

What Employers Need to Know

Review Filing Procedures: Employers that regularly file immigration petitions, and applications should monitor USCIS announcements concerning the forms that will become subject to mandatory electronic filing. Internal immigration procedures may need to be updated once USCIS establishes the effective dates and filing requirements for individual forms.
Electronic Systems Will Become More Important: Employers and immigration counsel will increasingly need to manage filings through USCIS’s online systems rather than relying on traditional paper submissions. This may require changes to internal document collection, signature procedures, case tracking, and filing workflows.
Data Accuracy Will Be Critical: Because electronic filing is designed to create more accessible and standardized government records, errors or inconsistencies in electronically submitted information could become easier for USCIS to identify. Employers should therefore ensure that information submitted in petitions and applications is complete, accurate, and consistent with supporting documentation.
National Security Screening May Increase: The electronic collection and sharing of immigration information could support more extensive identity, fraud, and national security screening. Employers should expect USCIS to continue emphasizing accurate biographical information and complete supporting documentation as electronic processing expands.

Looking Ahead

More Forms May Become Electronic: USCIS’s announcement is part of a broader move toward electronic immigration processing, and additional forms may eventually be required to be filed online. Employers should expect further USCIS announcements to identify affected forms and implementation dates.
Implementation Details Will Matter: The practical effect of the change will depend on which forms are included, when mandatory electronic filing begins, and whether USCIS establishes exceptions for particular circumstances. Employers should wait for USCIS’s filing instructions before changing procedures for individual forms.
Greater Government Access to Immigration Data: As more immigration information is submitted electronically, USCIS and DHS will have greater ability to organize, analyze, and use information across immigration cases. This could improve processing efficiency while also supporting more sophisticated fraud, identity, and national security screening.
Continued Digital Transformation: The move toward mandatory electronic filing is likely to form part of a larger modernization of the U.S. immigration system. Over time, employers may see greater reliance on online accounts, electronic communications, automated data checks, and digital case-management processes.

USCIS’s decision to expand mandatory electronic filing reflects the government’s continuing effort to modernize immigration processing while increasing its ability to conduct national security, identity, and fraud-related screening. For employers, the immediate priority is to monitor USCIS for additional instructions identifying the affected forms and effective dates, while preparing for a system in which accurate electronic data and online filing procedures become increasingly important. As the transition continues, employers should be prepared to update their immigration processes to accommodate a more heavily digital USCIS system.

SOURCE: www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-to-require-electronic-filing-of-forms-strengthening-national-security

Department of Labor Rule Could Make Employment-Based Green Cards More Difficult

The Department of Labor (DOL) has placed a new rule on its regulatory agenda that would change the permanent labor certification, or PERM, process used by employers sponsoring many foreign nationals for employment-based green cards. The proposed changes could make the process more demanding by increasing recruitment requirements, strengthening protections for U.S. workers affected by layoffs, and expanding employer compliance obligations. The current PERM process can already take two to three years, and the proposed changes could add additional scrutiny and requirements at a time when the administration is also considering other measures that could make employment-based immigration more difficult.

Key Points

PERM Is Already Lengthy: Labor certification is required for most employment-based immigrants, and the process can take two to three years from the initial prevailing wage determination through recruitment and PERM adjudication. DOL currently lists average PERM processing times of 403 days for analyst review and 290 days for cases undergoing audit review.
Proposed PERM Modernization: DOL’s regulatory agenda calls for modernization of the PERM program, including changes to the standards and procedures used to review employers’ labor certification applications. The agency says the goal is to improve recruitment standards, strengthen protections for U.S. workers affected by layoffs, and increase employer compliance with nondiscrimination and record-retention requirements.
Recruitment Requirements Could Change: Immigration attorney Krystal Alanis expects DOL to update outdated recruitment requirements, including the current use of two Sunday newspaper advertisements, potentially shifting more recruitment toward online job platforms. DOL may also examine whether employers are conducting PERM recruitment in a nondiscriminatory manner and whether their PERM recruitment practices match their normal recruiting practices.
More Audits Could Follow: The proposed changes could result in expanded PERM audits in which DOL requests documentation showing how employers recruit workers, which platforms they use, and how applicants are instructed to apply. Employers may therefore face greater scrutiny of their recruitment records and practices than under the current system.
Impact on High-Skilled Immigration: Labor certification is a key step toward permanent residence for many highly skilled foreign nationals, including individuals who first enter the United States in H-1B status. If employers are unable to obtain labor certification, affected workers may ultimately be unable to obtain employment-based green cards and permanent residence.

What Employers Need to Know

Recruitment Practices May Need to Change: Employers should be prepared to modify their PERM recruitment procedures if DOL adopts new requirements. Companies may need to document their use of online recruiting platforms and demonstrate that their PERM recruitment is consistent with their ordinary hiring practices.
Layoffs Could Create Additional Requirements: The proposed rule may impose stronger notification and consideration requirements when an employer has recently conducted layoffs. Employers with recent reductions in force should therefore expect additional scrutiny when pursuing PERM sponsorship for foreign workers.
Compliance Documentation Will Become More Important: Employers already must follow good-faith recruitment principles, but the new rule could require more detailed evidence showing that those principles were followed. Companies should maintain thorough recruitment records, including information about advertising methods, applicant instructions, applications received, and hiring decisions.
Consistency With Normal Recruiting Matters: Employers could face problems if they use different recruitment methods for PERM positions than they ordinarily use for comparable U.S. positions. The proposed rule may require employers to demonstrate that their labor certification recruitment accurately reflects their standard recruiting practices.
PERM Planning May Need to Start Earlier: Because the current process already takes years, additional recruitment requirements or audits could further increase the time needed to complete a case. Employers should consider the potential impact of these changes when developing green card sponsorship timelines, particularly for employees approaching H-1B maximum periods or other important immigration deadlines.

Looking Ahead

Formal Rulemaking Is Still Ahead: The DOL announcement is currently a regulatory agenda item rather than a final regulation, so the precise requirements and implementation timeline remain uncertain. DOL must go through the formal rulemaking process before any new PERM requirements become effective.
Schedule A Could Also Become Important: DOL has not meaningfully updated the Schedule A list of occupations exempt from labor certification since 2004, even though it requested public input on potential additions in 2023. Expanding Schedule A to include additional science and technology occupations could reduce reliance on PERM for certain highly skilled workers, but DOL has not taken further action on that effort.
Online Recruitment May Replace Outdated Practices: The anticipated rule could modernize PERM recruitment by reducing reliance on traditional newspaper advertising and placing greater emphasis on online job-search platforms. This could make the process more consistent with how employers actually recruit workers, while also creating new documentation requirements.
Greater Protection for U.S. Workers: DOL has indicated that the rule will strengthen protections for U.S. workers, particularly those affected by layoffs. Employers should therefore expect the agency to examine whether foreign-worker sponsorship could adversely affect recently laid-off U.S. workers and whether employers adequately considered those workers during recruitment.
Overall Scrutiny May Increase: The proposed changes are likely to increase employer compliance obligations and scrutiny of the PERM process rather than simply make the process faster or easier. If implemented, the rule could make an already complicated and highly regulated process even more demanding for employers sponsoring foreign workers.

The proposed DOL rule could significantly affect employers and foreign nationals who rely on the PERM process for employment-based permanent residence. Although the specific requirements have not yet been finalized, the anticipated changes point toward more detailed recruitment obligations, greater protection for U.S. workers affected by layoffs, expanded audits, and increased employer recordkeeping. Employers should closely monitor the rulemaking process and review their current PERM recruitment and documentation practices now, particularly because the proposed changes could make an already lengthy green card process more difficult and demanding.

SOURCE: www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2026/08/10/dol-immigration-rule-could-spell-trouble-for-employers-and-immigrants/

The content of this article is intended only to provide a general guide to the subject matter. It should not be construed as legal advice. Please contact FGI at info@employmentimmigration.com or (+1) 248.643.4900 for guidance if you have specific questions.

U.S. Immigration Alerts