We hope this newsletter finds you well. In this edition, we bring you important updates on various immigration matters. Please take a moment to review the following key highlights:
DHS Proposes Major Overhaul of Student and Exchange Visitor Status System
Department eliminates “duration of status” admissions, introduces fixed stay periods for F, J, and I nonimmigrants:
The Department of Homeland Security has unveiled a sweeping proposed rule that would fundamentally transform how international students, exchange visitors, and representatives of foreign media maintain legal status in the United States. The changes would replace the current “admission for duration of status” (D/S) framework with predetermined, fixed periods of authorized stay. Key Changes Under the Proposed Rule End of Duration of Status System: Under current regulations, F-1 students, J-1 exchange visitors, and I-1 media representatives are typically admitted for “duration of status,” meaning they can remain lawfully present as long as they maintain compliance with their program requirements. The proposed rule would eliminate this flexible framework entirely. Introduction of Fixed Stay Periods: Instead, these nonimmigrants would receive specific end dates for their authorized stay, similar to other visa categories like B-1/B-2 visitors or H-1B workers. The periods would be predetermined based on program length and visa category, requiring more frequent extensions and closer monitoring of status expiration dates. Elimination of Adjudication Deference: Perhaps equally significant, the proposal would end the practice of giving deference to prior favorable adjudications in renewal and extension cases. This means that even previously approved applicants would face fresh scrutiny in each subsequent application, potentially leading to increased denial rates and processing delays. Implications for Affected Communities Students and Educational Institutions: The changes could create significant administrative burdens for both international students and the universities that sponsor them. Students would need to track precise status expiration dates and file extension applications well in advance, while schools may face increased reporting and monitoring obligations. Exchange Programs and Research: J-1 exchange visitors, including researchers, professors, and cultural exchange participants, would similarly lose the flexibility that duration of status provides, potentially complicating long-term research projects and academic collaborations. Processing and Legal Concerns: Immigration attorneys warn that the elimination of deference could substantially increase processing times and costs, as each application would require comprehensive review regardless of the applicant’s previous compliance history. Industry Response and Next Steps: The proposed rule is expected to generate significant comment from educational institutions, legal organizations, and affected communities during the public comment period. Stakeholders are preparing comprehensive responses addressing both the practical implementation challenges and the broader policy implications of such a fundamental shift in immigration administration. Educational associations and immigration advocacy groups have already begun organizing opposition to the proposed changes, citing potential negative impacts on U.S. competitiveness in attracting international talent and students. The rule, if finalized, would represent one of the most significant changes to student and exchange visitor immigration policy in decades, affecting hundreds of thousands of individuals currently in the United States and future applicants worldwide.ICE Has Fined Immigrants $6 Billion. Now It’s Coming to Collect
Homeland Security tells people who ignored deportation orders to leave the U.S. or expect debt collectors, lawsuits and big tax bills
The Trump administration has launched an unprecedented campaign to collect billions of dollars in civil fines from immigrants who have ignored deportation orders, marking a dramatic escalation in immigration enforcement tactics that combines financial pressure with threats of debt collection and tax consequences.
Since President Donald Trump returned to office in January, the Department of Homeland Security has imposed over 21,500 fines totaling approximately $6.1 billion against immigrants who failed to comply with removal orders, according to government data and recent reports. The fines, which can reach nearly $1,000 per day, are being leveraged as a tool to pressure people to self-deport as the administration struggles to meet its ambitious deportation targets. A New Enforcement Strategy The civil monetary penalties, while authorized by Congress in 1996, have rarely been actively enforced over the past three decades. Immigration officers traditionally focused on deportations rather than imposing financial penalties on individuals who typically lacked the means to pay substantial fines. That has changed under the current administration, which has streamlined the process for levying fines and is now using them as a central component of its immigration strategy. Under new procedures implemented in June, individual DHS officers can now impose penalties with significantly reduced due process requirements. “These fines are targeted toward illegal aliens who ignore removal orders and do not honor voluntary departure agreements,” said DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin. The fines are typically applied retroactively for five years, potentially reaching $1.8 million per person for those who have been in violation of deportation orders for extended periods. “Pay Up or Get Out” In recent weeks, the government has escalated its collection efforts, warning immigrants they face lawsuits, debt collectors, and substantial tax bills if they fail to pay the penalties. The administration has also introduced a controversial incentive: a $1,000 “exit bonus” for those who choose to self-deport, along with forgiveness of all outstanding fines. “If you are here illegally, use the CBP Home App to take control of your departure and receive financial support to return home,” said Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in announcing the self-deportation program. The administration has made the CBP Home mobile application more user-friendly, eliminating certain steps to make self-deportation easier. Those who use the app to leave voluntarily receive forgiveness of civil penalties and the cash payment. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has pledged to recover the fines, stating his commitment to working with ICE to obtain funds owed. In an unprecedented move, Homeland Security may report unpaid fines to the IRS as taxable income, though tax experts have questioned the legal logic of this approach. Legal and Practical Challenges Immigration attorneys and legal experts express skepticism about both the collection prospects and the legality of the administration’s tactics. “Clearly they’re not expecting to collect the money, they’re just scaring people,” said immigration lawyer Edward Cuccia. The fines face significant practical obstacles to collection. Many recipients lack the financial means to pay penalties that can exceed their total assets by enormous margins. Legal experts note that the government would struggle to pursue asset forfeiture proceedings at scale, and few migrants have sufficient assets to make such efforts worthwhile. “Defending against the tax debt takes time, effort and tax knowledge which many people in this situation may lack,” said Keith Fogg, emeritus professor at Harvard Law School and former IRS official. The American Immigration Council has criticized the new procedures as reducing due process protections. Under the streamlined system, individuals facing fines have only 15 business days to respond to penalty notices, after which their right to appeal is eliminated. Broader Context of Enforcement The fine collection campaign comes as the Trump administration has received unprecedented funding for immigration enforcement. Congress approved $170.1 billion in new spending for immigration enforcement under the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” signed into law on July 4, 2025, making ICE the highest-funded federal law enforcement agency in history. Despite this massive investment, the administration has struggled to meet its enforcement targets. Daily arrests have fluctuated between 1,000 and 2,000 per day, falling short of the 3,000 daily arrests goal set by Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump’s immigration policy. The administration’s deportation rates have also not yet exceeded those of the Obama administration, which was able to more quickly remove recent border crossers. ICE has encouraged officers to make warrantless arrests and to “turn the creative knob up to 11” in meeting updated detention targets. Impact on Immigrant Communities Due to the high fines and threats, some immigrants, fearing the Trump administration’s removal campaign, have chosen to self-deport. Immigration advocates worry that the financial threats, combined with reduced access to legal representation, are creating additional fear in immigrant communities. The campaign comes at a time when immigrants have less access to legal advice, as the Trump administration has cut funding to programs providing legal services for people in immigration detention, including those with serious mental health conditions. The fine collection strategy represents a significant shift in immigration enforcement, using financial pressure as a complement to traditional detention and removal operations. Whether this approach will prove more effective than conventional enforcement methods remains to be seen, but it has already generated significant controversy and legal challenges across immigrant communities nationwide.DHS Announces Implementation of New Fees for ESTA, EVUS, and Land Border I-94 Forms, Starting September 30
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has announced that new fees will take effect for key travel programs, including the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), the Electronic Visa Update System (EVUS), and Form I-94 (Arrival/Departure Record) for land border entries. The changes will be implemented beginning September 30, 2025.
- Starting September 30, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will implement new U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) fees authorized by the H.R. 1 budget reconciliation legislation passed by Congress in July.
- The ESTA application fee for B-1/B-2 travel under the Visa Waiver Program will increase to $40, from $21.
- A new fee of $30 will be imposed on EVUS applicants, the online travel authorization system for Chinese B-1/B-2 visa holders.
- A fee of $24 will be added to the existing $6 fee for land border Forms I-94, resulting in a total fee of $30.
Sponsor Substitution After Death Protects Families
New guidance clarifies continuation of derivative I-485 applications when principal applicant dies
Immigration attorneys are highlighting critical provisions that protect families when tragedy strikes during the adjustment of status process.
Under current regulations, when an I-130 petitioner dies, qualifying family members may be able to substitute a new sponsor to continue the immigration process, preventing the loss of years of waiting and investment.
Key Protections for Derivative Applicants
Perhaps more significantly, derivative beneficiaries filing I-485 applications (adjustment to permanent resident status) can continue their cases even when the principal applicant dies while the I-485 is pending. This protection ensures that spouses and children don’t lose their immigration status due to circumstances beyond their control.
Requirements for continuation typically include:
- The I-485 application was properly filed while the principal was alive
- The derivative relationship existed at the time of filing
- The death occurred after the I-485 was accepted for processing
INA Section 204(l): Additional Protection for Surviving Family Members:
- Section 204(l) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides crucial protection for surviving family members of deceased employment-based beneficiaries. This provision allows qualifying relatives—particularly spouses—to continue pursuing permanent residence after the primary beneficiary’s death, provided they meet specific requirements.
Planning Recommendations
Immigration experts recommend that families with pending applications:
- Maintain detailed records of all filing dates and case numbers
- Document U.S. ties when traveling abroad (employment, housing, financial accounts)
- Consult with qualified immigration attorneys immediately if a principal applicant becomes seriously ill
- Consider humanitarian reinstatement and Section 204(l) protections where applicable
USCIS to Weigh Support for “Anti-American” Ideologies in Certain Immigration Benefit Adjudications
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has issued updated guidance directing officers to consider foreign nationals’ support for organizations or ideologies deemed “anti-American” when adjudicating certain discretionary immigration benefits. The revisions to the USCIS Policy Manual come as part of a broader expansion of applicant scrutiny, including more extensive social media reviews.
Key Policy Changes
- New Negative Factor: USCIS officers are now instructed to assess whether a foreign national has “endorsed, promoted, supported, or otherwise espoused” anti-American views or the views of terrorist organizations, including groups promoting antisemitic ideologies or engaging in antisemitic terrorism.
- Harassment & Conduct: The policy specifies that participation in activities such as physical harassment in support of such organizations will be considered an “overwhelmingly negative factor” in discretionary adjudications.
- Social Media Review: USCIS will broaden its social media vetting to identify applicants whose online activity may indicate association with anti-American groups or ideologies.
Scope of Application
The new guidelines apply to a range of immigration benefit requests where USCIS officers have discretionary authority, including:
- Applications for extensions and changes of nonimmigrant status;
- Adjustment of status (green card) applications;
- Requests to reinstate F-1 status; and
- Most Employment Authorization Document (EAD) applications, such as H-4, F-1 OPT/STEM OPT, and adjustment-based EADs.
By contrast, immigration petitions that are primarily eligibility-based, such as H-1B and L-1 petitions or EB-1/EB-3 green card petitions, are generally not affected. However, petitions involving discretion, such as EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW) and EB-5 ImmigrantInvestor cases, may be indirectly impacted since officers have some discretion in assessing national interest, public safety, or fraud-related issues.
Definition of “Anti-American”
The guidance does not provide a strict definition of “anti-American.” Instead, USCIS officers are instructed to look to longstanding statutory bars on naturalization that prohibit affiliation with communism, totalitarianism, anarchism, or organizations advocating violent overthrow of the U.S. government, sabotage, terrorism, or unlawful destruction of property. At the same time, the guidance leaves room for broad discretionary interpretation.
Additional Considerations
Adjudicators may also weigh whether a foreign national has engaged in fraud or violated U.S. laws in connection with entry programs, such as humanitarian parole programs requiring financial sponsorship where fraudulent documentation was used.
Broader Implications
This new policy underscores USCIS’s increased emphasis on ideological vetting and the use of social media monitoring in immigration adjudications. For foreign nationals, particularly those applying for discretionary benefits such as EADs, extensions of stay, or adjustment of status, even perceived associations with groups or ideas that could be interpreted as anti-American may carry significant immigration consequences.
Appeals Court Stays Postponement of TPS Terminations for Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has stayed a lower court ruling that had delayed the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designations for Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua.
As a result of the appeals court’s decision, the TPS designation for Nepal is now deemed expired as of August 5, 2025. Nepalese TPS beneficiaries have lost TPS protection and work authorization as of that date and are subject to removal from the United States, barring a subsequent contrary court order. The TPS designations for Honduras and Nicaragua are set to expire on September 8, 2025. After that date, TPS beneficiaries from these countries will lose protection and work authorization unless a contrary court order is issued.
The Ninth Circuit’s order overturns a July 31, 2025 district court decision that had extended TPS protections for these countries until at least November 18, 2025. The appellate ruling comes in the case National TPS Alliance et al. v. Noem et al., 25-4901 (9th Cir.).
An appeal of the Ninth Circuit’s decision may be filed with the U.S. Supreme Court. Regardless of the appeal outcome, the legality of the Department of Homeland Security’s actions to terminate these TPS designations will continue to be litigated at the district court level. TPS, a humanitarian protection program, allows nationals of designated countries to live and work lawfully in the United States when returning home would be unsafe due to conditions such as armed conflict or natural disasters. The appeals court’s ruling places thousands of Honduran, Nepali, and Nicaraguan TPS holders and their families in legal uncertainty as they await further court developments.Sincerely,
Keshab Raj Seadie, Esq.
Law Offices of Keshab Raj Seadie, P.C. Disclaimer: This newsletter is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always consult an attorney for personalized advice.
