Immigration attorney Flavia Santos Lloyd found herself fielding call after call from anxious clients following the Trump administration’s announcement requiring individuals seeking permanent residency to submit applications from their native countries rather than from within the United States.
Lloyd struggled to provide clear guidance to her clients, recognizing that the perplexing new directive would create delays in the application process.
“It has a chilling effect because we have some cases that we were going to proceed and I can tell already, we should wait and see what’s going on,” she said.
On Friday, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services revealed that foreign nationals currently in America who desire permanent residency must depart and submit their applications from their native countries, with some undetailed exceptions.
This declaration, which could impact hundreds of thousands of permanent residency applicants annually, represents the most recent immigration directive from the Republican administration that has bewildered attorneys, advocates and immigrants alike. The move also signals a shift by the administration toward restricting legal immigration pathways, following a previous focus on individuals residing in the country without authorization.
“This is simply an attempt to try to limit and scare people away from the legal immigration process,” immigration attorney Charles Kuck said, adding that he expected legal action against the change. “This is a scare tactic.”
With concerned immigrants and their employers overwhelming immigration law firms with inquiries, the actual impact remains uncertain, along with potential exceptions and how the directive will be implemented practically.
Certain permanent residency applicants were already encountering inquiries about their eligibility to apply domestically.
For over fifty years, foreign nationals with lawful status have been permitted to apply for and obtain permanent residence while remaining in America — including spouses of American citizens, work and student visa holders, and refugees and asylum seekers, among others.
This longstanding practice appeared to shift abruptly on Friday when USCIS posted the change on its website.
“From now on, an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances,” the agency said. When questioned by The Associated Press, USCIS indicated that only individuals providing an “economic benefit” or “national interest” would likely qualify to apply domestically.
The agency explained that nonimmigrants, including students or temporary workers, maintain temporary status in America and should depart when their authorized period concludes.
USCIS additionally released a comprehensive policy memorandum serving as guidance for staff members who adjudicate these cases. Immigration specialists attempting to interpret the announcement noted the memo contained more subtle language, creating uncertainty about the actual scope of the modification.
Boundless Immigration, an immigration law firm, published a blog post presenting their understanding of the directive, stating that officers were being directed to “apply existing discretionary standards more rigorously” but concluded that the policy doesn’t entirely halt the status adjustment process for “eligible applicants” based on their visa category.
The firm referenced earlier policy memorandums regarding citizenship acquisition that had not resulted in stricter enforcement in practice.
Shev Dalal-Dheini, senior director of government relations at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, suggested the guidance might target individuals who exceeded their visa periods, such as parents of American citizens who remained after visa expiration, company employees who transferred to America, or individuals holding visas designated for clergy and religious workers.
“It seems like maybe who they’re targeting is potentially those whose period of stay lapsed while they were here,” she said.
Kevin Miner, a partner with immigration law firm Fragomen, anticipated that individuals holding employment-based visas, such as H-1Bs, would receive exemptions. These dual-intent visas permit nonimmigrant visa holders in America to pursue permanent residency. The memo specifically identified dual-intent visas as potential exception areas.
“Those probably are cases that will continue to precede business as usual and that we won’t see a significant impact,” said Miner, who noted Friday’s announcement caught people off guard.
Matthew Soerens, the U.S. director of church mobilization for World Relief, an organization assisting refugee resettlement in America, said language in the memo addressing cases requiring domestic status adjustment provides the organization “hope” and “expectation” that the guidance excludes refugees.
Refugees are individuals fleeing their homeland who satisfy specific criteria for U.S. admission following extensive screening. They must complete permanent residency processing one year after arrival and cannot return home due to safety risks, Soerens explained.
The administration has dramatically reduced refugee admissions this year and restricted them to white South Africans.
Individuals who entered through humanitarian parole, which permits presidents to admit people for humanitarian purposes and which President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration significantly expanded, could also face consequences, Soerens noted.
Many such individuals might already have family in America or married American citizens — both situations potentially providing permanent residency pathways that could now become complicated.
These complexities make providing general legal counsel challenging, Dalal-Dheini said.
“It’s going to be a very case by case specific thing,” she said.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association reported that several individuals in permanent residency interviews under the new guidance encountered previously unasked questions on Tuesday.
One applicant seeking permanent residency based on marriage to an American citizen was questioned about why they applied to adjust status domestically instead of returning home and applying at the embassy there. They were asked whether any factors would prevent them from applying in their home country and if they maintained family there.
Another individual was instructed to submit a form demonstrating why they should be permitted to apply domestically and was told evidence should prove they wouldn’t become a financial burden or “public charge” on America, potentially including their 2025 tax return, an employer letter stating their salary, and bank statements.
Lloyd, the immigration attorney, said she has contacted her corporate and individual clients informing them she is monitoring the situation and will contact them once she obtains additional guidance and practical applications.
She believes the policy will discourage some companies from pursuing permanent residency for their clients.
“I don’t want everybody to panic,” she said. “My advice to them is wait and see.”
