Immigration Process Explained Archives - Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq.

Can You Work While Waiting for Your Green Card?

Martha Arias — Fri, 23 Oct 2026 16:09:51 +0000

Understanding employment authorization, Form I-485, Form I-765, work permits, and the rules that apply while a green card application is pending.

You have applied for a green card, but your application is still being processed. Meanwhile, you may have a job opportunity, need to support your family, or want to know whether you can continue working while waiting for a decision.

One of the most common questions during this process is simple: Can I legally work in the United States while waiting for my green card?

The answer depends on your immigration circumstances, the applications you have filed, and whether you already have permission to work.

For many people applying for permanent residence from inside the United States, employment authorization is available while their green card application is pending. But there is an important distinction between applying for a green card, applying for a work permit, and actually being authorized to work.

Understanding that difference can help you make informed decisions about employment and avoid complications in your immigration case.

Can You Work While Your Green Card Application Is Pending?

Yes, in certain circumstances—but a pending green card application does not automatically give you permission to work.

You may be authorized to work if:

USCIS has approved an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) based on your pending adjustment-of-status application.
You already hold an immigration status that independently permits employment, and you continue to comply with that status’s requirements.
You have another valid basis for employment authorization under U.S. immigration law.

For people applying to adjust status to lawful permanent residence, the usual process involves two separate forms: Form I-485 and Form I-765.

The difference between them is important.

Form I-485 vs. Form I-765: What’s the Difference?

Although these forms are frequently submitted together, they serve different purposes.

Form	Purpose	Does filing it authorize you to work?
Form I-485	Application to register permanent residence or adjust status	No, not by itself
Form I-765	Application for employment authorization	No, filing alone does not grant authorization
Approved EAD	Evidence of employment authorization for its applicable validity period	Generally yes, subject to applicable conditions

Form I-485: Applying for Permanent Residence

Form I-485 is used by eligible individuals who are physically present in the United States to apply for adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence.

Applicants may qualify through family relationships, employment-based immigrant categories, or other provisions of immigration law.

While the application is pending, they have not yet become permanent residents merely because USCIS accepted the filing.

A pending I-485 also does not, by itself, establish a new lawful immigration status.

Form I-765: Applying for Permission to Work

Form I-765 allows individuals in qualifying immigration categories to request employment authorization.

Many applicants with a pending I-485 can request an EAD under eligibility category (c)(9).

An eligible applicant may generally file Form I-765 with Form I-485 or submit the work-permit application later while the adjustment application remains pending.

If filing separately, USCIS generally requires evidence of the pending Form I-485, such as the I-485 receipt notice.

However, not every person seeking a green card uses category (c)(9). For example, refugees and individuals already granted asylum generally use different employment-authorization categories.

Official USCIS information: Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization

When Can You Start Working?

If you need an adjustment-based EAD to work, you generally must wait until USCIS approves your employment authorization and you have acceptable evidence of that authorization.

Submitting Form I-765 does not mean you can begin working immediately.

A receipt notice confirming that USCIS received the application also does not, by itself, grant employment authorization.

Consider this example:

Maria is living in Miami and has properly filed Form I-485 through an eligible family-based immigration process. She also files Form I-765 requesting employment authorization.

While both applications are pending, Maria receives an offer of employment.

If Maria has no other basis for legal employment, she generally cannot begin working simply because her I-485 and I-765 applications were accepted. She must first receive the required authorization.

However, if Maria already holds valid employment authorization through another qualifying immigration category, she may be able to continue working under that authorization, subject to its limitations.

The appropriate answer depends on the person’s existing immigration status and employment eligibility.

What If Only Your Form I-130 Is Pending?

This is an especially important distinction for family-based immigration applicants.

Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, is used to establish a qualifying family relationship for immigration purposes.

Filing or obtaining approval of an I-130 petition does not, by itself, authorize the beneficiary to work in the United States.

For example, a U.S. citizen may file Form I-130 for a spouse. Whether that spouse may also file Form I-485 depends on adjustment eligibility, visa availability when relevant, and other legal requirements.

A person with only a pending I-130 generally cannot obtain a category (c)(9) work permit on that basis alone.

Additionally, individuals completing immigrant visa processing at a U.S. embassy or consulate abroad do not generally qualify for an adjustment-based EAD merely because an immigrant petition is pending.

The distinction is straightforward:

I-130: Establishes a qualifying family relationship.
I-485: Requests permanent residence through adjustment of status.
I-765: Requests employment authorization when an eligible category applies.

For more information about family-based immigration, see our Guide to Obtaining a Green Card through Marriage.

How Long Does It Take to Receive a Work Permit While Waiting for a Green Card?

Processing times depend on the type of employment-authorization application, USCIS workload, and the circumstances of the case.

Some applicants receive an EAD before USCIS makes a decision on the green card application. Others may experience longer processing periods.

There is no single processing time that applies to every applicant.

To review current estimates, use the official USCIS Case Processing Times tool.

Select Form I-765 and the appropriate application category to locate the information relevant to your case.

Remember that USCIS processing-time figures describe past adjudications. They are not guaranteed decision dates for individual applications.

You can also monitor your application through USCIS Case Status Online.

Can You Change Jobs While Your Green Card Application Is Pending?

Having an EAD based on a pending I-485 may provide greater flexibility regarding employment than certain employer-specific nonimmigrant classifications.

An adjustment-based EAD generally is not restricted to one employer in the way that some temporary work-authorized classifications are.

However, permission to work and eligibility for a green card are separate legal questions.

For example, an applicant pursuing an employer-sponsored green card may need to preserve a qualifying job offer or satisfy applicable employment-based immigration requirements.

Certain employment-based applicants may qualify for job portability after Form I-485 has been pending for at least 180 days, provided they meet additional requirements, including those involving the same or a similar occupational classification.

Other applicants may have different considerations.

Changing jobs or choosing to work under an adjustment-based EAD may also affect a person’s strategy for maintaining a separate nonimmigrant status.

Before changing employment arrangements, applicants should consider both their current work authorization and the immigration basis supporting their green card applications.

What Happens If Your Work Permit Expires Before Your Green Card Is Approved?

For some adjustment applicants, the I-485 remains pending longer than the validity period of their EAD.

If that happens, eligible applicants can generally apply to renew their employment authorization while the underlying adjustment application remains pending.

However, an important federal rule now affects whether filing a renewal allows someone to continue working after the current EAD expires.

October 2026 Update: DHS Finalizes Restrictions on Automatic EAD Extensions

On October 14, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security published a final rule confirming the elimination of automatic EAD extensions for certain renewal applications.

The underlying restriction first took effect on October 30, 2025.

Under the rule, filing an EAD renewal application on or after October 30, 2025, generally does not automatically extend the expiring EAD or employment authorization under the affected categories.

The final rule did not make additional regulatory changes to the October 2025 restriction.

There are important exceptions:

Certain eligible renewal applications properly filed before October 30, 2025, may continue to benefit from previously applicable automatic extensions.
Some extensions are independently authorized by law.
Certain Temporary Protected Status (TPS) employment documents may be extended under applicable Federal Register notices.

What does this mean for applicants waiting for green cards?

If your employment authorization is based on a pending I-485, you should not assume that submitting a renewal application will automatically permit you to keep working after the expiration date on your existing EAD.

Depending on your individual circumstances, you may need a newly approved EAD or another valid basis for employment authorization to continue working.

An EAD’s expiration also does not automatically mean that the underlying I-485 application has been denied. The two applications serve different purposes.

For the official regulatory details, see:

DHS Final Rule: Removal of Automatic Extensions for Certain Employment Authorization Documents — October 14, 2026

When Should You Renew Your EAD?

If your green card application remains pending and your current EAD is approaching expiration, review your eligibility for renewal before the document expires.

USCIS generally recommends that eligible renewal applicants file within the applicable renewal window, often up to 180 days before expiration.

Filing earlier does not guarantee approval before your existing authorization expires, and the appropriate timing may depend on your category and current USCIS instructions.

Before submitting a renewal:

Confirm that your Form I-485 is still pending.
Identify the correct employment-authorization category.
Check the expiration date of your current EAD.
Review the latest Form I-765 edition, instructions, and filing fees.
Determine whether any separate legal basis allows continued employment.

USCIS filing fees have also changed over time. An I-765 filed in connection with a pending I-485 may have a different fee depending on when the I-485 was filed and other applicable rules.

Always verify the current amount using the official USCIS Fee Schedule.

What Happens to Your Work Authorization When Your Green Card Is Approved?

Once USCIS approves your adjustment-of-status application and you become a lawful permanent resident, you are generally authorized to work in the United States based on that permanent resident status.

You no longer need a separate adjustment-based EAD to establish your underlying eligibility to work.

Your Permanent Resident Card, commonly called a green card, serves as evidence of your permanent resident status and employment authorization. Other acceptable employment-verification documentation may also apply.

An important point: approval of a Form I-765 and approval of a Form I-485 are not the same decision.

Receiving a work permit does not mean USCIS has approved your green card.

Likewise, an individual may become a permanent resident before a separately pending EAD application is completed.

Five Practical Questions to Ask Before Accepting a Job

If your green card application is pending, review the following before beginning new employment:

1. Do I currently have authorization to work?
Identify whether you hold an approved EAD or another immigration status that permits your proposed employment.

2. Has USCIS approved my work permit, or has it only accepted the application?
A receipt notice is not the same as an approval.

3. When does my employment authorization expire?
Do not assume that an EAD renewal automatically extends your authorization.

4. Could taking this job affect the green card application itself?
This question is especially relevant for certain employment-sponsored immigration cases.

5. Do I understand the conditions of my existing immigration status?
A pending adjustment application or approved EAD does not resolve every question about maintaining a separate immigration status, changing employment, or traveling internationally.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I work while my I-485 is pending without an EAD?

Possibly, if you have another valid basis for employment authorization. For example, certain nonimmigrant classifications permit employment under specified conditions.

Otherwise, merely having a pending I-485 does not authorize employment.

Can I apply for Form I-765 at the same time as Form I-485?

Yes, many eligible adjustment applicants can file Form I-765 with Form I-485. The correct category, supporting documents, fees, and filing procedures depend on the case.

Is my I-765 approval a sign that my green card will be approved?

No. An approved I-765 establishes the employment-authorization benefit granted by USCIS. It does not guarantee approval of the underlying I-485.

If my work permit expires, is my green card application canceled?

Not automatically. An EAD expiration and the adjudication of Form I-485 are separate issues. However, you must still have valid authorization to continue employment, and the ongoing eligibility of your adjustment application must be considered independently.

Can I work for any employer with a category (c)(9) EAD?

A valid adjustment-based EAD generally is not tied to a single employer. Nevertheless, an employment-based green card application may depend on specific job-offer or portability requirements. Applicants should not confuse general employment authorization with the requirements for obtaining permanent residence.

Can I work while waiting for a marriage-based green card?

Many eligible applicants pursuing adjustment of status through marriage may apply for an EAD while Form I-485 is pending.

But the marriage, the filing of Form I-130, and the filing of Form I-485 do not automatically provide work authorization. Another valid basis for employment authorization or the appropriate EAD approval is generally required before employment begins.

Does a pending green card application give me legal immigration status?

Not by itself. A properly filed pending adjustment application may have certain legal consequences concerning authorized stay and eligibility for related benefits, but it does not automatically establish or extend a nonimmigrant status. Individual immigration histories and eligibility rules matter.

Planning Your Employment While Waiting for Permanent Residence

Waiting for a green card can affect important decisions about employment, finances, and family responsibilities.

For applicants in the United States, knowing when employment is legally permitted is as important as understanding the green card process itself.

The key points are:

A pending green card application does not automatically authorize employment.
Eligible applicants with a pending I-485 may apply for employment authorization through Form I-765.
A pending I-765 generally does not authorize employment by itself.
EAD renewal rules changed in October 2025 and were finalized in October 2026.
Work authorization and permanent residence eligibility must be evaluated separately.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Have questions about employment authorization while your green card application is pending?

U.S. Immigration Law Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq., and her Miami office Arias Villa, PLLC, assists individuals and families with U.S. immigration matters, including adjustment of status and employment-authorization questions. Contact Arias Villa, PLLC to request a consultation today.

CALL NOW

REQUEST A CONSULTATION

SEND A MESSAGE

Disclaimer: This article is provided for general educational purposes and is not legal advice. Immigration eligibility, employment authorization, deadlines, and filing procedures depend on individual circumstances and the law applicable to each case. Reading this article or contacting Arias Villa, PLLC does not establish an attorney-client relationship.

Official Government Resources

The post Can You Work While Waiting for Your Green Card? appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

Got a USCIS Notice? Here’s What It Means and What to Do Next

Martha Arias — Tue, 20 Oct 2026 16:45:39 +0000

A practical guide to understanding receipt notices, biometrics appointments, requests for evidence, interview notices, approvals, denials, and more.

You check your mailbox and find a letter from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Before you even open it, you may wonder: Is my immigration case approved? Do they need more documents? Is something wrong?

Not every USCIS notice means there is a problem. Some simply confirm that your application was received. Others schedule an appointment, request additional information, or communicate a decision.

The important thing is knowing what the notice means, whether you need to respond, and how much time you have to act.

Here is how to understand nine common USCIS notices and avoid mistakes that could affect your immigration case.

First, What Is Form I-797?

Many USCIS letters are identified as Form I-797, Notice of Action. USCIS uses different versions of this form to communicate with applicants and petitioners.

For example:

Form I-797C may be used for receipt, rejection, appointment, or other notifications.
Form I-797E is used to request evidence.
Other I-797 versions may communicate approvals or provide documentation related to a particular immigration benefit.

The form number alone does not tell you everything. Always read the notice’s heading, the application or petition involved, and the instructions.

USCIS explains the different versions in its official Form I-797 Types and Functions guide.

Notice	What it means	What to do
Receipt Notice	USCIS accepted your filing for processing	Save the notice and track your case
Biometrics Notice	USCIS scheduled collection of fingerprints, a photo, or a signature	Attend or request rescheduling if necessary
Request for Evidence (RFE)	USCIS needs additional evidence	Prepare a complete response before the deadline
Interview Notice	USCIS scheduled an interview	Review instructions and prepare
Transfer Notice	Your case was moved to another USCIS office	Keep the notice and monitor your case
Approval Notice	USCIS approved the specified application or petition	Read the exact benefit approved and next steps
Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID)	USCIS identifies reasons it intends to deny the request	Review the concerns and respond promptly
Denial Notice	USCIS denied the application or petition	Review the reasons and available legal options
Rejection Notice	USCIS did not accept the filing for processing	Correct the filing problem before resubmitting

1. Receipt Notice: USCIS Received Your Application

A receipt notice generally confirms that USCIS accepted your application or petition for processing.

It usually includes a receipt number that you can use to track the case.

What should you do?

Keep the notice, confirm that your personal information is correct, and use the receipt number to check your case through the official USCIS Case Status Online tool.

Important: A receipt notice does not mean your application has been approved. It also does not, by itself, establish lawful immigration status or unrestricted permission to work. Some receipts can serve as evidence of particular benefits or extensions when specific legal requirements are met, so read the notice carefully.

2. Biometrics Notice: USCIS Needs Your Fingerprints or Photograph

USCIS may require you to visit an Application Support Center to collect fingerprints, a photograph, or a signature for identity verification and background checks.

Your notice should identify the appointment date, time, location, and required documents.

What should you do?

Attend the appointment as instructed. If you cannot attend, follow USCIS procedures to request rescheduling.

USCIS allows many biometrics appointments to be rescheduled through an online account, subject to restrictions. Missing an appointment without properly addressing it can delay your case or lead to a determination that the request was abandoned.

3. Request for Evidence (RFE): USCIS Needs More Information

An RFE means USCIS is requesting specific documents or information before making a decision.

For example, USCIS may ask for additional financial documentation, proof of a qualifying relationship, or evidence related to immigration eligibility.

What should you do?

Read every requested item, note the response deadline, and follow the submission instructions. A complete response should address the issues identified in the notice.

An RFE does not automatically mean your case will be denied. However, an inadequate or late response can have serious consequences.

USCIS also has discretion in certain circumstances to deny a case without first issuing an RFE.

For more details, read our earlier article: USCIS May Deny Immigration Cases Without First Sending an RFE.

4. Interview Notice: Your Immigration Interview Has Been Scheduled

Depending on the benefit you are requesting, USCIS may schedule an interview to review your application and ask questions about your eligibility.

Interview notices can relate to green card applications, naturalization, and other immigration matters.

What should you do?

Check the appointment date and location, review the list of required documents, and prepare for questions relevant to your case.

If you cannot attend, request rescheduling according to the instructions for your particular interview. Do not simply miss the appointment.

An interview notice is not an approval or denial. It indicates that USCIS has scheduled another step in the process.

5. Transfer Notice: Your Case Has Moved to Another Office

Sometimes USCIS transfers a pending application or petition between service centers or other offices.

A transfer may occur for workload management or because another office will handle the next stage of processing.

What should you do?

Save the transfer notice, continue monitoring your case, and follow any new instructions.

Does a transfer mean something is wrong?

Not necessarily. A transfer alone does not establish that your case has a problem or that USCIS intends to deny it. It also does not guarantee that a decision will arrive soon.

6. Approval Notice: USCIS Approved Your Request

An approval notice is usually welcome news, but it is important to understand exactly what has been approved.

For example, approval of a family-based petition is not necessarily the same as approval of lawful permanent residence. Some applicants must complete additional steps through adjustment of status or consular processing.

What should you do?

Review the application or petition listed, any applicable validity dates, and any instructions concerning future documents or procedures.

Do not assume that every approval grants the same immigration rights. The consequences depend on the specific benefit approved.

7. Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID): USCIS Is Considering a Denial

A NOID means USCIS has identified reasons for a proposed denial and is giving the applicant or petitioner an opportunity to respond.

This is different from a final denial.

What should you do?

Read the concerns carefully, identify the supporting evidence or legal issues that need to be addressed, and pay close attention to the deadline.

A NOID may involve questions about eligibility, documentation, inconsistencies, or other case-specific concerns.

Because the consequences can be significant, obtaining legal guidance before responding may be appropriate.

8. Denial Notice: USCIS Has Denied the Application or Petition

A denial notice explains that USCIS has decided not to approve the requested immigration benefit.

The written decision should identify the reasons for denial and, where applicable, provide information about available review procedures.

What should you do?

Review the decision promptly. Depending on the type of case, available options may include an appeal, a motion to reopen, a motion to reconsider, or a new filing.

Not every decision is appealable, and different procedures and deadlines apply.

Do not assume you have unlimited time to challenge a denial. Some post-decision deadlines are short and may be calculated from the date USCIS served the decision rather than the day you opened the letter.

9. Rejection Notice: USCIS Did Not Accept Your Filing

A rejection is different from a denial.

A rejection usually means USCIS did not accept the submission for processing because of a filing problem, such as an incorrect fee, missing signature, or other intake deficiency.

What should you do?

Read the stated reason and review the current filing requirements before submitting a corrected application.

A rejected filing generally does not retain a filing date. This distinction can be especially important when an immigration deadline, eligibility window, or status-expiration issue is involved.

How to Read a USCIS Notice Before Taking Action

Regardless of which notice you receive, begin with these five details:

1. The form or application involved. If you have several pending immigration applications, identify which one USCIS is addressing.

2. Your name and receipt number. Confirm that the identifying information is correct. A USCIS receipt number generally has 13 characters: three letters followed by ten numbers.

3. The notice date. This may matter when calculating certain deadlines. Do not assume the date the letter reached your mailbox controls.

4. The action requested. Determine whether USCIS is providing information, scheduling an appointment, asking for evidence, or announcing a decision.

5. The response deadline and submission instructions. If action is required, follow the instructions on that notice and any applicable legal requirements.

Keep a complete copy of every notice and any materials you submit in response.

Five Mistakes to Avoid After Receiving a USCIS Notice

Ignoring the notice because your online case status has not changed. A mailed notice may contain instructions that require action.

Assuming a receipt means approval. USCIS accepting an application and approving the immigration benefit are separate events.

Responding to an RFE with only part of the requested evidence. USCIS generally expects requested evidence to be submitted together as instructed.

Missing an appointment without requesting rescheduling. Failing to attend a required appointment may affect your application.

Moving without updating your USCIS mailing address. Updating your address with the U.S. Postal Service does not automatically update your address with USCIS. Most noncitizens in the United States must report a change of address to USCIS within 10 days, subject to applicable exceptions.

Frequently Asked Questions

How can I check whether my USCIS notice is real?

Use your receipt number to check your case through the official USCIS website. Be cautious of suspicious payment requests, unofficial websites, and messages asking you to provide sensitive personal information. If you are uncertain, contact USCIS through its published channels or speak with your attorney.

What if USCIS says it mailed a notice, but I never received it?

Check your USCIS online account if available, confirm your mailing address, and use the official USCIS e-Request service or Contact Center to report a missing notice when appropriate.

If the missing notice concerns an appointment, evidence request, or deadline, seek assistance promptly rather than assuming USCIS will automatically extend the time.

Does receiving an RFE mean my immigration case will be denied?

No. An RFE indicates that USCIS is requesting additional information. The final outcome depends on the applicable legal requirements and the evidence in the record, including any timely response.

Does USCIS send an approval notice before the green card arrives?

USCIS may send a written approval notice before the physical Permanent Resident Card arrives. You should check your case status and follow instructions concerning document delivery.

Can I receive more than one USCIS notice for the same case?

Yes. A single application may generate several notices during processing, such as a receipt notice, biometrics appointment, evidence request, interview notice, and decision.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Received a USCIS Notice? Read It Carefully.

A letter from USCIS is not automatically bad news. It may simply confirm that your case is progressing, but it may also contain an important deadline or request that requires immediate attention. Understanding the notice is the first step. Knowing how it applies to your particular immigration situation is just as important.

If you have received a USCIS notice and are uncertain about the next step, call us. We assists individuals and families with U.S. immigration matters from our Miami office.

CALL NOW

REQUEST A CONSULTATION

SEND A MESSAGE

Legal disclaimer: This article provides general information and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration procedures, deadlines, and eligibility requirements vary depending on the facts and type of case. Reading this article or contacting the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship.

Official resources

The post Got a USCIS Notice? Here’s What It Means and What to Do Next appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

TPS for El Salvador, I-220A and Immigration Options

Martha Arias — Thu, 10 Sep 2026 20:11:13 +0000

Yesterday afternoon, I joined Carlos and Agustín Acosta on Actualidad Radio’s Cada Tarde for our weekly conversation about current U.S. immigration issues and the questions many families, workers, and business owners are facing.

Our discussion focused on the future of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Salvadorans, the long-term ties many TPS holders have developed in the United States, and the possible economic consequences when people who have worked, paid taxes, built businesses, and created jobs face uncertainty about their immigration status.

We also spoke about I-220A cases, employment and business-based immigration possibilities, adjustment of status, unlawful presence and waivers, travel and parole issues, and why the details of a person’s immigration history can make a significant difference when evaluating possible options.

As always, I appreciate Carlos and Agustín for giving us the time to discuss these complicated subjects thoughtfully and for asking the practical questions that many people in our community are also asking.

Immigration law continues to change, and circumstances are different for every individual and family. Staying informed—and obtaining advice based on your particular immigration history—is especially important when your status, employment, family, or business may be affected.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration laws, policies, court decisions, and agency procedures may change, and every case depends on its individual facts. Reading this article or contacting Arias Villa, PLLC does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Experienced Immigration Law Attorney

For professional and dedicated immigration legal services, reach out to our immigration attorney Martha Arias and her team at Arias Villa, PLLC. Schedule your consultation today and let us help you achieve your immigration goals.

CALL NOW

REQUEST A CONSULTATION

SEND A MESSAGE

The post TPS for El Salvador, I-220A and Immigration Options appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

Form I-485 Changes September 18, 2026: What Adjustment of Status Applicants Need to Know

Martha Arias — Thu, 03 Sep 2026 14:59:54 +0000

If you are preparing to apply for Adjustment of Status in the United States, September 18, 2026 is an important date to understand.

On that day, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will begin requiring a new edition of Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status. September 18 is also the effective date of the Department of Homeland Security‘s new public charge rule.

These changes do not mean that every adjustment-of-status applicant should rush to file before September 18. They do, however, make it especially important to use the correct form edition, understand which rules apply to your case, and make sure an application is complete before it is submitted.

A New Form I-485 Takes Effect September 18

USCIS has announced a new 09/18/26 edition of Form I-485.

Until September 18, USCIS will continue to accept the current 01/20/25 edition. USCIS specifically warns applicants not to use the new 09/18/26 edition before September 18.

For applications postmarked or electronically submitted on or after September 18, 2026, USCIS will accept only the new 09/18/26 edition. Older editions will be rejected.

This distinction matters because a rejected application generally does not receive the filing date that an applicant may have been trying to secure.

Applicants preparing a filing around the transition date should therefore pay particular attention to both the edition date printed on the form and the date the application is submitted.

The Public Charge Rules Also Change September 18

A separate but important change also takes effect on September 18.

The Department of Homeland Security’s final rule rescinds the public charge regulations adopted in 2022 and returns greater discretion to immigration officers when determining whether an applicant subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility is likely at any time to become a public charge.

For adjustment-of-status cases, the new rule applies to applications postmarked or electronically submitted on or after September 18, 2026.

This means an adjustment application properly filed before September 18 does not become subject to the new rule simply because USCIS continues processing the case after that date. DHS also states that receipt of means-tested public benefits before September 18 will be considered consistently with the prior 2022 rule.

What Will USCIS Consider Under the New Public Charge Framework?

The public charge determination remains an individualized review.

Federal law requires immigration officers to consider, at a minimum, factors including:

age;
health;
family status;
assets, resources and financial status; and
education and skills.

Where required, an Affidavit of Support, Form I-864, is also relevant.

Under the new framework, officers may additionally consider an applicant’s receipt of means-tested public benefits and other circumstances relevant to determining whether the individual is likely at any time to become a public charge. DHS describes the determination as a case-by-case review based on the totality of the circumstances.

Receiving a particular benefit does not automatically mean that an adjustment application will be denied. DHS specifically explains that receipt of a means-tested benefit is one consideration rather than an automatic determination by itself.

Benefits Received by Children or Other Family Members

This is an area where families should be particularly careful about misinformation.

The public charge determination focuses primarily on the person applying for admission or adjustment of status.

DHS states that USCIS is collecting information concerning means-tested public benefits received by the adjustment applicant. Benefits received by another household member are not simply treated as though they were received by the applicant.

There can, however, be circumstances in which a family member’s receipt of benefits may provide information relevant to the applicant’s overall financial situation—for example, where someone the applicant is legally obligated to support receives means-tested benefits because household income falls below a qualifying threshold.

For that reason, families should not make decisions about terminating benefits based solely on generalized information they see online.

Does the Public Charge Rule Apply to Every Form I-485 Applicant?

No. Not every person filing Form I-485 is subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility.

USCIS identifies a number of exempt immigration categories. Depending on the circumstances, these can include certain:

refugees and asylees;
VAWA self-petitioners;
Special Immigrant Juveniles;
U and T nonimmigrants;
Cuban Adjustment Act applicants;
NACARA applicants; and
other categories specifically exempted by law.

The applicable exemption depends on the legal basis for adjustment, and the complete USCIS list should be reviewed when determining whether the public charge provisions apply to a particular case.

Should You File Form I-485 Before September 18?

This will understandably be one of the most common questions over the next two weeks.

For someone who is already eligible to adjust status and has a properly prepared application, the September 18 effective date may be relevant because it determines both which edition of Form I-485 must be used and, for applicants subject to public charge, which regulatory framework applies.

But the answer is not simply:

“Everyone should file before September 18.”

Adjustment of status requires much more than submitting Form I-485. Immigration history, eligibility, visa availability where applicable, admissibility, supporting documentation, financial sponsorship, medical examination requirements and other issues can affect whether and when an application should be filed.

Rushing an incomplete or incorrect application simply to meet a date can create its own problems.

If You Are Preparing an Adjustment of Status Application

If you are planning to file Form I-485 during September, check the USCIS website immediately before submitting your application.

Make sure you are using the correct edition, current instructions, filing fee and filing location.

For people whose cases may involve public charge concerns, financial sponsorship questions, prior immigration issues, or uncertainty about adjustment eligibility, it may also be wise to have the case reviewed before filing.

Frequently Asked Questions

What Form I-485 edition should I use before September 18, 2026?

USCIS currently instructs applicants filing before September 18 to use the 01/20/25 edition.

What Form I-485 edition is required beginning September 18, 2026?

For filings postmarked or electronically submitted on or after September 18, USCIS will require the 09/18/26 edition.

Will USCIS accept the new Form I-485 before September 18?

No. USCIS states that the 09/18/26 edition should not be submitted before its effective date.

Does the new public charge rule apply to pending I-485 applications?

The new rule applies to adjustment applications postmarked or electronically submitted on or after September 18, 2026.

Does receiving public benefits automatically make someone ineligible for a green card?

No. For applicants subject to public charge, DHS uses an individualized totality-of-the-circumstances analysis. Receipt of a means-tested benefit is not automatically determinative.

DISCLAIMER: This article provides general information about U.S. immigration law and is not legal advice. Immigration eligibility and filing strategy depend on the individual facts of each case.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Applying for Adjustment of Status (or Green Card)?

Immigration rules and USCIS forms can change quickly. Taking the time to understand which requirements actually apply to your circumstances can help avoid unnecessary mistakes.

If you have questions about U.S. immigration law, the new public charge rule, adjustment of status, or another U.S. immigration matter, you may contact my office at Arias Villa, PLLC in Miami at (305) 671-0018.

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

The post Form I-485 Changes September 18, 2026: What Adjustment of Status Applicants Need to Know appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

Immigrant Visa Interviews Paused Worldwide: I-220A and B1/B2 Updates Discussed on Actualidad Radio

Martha Arias — Fri, 28 Aug 2026 20:58:40 +0000

Yesterday I joined Carlos and Agustín once again on “Cada Tarde” on Actualidad Radio for a timely conversation about several immigration developments that are creating questions for families and immigrants across the United States and abroad.

During the interview, we discussed the temporary pause affecting immigrant visa interviews at U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide, the continuing federal court proceedings involving the earlier 75-country immigrant visa pause, recent developments concerning B1/B2 visas and asylum applicants, and the still-unresolved legal questions affecting many Cuban immigrants who were issued Form I-220A.

We also discussed why it is especially important to distinguish between a new government announcement, a pending court case, and a final legal determination. Immigration policies are changing quickly, and some of these matters remain before the courts.

My sincere thanks to Carlos and Agustín for inviting me back and for giving their audience the opportunity to hear a thoughtful discussion about issues that are affecting so many people.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

DISCLAIMER: This information is provided for general educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration matters depend on the individual facts and circumstances of each case.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Experienced Immigration Law Attorney

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

CARLOS:
Cambiamos de tema. Ya tenemos con nosotros a nuestra próxima invitada y la llamamos porque ayer, cuando estábamos cerrando el programa, de acuerdo, Agustín, leíamos una información que daba cuenta de una orden por parte de una jueza federal con relación a los trámites migratorios que estaban detenidos. Dieron la orden de darle curso, y que beneficia a los 39 países, y ya nos explicará nuestra invitada cuáles son los 39 de los 75 que se habían visto afectados. Pero a eso le agregaron que ayer se produjo una orden mediante la cual, en todo el mundo, están suspendidas las entrevistas para visas de inmigrantes.

AGUSTÍN:
En los consulados y embajadas.

CARLOS:
Bueno, la argumentación es que van a preparar al personal para que sean un poco más estrictos en las entrevistas porque quieren evitar el tema de la carga pública. Pero bueno, vamos a estar claros: hay que verlo desde los dos ángulos. Vamos a escuchar a nuestra invitada porque yo tengo un tema con eso.

Hay gente que, de verdad —y yo con esto no quiero decir que estamos de acuerdo con la forma como se están aplicando las políticas migratorias—, pero yo sé, y yo sé que mucha gente que me está escuchando sabe, que hay gente que viene, saca la residencia, se va para su país de origen, antes de que se cumplan los seis meses vuelve a entrar y no vive aquí. Y entonces eso perjudica a quien sí quiere migrar y vivir aquí. Entonces esas cosas también las ven los que están haciendo la auditoría de cómo se maneja el tema. Pero vamos a darle la bienvenida a nuestra invitada.

AGUSTÍN:
Claro. Se trata de la doctora Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración, que tiene un segmento todos los lunes acá con nosotros, pero que hoy la hemos llamado, hoy jueves, precisamente porque se presentaron ayer estas dos noticias de última hora. Doctora, muy buenas tardes.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Muy buenas tardes, Agustín y Carlos. Un gusto estar con ustedes aquí lunes, martes, miércoles, cuando ustedes…

AGUSTÍN:
El día que se dé…

CARLOS:
Martha, hace tiempo que no la veíamos, doctora. Ya podemos verla a través de Zoom.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Verdad. Es que tengo aquí por allá como la frecuencia y la emisora, pero bueno, con esto de la tecnología aquí estamos.

AGUSTÍN:
Deje que usted vea el estudio que nos gastamos.

CARLOS:
Así es.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Oh, sí. Esto es un estudio de lujo.

CARLOS:
Totalmente, doctora. [inaudible]

AGUSTÍN:
Esto hace palidecer la sala de control del Artemis que fue ahora a la Luna, si no es que está ultra, ultra…

CARLOS:
Así es. Tenemos tecnología de primera. Bienvenida, doctora. Y bueno, ya escuchó usted más o menos la introducción que hicimos, así que corte el pastel por donde usted quiera.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Bueno, a ver. Esto es interesante. Como ustedes muy bien lo dijeron, un juez había declarado que anuló, o ha anulado, o vacated, la decisión del gobierno de pausar la emisión de visas de inmigrantes de 75 países. Esto fue, creo, el viernes pasado que el juez dijo esto.

Ayer, el 26 de agosto, el gobierno anunció que iba nuevamente a paralizar estas visas de inmigrantes para entrenamiento de los cónsules sobre la nueva carga pública, la regulación que entra a partir de septiembre 18, el próximo mes.

Entonces, pues, queda como un poquito contradictorio porque se suspende el viernes por un juez, pero el gobierno saca esta decisión. ¿Qué está pasando?

Lo último que está pasando es lo siguiente: los demandantes presentaron una moción de emergencia para obligar al gobierno a que cumpla con la decisión o la orden de la jueza Vargas, porque la decisión, dicen ellos, cobijaba a todas las visas de inmigrantes; que esto es una excusa y que es básicamente lo mismo que la pausa anterior por razones de carga pública que ha hecho el gobierno, igual a lo que está pasando ahora, que nuevamente lo pausaron.

Entonces, en este momento, Agustín y Carlos, hay una moción de emergencia presentada en la corte para pedirle, para exigir, que el gobierno cumpla con la orden de la jueza.

AGUSTÍN:
¿Esto quedaría dilucidado esta semana, de acuerdo con lo que el tribunal pudiera dictaminar, o normalmente el tribunal escucha argumentos, luego se retiran a deliberar y pudiéramos entonces estar viendo ya una determinación final más adelante en el año?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Bueno, esperamos que esto lo hagan rápido porque se presentó como una emergency motion, una moción de emergencia, para obligar a que se cumpla. Como moción de emergencia, se supone que debe ser contestada rápidamente.

Entonces esperamos que tal vez, en no más de una semana a dos semanas, el gobierno conteste a esta moción y se pueda tomar una decisión.

Pero tampoco sabemos porque, acuérdese, es una moción nada más. Ya está la decisión del juez anterior. Si esta moción la niegan, entonces tendría que nuevamente presentarse otra demanda ahora por esta nueva medida del gobierno.

CARLOS:
Antes de que le entremos, doctora, al tema de las entrevistas para las personas que optan por una visa o una tarjeta de residencia, quiero entrarle a lo de la visa B-1/B-2.

Es decir, mucha gente ha entendido o malentendido el tema de que si a usted le emitieron la visa en el 2016 o después del 2016, o desde el 2016, entonces usted no podría pedir asilo o sería candidato a que le nieguen el asilo.

¿Cuál es la realidad de ese tema de emisiones de visa posteriores a 2016 o desde el 2016 en adelante?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Bueno, yo más bien creo que la realidad es porque estamos hablando de diez años, y normalmente esos diez años es lo que duran las visas hoy en día, porque las emiten por diez años. Yo creo que el punto de los diez años o el 2016 es por eso, por la caducidad, porque obviamente, si fue emitida antes del 2016, obviamente esa visa ya está expirada si no la renovaron.

Entonces yo creo que el punto del 2016 es por la expiración; normalmente son diez años.

Lo que el gobierno está diciendo es que las personas —si estamos hablando de B-1/B-2—, lo que el gobierno está diciendo es que si a una persona le fue expedida esa visa y dentro de los Estados Unidos pidió un asilo, esa visa va a ser cancelada por el Departamento de Estado.

No se sabe cuándo va a empezar a hacer esto y dónde va a mandar las notificaciones de esas cancelaciones.

Pero lo que yo le quiero decir al público es que esto no es nada nuevo. Obviamente es una noticia que impacta porque todo lo que diga “visa” y “cancelación” obviamente impacta, pero es que esto no es nada nuevo.

Mire, si una persona viene a los Estados Unidos con una visa de turista o una visa de empleo, qué sé yo, y esa persona pide asilo, esa persona está mostrando la intención de inmigrar a los Estados Unidos, porque por eso pide el asilo.

Obviamente, esa persona tiene, cuando entra con una visa de turista, seis meses para estar en los Estados Unidos, y si es una de estudiante, pues hasta lo que dure el estudio. Pero si esa persona pide asilo, quiere decir que estos seis meses que le habían dado con visa de turista, pues ya no los va a tener, ya va a perder ese estatus de turista. Y esa visa, aunque ya la tenga en el pasaporte, ya no tiene validez porque la persona ya emigró, en cierta forma mostró una intención de inmigrar.

Entonces, en la práctica, desde que yo ejerzo como abogada de inmigración hace 23 años, yo nunca he visto una persona…

CARLOS:
Que empezó muchachita entonces a ejercer.

AGUSTÍN:
De high school empezó…

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Cinco años, por ahí.

CARLOS:
[inaudible]

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Por ahí me decía alguien que no es que nosotros somos viejos, sino que tenemos juventud acumulada. Es una cantidad de acumulación de juventud.

Pero a lo que le estaba diciendo: en este tiempo de estos 23 años yo nunca he visto una persona que venga a los Estados Unidos con visa de turista y pida asilo, sea que se lo aprueben, sea que se lo nieguen, y se vaya de los Estados Unidos e intente volver a aplicar a una visa de turista, que se la hayan dado. A nadie. Esa visa nunca se la vuelven a dar porque la persona ya mostró una intención de inmigrar.

Incluso yo tuve un cliente al que le aprobaron el asilo; se quedó como cinco o seis años y se fue a su país. Después trató de renovar su visa de turista y de regresar, y nunca se la volvieron a aprobar, ni a sus hijos, que se fueron jovencitos.

Entonces, vamos a decir que de facto siempre ha ocurrido esto: a la persona nunca le vuelven a renovar su visa de turista.

La única diferencia que está pasando ahora es que sí le van a mandar, a ver, una cartica no muy grata que dice: “Su visa ha sido cancelada”. Pero ¿quién dijo que la vamos a necesitar más? Ya la persona está en los Estados Unidos. [inaudible] Esto, de hecho, siempre ha pasado.

AGUSTÍN:
Bien, doctora. Yo tengo mucha curiosidad con el asunto de la I-220A, porque yo mantengo que la I-220A se le dio a un grupo de personas que entraron a los Estados Unidos y el gobierno les dio algún tipo de proceso en algún puesto fronterizo, en alguna oficina allá en territorio de los Estados Unidos.

A esas personas les dieron algún documento que les permitió luego sacar el permiso de trabajo y, muchos de ellos, inclusive sacar su licencia de conducción en el estado donde fueron a vivir.

Para los efectos prácticos, yo entiendo que el gobierno los aceptó, porque de lo contrario no les hubieran dado ni la licencia de conducción, que es un documento oficial estatal, ni el permiso de trabajo, que es un documento federal.

Si yo llegara esta noche a mi casa y me encontrara diez personas sentadas en la sala, comiendo, bebiendo, se quitaron los zapatos, están viendo el televisor, y yo monto en cólera y digo: “¿Ustedes quiénes son? ¿Cómo entraron acá?”

“Ah, no, el hijo suyo nos abrió la puerta y nos permitió entrar.”

Yo no puedo llamar a la policía y acusarlos de allanamiento de morada si mi hijo les permitió la entrada.

Entonces yo mantengo, por una cuestión meramente de sentido común, que estas personas fueron admitidas y, si fueron admitidas y se les dieron estos documentos, entonces cumplen con el precepto de la ley de 1966 que les permitiría la solicitud por la Ley de Ajuste.

¿Usted tiene alguna idea de en qué cronograma está el proceso judicial pendiente?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí. Bueno, el proceso en este momento está en que el Circuito 11 devolvió a la Sala de Apelaciones, en ese caso de Cabrera-Fernández, que es el caso, devolvió el caso a la Sala de Apelaciones para que reinterpretaran o reanalizaran su definición que habían dado antes sobre la I-220A.

Cuando ustedes se acuerdan de que en algún momento la corte dijo que no, que la I-220A no es un parole, aunque no fue explícitamente en el mejor caso, con los mejores hechos que la Corte de Apelaciones dijo eso, pues la Sala de Apelaciones, en este caso, lo devolvió.

Y estoy hablando del Circuito 11, que es el de Atlanta. Devolvió este caso a la Sala de Apelaciones de Inmigración, que es el Board of Immigration Appeals, diciéndole: “Ustedes están interpretando esto mal. Esa interpretación de ustedes no es correcta. Yo se lo voy a devolver para que ustedes analicen otra vez e interpreten correctamente la ley.”

Esa devolución del Circuito 11 a la Sala de Apelaciones está pendiente.

AGUSTÍN:
Ahora bien, déjeme interrumpirla un momentito. Ahora vamos a entrar en el terreno especulativo de alguien que tiene 23 años y una experiencia superlativa en estas cosas.

El olfato o el instinto suyo, ¿le dice que la devolución de la Corte de Apelaciones de Atlanta a la Junta de Apelaciones de Inmigración, con esa encomienda y con un señalamiento que puede uno inferir que les están llamando la atención por una interpretación incorrecta, pudiera resultar en un beneficio para los peticionarios?

Para los que nos están escuchando en la radio, la doctora ahora está como pensando bien las cosas.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
A ver. Desde el punto de vista legal, yo pienso que es totalmente posible y debería pasar eso. Desde el punto de vista legal, yo no vería otro raciocinio, otro análisis que condujera a una decisión diferente. Eso sería lo correcto.

Porque, como lo argumentaron los abogados y como está argumentado, es clarísimo. Y como usted me lo dijo, es clarísimo que eso tiene que ser.

Ahora, eso es desde el punto de vista legal. Desde el punto de vista práctico, como yo estoy viendo ciertas decisiones de la Sala de Apelaciones, me preocupa. Me preocupa mucho la decisión que puedan emitir, porque la Sala de Apelaciones actual ya no es esa sala donde había unos juristas que hacían unos análisis súper profundos y bien hechos.

Estamos con una nueva sala, prácticamente nueva, porque muchos jueces son nuevos…

AGUSTÍN:
¿Politizada?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Politizada al máximo, al servicio de las directivas del Ejecutivo en cuanto a la materia migratoria.

AGUSTÍN:
¿Y quién tiene la última palabra en este caso, Atlanta o la Junta de Inmigración?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Atlanta. Porque cuando se devuelve al BIA, el BIA vuelve, lo interpreta, y si las partes vuelven y presentan otra vez un recurso de revisión ante el Circuito 11, esto regresa al Circuito 11 para el análisis otra vez y la decisión final.

Bueno, final hasta… o sea, de todo, porque de ahí del Circuito 11 puede ir a Supreme, claro, o ir a la Corte Suprema.

Pero entonces, aparte de estas dos cosas, si me preguntara a mí cuál es mi instinto, mi sexto sentido, mi instinto es que esto lo va a tener que resolver el Ejecutivo o el Congreso de alguna forma.

Y hemos visto cómo María Elvira Salazar ha pedido que se les dé, por lo menos a los que tienen la I-220A, un parole in place, que fue similar al que se les dio a los militares.

Yo pienso que, si de pronto la Sala de Apelaciones no toma esa decisión a favor, de pronto esto viene por el lado del Ejecutivo.

¿Por qué lo pienso así? Porque mire las peticiones de ajuste de estatus cubano que la mayoría de abogados y las personas tienen pendientes con I-220A ante USCIS y ante la corte: la mayoría están en stand-by. Uno.

Dos: algunas de las que no están en stand-by son jueces que han tenido el coraje, yo creo, de decir: “Esa I-220A sí es un parole.” Tenemos uno recientemente que lo dieron en Orlando.

Entonces, por eso pienso que estos casos estén en stand-by y on hold. Es alguna decisión que viene de allá arriba donde les dice: “Mire, hold it, hold it, téngalo allí, pero no [inaudible], que aquí va a pasar algo.”

Y yo pienso que va a pasar algo más por el Ejecutivo o por el Congreso que por la Sala de Apelación.

CARLOS:
Muy bien. Nos queda toda la inquietud porque lo que… Agustín, doctora, el tema de la admisión por esa persona a la que le dieron una I-220A.

Se presentó —voy a poner un ejemplo fronterizo—, se presentó en la frontera y dijo: “Aquí estoy”, porque pidió una cita con la aplicación, y entonces ahí le expidieron una I-220A.

AGUSTÍN:
Pero fíjate, Carlos y doctora, mucho antes de que la doctora se graduara de leyes, y cuando tú vivías en la Isla de Margarita y yo ya andaba por acá, llegaba un balsero a los Cayos en un neumático de un vehículo.

En el momento en que tocaba tierra, lo recibían cuatro o cinco transeúntes que estaban por allí, le compraban una Coca-Cola para hidratarlo, le daban un sándwich y llamaban a la policía.

Y venía la policía, y la policía probablemente ni siquiera se lo llevaba. Lo llevaban para el Hogar de Tránsito que dirigía Arturo Cobo allí en Cayo Hueso. Y Arturo los hospedaba y, al día siguiente, los llevaban para inmigración.

Y los procesaban y les daban exactamente el mismo papel que le dieron a los I-220A. Le daban un papel de admisión, y con ese papel de admisión esa persona, pues, sacaba su licencia de conducción, sacaba un número de Seguro Social, y luego, al cabo de un año y un día, se presentaba ante un abogado de inmigración y solicitaba, por la Ley de Ajuste de 1966, la residencia.

No hay una gran diferencia. Puede cambiar el nombre del documento, pero el espíritu de uno y de otro es prácticamente idéntico.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Tiene toda la razón. Aunque, si vamos desde el punto de vista legal, y que son los argumentos que se han expresado, es que la ley de inmigración tiene únicamente dos formas.

¿Cómo una persona determina si entró a los Estados Unidos, vamos a decir, legalmente? Obviamente es por la frontera, por tierra o por aire, yo no sé, por mar; bueno, pueden entrar.

Pero hay dos formas legales de entrar. Las dos formas legales son una admisión, que es la persona que entra con una visa: visa de turista, visa de inversionista…

Eso, cuando la persona entra, le dan el sello, queda estampado que ha entrado en el sistema como que fue admitida en esa categoría con la que entró.

La otra forma que está en la ley —esto está en la ley estatutaria del Congreso de los Estados Unidos—, la otra forma es un parole.

El parole, vamos a llamarlo como permiso. Es como Agustín decía ahora: si a esa persona usted le abrió la puerta, le dio el permiso para que entre a su casa. Usted no le dio la llave, que sería la admisión, porque la admisión sería la llave: le dio la llave para que abra la puerta.

No. Usted no le dio la llave a esta persona. Usted le abrió la puerta y le permitió sentarse en la sala. Ese permiso se llama parole.

Entonces no hay ningún otro nombre en el estatuto: o admisión o parole.

AGUSTÍN:
Que viene de la palabra francesa, parole. Es como que es una aceptación a que se quede aquí, una permanencia.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Bajo palabra. Estamos permitiendo entrar, un permiso.

Ahora, si la persona en ese momento entra, ¿cuál es el documento correcto? Si le dan ese permiso, el documento correcto para mostrarlo se llama parole, y es una forma que es la I-94, que es la misma que le dan a la admisión, pero le ponen un sello que dice parole bajo la sección 212(d)(5)(A), que es la sección que dice que es un parole humanitario.

Se le estampa ahí, lo firman y queda en el sistema como un parole. No hay otra, no hay otra.

Entonces, ¿qué pasa? Si a la persona no le dan ese parole y la deportan de la frontera, a esa persona la sacan y le dan una I-220B, que eso sí ya es cuando la persona la deportaron pero pasó una entrevista y, yo creo, la dejaron entrar.

Eso es otra cosa distinta. Ahí tampoco hay parole. Ahí hay una deportación, solo que la está cumpliendo dentro con esa I-220B.

¿Qué pasa? Cuando le dan el documento incorrecto, que es esa I-220A, que fue el que le dieron los oficiales a la entrada, ese documento es para que la persona salga bajo libertad, bajo palabra.

Ahí ya estamos hablando, vamos a decir, de las partes del proceso. La parte uno es: te admito o te doy un parole, ¿ok?

La parte dos es: te voy a dar este documento para que entre.

Y la parte tres, que puede ser conjunta con la parte dos, es: te voy a poner en custodia o te voy a dejar entrar.

Obviamente, si tiene una admisión y tiene una visa, pues no lo van a poner en custodia. Si tiene un parole, porque le están dejando entrar, ellos pueden determinar si lo ponen en custodia o no. Y no lo están poniendo en custodia; lo están dejando salir bajo palabra.

AGUSTÍN:
Pero no solo los están dejando salir, o los dejaron salir en su momento; les dieron la vía para que sacaran la licencia de conducción y el permiso de trabajo.

A falta de un documento nacional de identidad, como se llama en España el documento, y la cédula de identidad de la República Dominicana, exacto, a falta de eso, que aquí no lo hay en los Estados Unidos, el único otro documento que tiene un estándar nacional hoy en día es la licencia de conducción.

Y si usted, para poder sacar una licencia de conducción, le exigen una regularización migratoria, pues estas personas presentaron ese papel que les dieron en ese momento de entrada o en el momento del proceso, y con eso sacaron su licencia de conducción y su permiso de trabajo.

Yo no recuerdo el texto, las palabras de la Ley de Ajuste de 1966, pero me parece haber leído en algún momento que decía “legally admitted”. Y si es legally admitted, ¿no es así la de 1966?

Admitted. ¿Qué cosa es admitir? Admitir es autorizar a alguien a entrar. Si usted va a una discoteca donde hay un portero —esto era muy común en los años 80 y 90— y van 50 personas que quieren entrar a la discoteca pero no caben todos, había un portero y el portero seleccionaba quién entraba. Eso es una admisión.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Bueno, ahí sí no estoy de acuerdo, aunque en términos generales pudiéramos decir que sí.

Pero la ley de inmigración, el estatuto, define qué es una admisión para efectos de inmigración, para efectos del estatuto. Entonces, una admisión, lo dice claramente, es cuando a la persona la dejan entrar o entra a los Estados Unidos con un tipo de visa que le permite ser admitida.

Entonces la definición de admisión en el estatuto sí es distinta a lo que nosotros, en la calle, conocemos desde el punto de vista del idioma, que ya puede tener otra connotación.

Hay una definición distinta, una definición distinta.

Pero lo que sí es claro es que solamente hay dos formas de entrar legal: o parole o admisión. No hay más.

Entonces el hecho de que a unas personas las procesaron y les dieron el documento equivocado, que no les tenían que haber dado una I-220A, les tenían que dar un parole, eso no es culpa de los inmigrantes. Eso es culpa de la forma como fueron procesados, ¿no?

Ese es uno de los mayores argumentos.

CARLOS:
Ahora, pero en un reto —y disculpe que la interrumpa, doctora—, en un reto en la corte, usted como abogado puede argumentar, más allá de lo que pueda significar desde el punto de vista del lenguaje jurídico la palabra admisión, que esta persona entró y le dieron una serie de documentos que sí han reconocido la entrada y, por ende, su estadía en los Estados Unidos.

¿Le permiten, en el caso de los cubanos, aplicar para la Ley de Ajuste Cubano, o solo se puede aplicar para el Ajuste Cubano si usted tiene previamente un parole?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, tiene que ser parole o admisión. Y como a la persona la dejaron, la procesaron, le permitieron entrar, no tenía una visa para decir que era una admisión, entonces no puede ser otra cosa que un parole.

Que los oficiales de la entrada le dieron una forma que se llamaba X, Y o Z; en este caso se llamó la I-220A.

CARLOS:
Y en una corte tú puedes decir: “No es culpa del inmigrante; fue el gobierno el que mal emitió un documento.”

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactamente. Bueno, ese es el argumento. Precisamente ese es el argumento que ha estado en la corte y que ha llegado hasta el Circuito 11.

Ese es el estado: el gobierno dio el documento equivocado, pero eso no es problema del inmigrante. Ese documento no se tenía que llamar I-220A; se tenía que llamar parole, porque no hay otro.

AGUSTÍN:
Voy a otro punto. Cuando tú entras a los Estados Unidos como turista, tú no puedes trabajar legalmente. No puedes trabajar, y si trabajas estás al margen de la ley.

Si tú entras como estudiante, con una visa de estudiante para estudiar en la universidad una carrera, tú no puedes trabajar como estudiante, con una visa de estudiante.

En el momento en que el gobierno federal —y esta es una opinión mía, pero yo creo que es una opinión que tiene un sustento, pudiéramos decir, cuasi legal—, en el momento en que el gobierno federal, que es la institución que otorga un permiso de trabajo, y los permisos no se otorgan a los turistas, los permisos no se otorgan a las personas que están de tránsito, los permisos no se otorgan al que viene a jugar un juego de fútbol de la Copa, porque eso no es un permiso de trabajo…

El jugador viene a hacer un trabajo deportivo pero se tiene que ir después; no se puede quedar aquí trabajando en McDonald’s.

Y no se le permite trabajar a un estudiante que viene a cursar una carrera universitaria.

En el momento en que el ente federal le otorga un permiso de trabajo a una persona, ¿no está reconociendo su permanencia a corto, mediano o largo plazo en los Estados Unidos?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Está reconociendo la permanencia, pero el permiso de trabajo de la mayoría de estas personas no se los otorgaron por la I-220A. Se los otorgaron porque muchos de ellos pidieron asilo.

Entonces se los otorgaron bajo la categoría del asilo, que es C08, no porque la I-220A en sí les permitiera trabajar.

Entonces la mayoría de ellos entraron, les permitieron pedir un asilo y, a través del asilo, fue que obtuvieron el permiso de trabajo.

AGUSTÍN:
Bueno, entonces, ¿usted cree que esto se ventila este año?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Yo espero que sí. Lo que yo no sé es si esto sea antes de noviembre o después de noviembre. Esa es la pregunta del millón.

Pero yo espero que sea este año porque esta decisión que llegó a través de la Sala de Apelación ya se lo devolvieron como desde febrero. O sea, ya lleva muchos meses.

Y yo no sé si también entonces el gobierno le está diciendo: “Ponga el hold mientras sacamos la [decisión] del Congreso o del Ejecutivo.”

Y sería eso, pero no, no, no sé.

Pero la esperanza es que lo podamos hacer lo más rápido posible, porque mire: están deportando muchas de estas personas con I-220A que no han podido resolver, y qué triste sería que deporten y deporten más y después salga un beneficio para los que quedan.

CARLOS:
Eso puede estar planificado: salgamos de la mayoría que se pueda y, cuando otorguemos el beneficio, el que se salvó se quedó.

Doctora, no queremos despedirla sin preguntarle sobre la última decisión, que es el tema de parar las entrevistas en todos los consulados para el otorgamiento de una visa de inmigrante o una tarjeta de residente.

El gobierno está argumentando, por lo menos está diciendo, que esto primero es temporal y, segundo, es para —creo que la palabra que utilizaron fue— la capacitación de nuestro personal consular, y que sean un poco más estrictos y exhaustivos en las entrevistas. Y también pareciera que tiene algo que ver con el tema de la carga pública.

Yo le decía que ciertamente sí es un inconveniente. No es menos cierto que hay gente que utiliza las residencias para venir a estar cuatro meses aquí y, antes de que se le cumplan los seis meses, se va y vuelve a entrar. Y hay gente que tiene esa práctica, que nos parece inusual porque hay gente que sí ha hecho todo lo que necesita hacer para hacerse residente de los Estados Unidos.

¿Qué evaluación tiene usted?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Bueno, efectivamente, como le dije, vamos a esperar cómo decide la jueza esta moción de emergencia, a ver si la jueza ordena también que se ejecute y se anule esta nueva orden del Ejecutivo, del Departamento de Estado.

Vamos a ver. Lo sabremos tal vez en unas cuantas semanas.

¿Qué opino de esto? Yo pienso que es más bien una excusa para continuar dilatando los procesos migratorios porque una de las intenciones, una de las metas del gobierno, obviamente lo han dicho claramente, es bajar la inmigración en los Estados Unidos.

Bajar la inmigración incluye entonces dilatar esos procesos consulares y también dilatar los procesos dentro de los Estados Unidos, dejarlos ahí, que se vaya la gente, y así es una forma de reducir esa inmigración.

Yo pienso que es una excusa porque fíjese: en la primera administración del señor Trump, él emitió una regla de carga pública que es casi igual a la que estamos ahora, si no idéntica, y el presidente Biden, cuando entró, la eliminó. Y ahora, pues, tenemos nuevamente la misma, que está por entrar.

En ese momento ya se había instruido a los oficiales consulares sobre cómo manejar esa carga pública. Se les habían dado todas las guías. De hecho, en la misma página del Departamento de Estado aparecía como un proceso que tenía que mandar la gente, cómo probar que no iba a ser una carga pública.

Entonces, si la mayoría de sus oficiales consulares todavía estaban en sus posiciones consulares, pues ya tienen ese entrenamiento. Uno.

Dos: fíjese, dar un entrenamiento sobre un pedacito de la carga pública, de cómo entrevistar a las personas, y pausar todos los casos indefinidamente sin saber todavía cuándo van a salir de ese entrenamiento, porque la pausa es indefinida…

Si lo comparamos con el entrenamiento que están recibiendo los jueces nuevos que están juramentando, que no tienen mucho conocimiento de inmigración, y que el entrenamiento es limitado y no es indefinido, entonces yo me pongo a pensar: la ley de inmigración es tan compleja, es una de las más difíciles después de la ley de impuestos.

Entonces, si un juez que tiene unos casos muchísimo más complejos que decidir tiene un entrenamiento tan rápido, entonces ¿por qué a los oficiales consulares les van a dar un entrenamiento indefinido sobre un pedacito nada más de la legislación, que es un pedacito de carga pública?

No tiene sentido para mí.

AGUSTÍN:
Doctora, los jueces que están contratando para inmigración no son personas como usted, abogados con experiencia en ley de inmigración. ¿Los están trayendo de otros…?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Algunos, muy pocos, dentro de los que entran como jueces de inmigración vienen de lo que nosotros llamamos el private bar, que es la barra de abogados defensores de inmigración.

Son pocos. Sí hay, pero son muy pocos, porque pocos son los abogados defensores de inmigración que quieren entrar en ese campo.

La mayoría de estos jueces son veteranos. Obvio, todos son abogados, claro que sí, pero son veteranos o personas que han pertenecido de alguna forma a las Fuerzas Armadas en los Estados Unidos.

Pero muchos, y la mayoría —y lo pueden leer ustedes, está escrito—, la mayoría de ellos hoy día no tienen una experiencia migratoria.

Entonces eso es complicado con estos jueces porque, como inmigración es tan complejo, las decisiones son muy… algunas de ellas, erróneas.

Y, aparte de eso, no son jueces que ya vienen con más… [inaudible]. No van a ser tan neutrales como debe ser un juez, como es obligación, sino también vienen como un poquito más [inaudible], como si fueran oficiales del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional.

Entonces sí, es compleja la situación que estamos viendo.

Hay abogados —a mí no me ha pasado, gracias a Dios—, pero abogados que están reportando jueces amenazándolos con presentar quejas a la barra de abogados cuando el abogado celosamente representa a su cliente. No por cosas indebidas, obviamente. Una persona que haga algo con falta de ética o viole las normas puede ser reportada.

Pero aparentemente se está dando, sobre todo en algunas cortes de Nueva York, algún comportamiento muy hostil por parte de los jueces hacia los abogados defensores. Y esto también nos está afectando, pues, a nosotros y, obviamente, a los clientes.

Esto es lo que está pasando con esta nueva, vamos a decir, ola de jueces de inmigración que estamos viendo.

AGUSTÍN:
Doctora, si me lo permite, voy a dar su teléfono porque la hemos tenido aquí casi 40 minutos y lo menos que puedo hacer es recomendarle a los oyentes: si algún oyente necesita la mejor asesora de inmigración que pueda encontrar, yo le recomiendo a nuestra amiga Martha Arias.

El teléfono es el 305-671-0018.

Doctora, muchísimas gracias.

CARLOS:
Gracias, doctora. Un placer. [inaudible]

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Muchas gracias por invitarme. Feliz resto de semana.

CARLOS:
Cuando pueda, pase por aquí para que conozca el estudio.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Tengo que volver. Si no, no lo conozco. Ya con la reforma que hicieron no lo conozco.

CARLOS:
Aquí será bienvenida. Gracias, doctora. Muy bien.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

CARLOS:
We are changing topics. We already have our next guest with us, and we called her because yesterday, when we were closing the program, as Agustín and I were discussing, we were reading information about an order from a federal judge regarding immigration procedures that had been stopped. They gave the order to move them forward, and it benefits the 39 countries, and our guest will explain to us which are the 39 out of the 75 that had been affected.

But they added to that that yesterday an order was issued under which, throughout the world, interviews for immigrant visas are suspended.

AGUSTÍN:
At the consulates and embassies.

CARLOS:
Well, the argument is that they are going to prepare the personnel so that they can be a little stricter during the interviews because they want to address the public-charge issue.

But, well, we have to be clear: you have to look at it from both angles. We are going to listen to our guest because I have an issue with this.

There are people who really —and by this I do not mean that we agree with the way the immigration policies are being applied— but I know, and I know that many people listening to me know, that there are people who come, obtain permanent residence, go back to their country of origin, come back before the six months are up, and do not live here.

And then that hurts the person who really does want to immigrate and live here. So those things are also seen by those who are auditing how the issue is handled.

But let us welcome our guest.

AGUSTÍN:
Of course. This is attorney Martha Arias, an immigration attorney, who has a segment with us every Monday, but today we called her, today Thursday, precisely because these two breaking-news developments came up yesterday.

Attorney, very good afternoon.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Very good afternoon, Agustín and Carlos. It is a pleasure to be with you here Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, whenever you…

AGUSTÍN:
Whatever day it happens…

CARLOS:
Martha, it had been a while since we had seen you, attorney. Now we can see you through Zoom.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Right. It is that I have here and there something with the frequency and the station, but, well, with this technology, here we are.

AGUSTÍN:
Wait until you see the studio we have now.

CARLOS:
That is right.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Oh, yes. This is a luxury studio.

CARLOS:
Absolutely, attorney. [inaudible]

AGUSTÍN:
This makes the Artemis control room that just went to the Moon look pale, unless this one is ultra, ultra…

CARLOS:
That is right. We have first-class technology. Welcome, attorney. And, well, you heard more or less the introduction that we made, so cut the cake wherever you want.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Well, let us see. This is interesting. As you very correctly said, a judge had declared that she annulled, or has annulled, or vacated, the government’s decision to pause the issuance of immigrant visas from 75 countries. This was, I believe, last Friday when the judge said this.

Yesterday, August 26, the government announced that it was again going to stop these immigrant visas for training of the consular personnel regarding the new public-charge rule, the regulation that takes effect beginning September 18, next month.

So it becomes a little contradictory because it is stopped on Friday by a judge, but the government issues this decision.

What is happening?

The latest thing that is happening is the following: the plaintiffs filed an emergency motion to force the government to comply with the decision or order of Judge Vargas because the decision, they say, covered all immigrant visas; that this is an excuse and that it is basically the same thing as the previous pause for public-charge reasons that the government carried out, the same thing that is happening now, that they paused it again.

So, right now, Agustín and Carlos, there is an emergency motion filed in court asking, demanding, that the government comply with the judge’s order.

AGUSTÍN:
Would this be clarified this week according to what the court might rule, or does the court normally hear arguments, then retire to deliberate, and we could then be seeing a final determination later in the year?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Well, we hope that they do this quickly because it was filed as an emergency motion, an emergency motion, to force compliance.

Because it is an emergency motion, it is supposed to be answered quickly.

So we hope that perhaps, in no more than one to two weeks, the government will answer this motion and a decision can be made.

But we also do not know because, remember, it is only a motion. The previous judge’s decision already exists. If this motion is denied, then another lawsuit would again have to be filed because of this new government measure.

CARLOS:
Before we get into the subject, attorney, of the interviews for people seeking a visa or a permanent resident card, I want to get into the B-1/B-2 visa issue.

That is, many people have understood or misunderstood the issue to mean that if your visa was issued in 2016 or after 2016, or from 2016 onward, then you could not request asylum or would be a candidate to have your asylum denied.

What is the reality regarding this issue of visas issued after 2016 or from 2016 forward?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Well, I rather think that the reality is because we are talking about ten years, and normally those ten years are how long visas last nowadays because they issue them for ten years.

I think the point of the ten years, or 2016, is because of that, because of expiration, because obviously, if it was issued before 2016, obviously that visa has already expired if they did not renew it.

So I think the point about 2016 is because of expiration; normally it is ten years.

What the government is saying is that people —if we are talking about B-1/B-2— what the government is saying is that if a person was issued that visa and, while inside the United States, requested asylum, that visa is going to be canceled by the Department of State.

It is not known when they are going to start doing this or where they are going to send notices of those cancellations.

But what I want to tell the public is that this is nothing new. Obviously it is news that has an impact because anything that says “visa” and “cancellation” obviously has an impact, but this is nothing new.

Look, if a person comes to the United States with a tourist visa or an employment visa, whatever, and that person requests asylum, that person is showing an intention to immigrate to the United States because that is why the person is requesting asylum.

Obviously, that person has, when entering with a tourist visa, six months to be in the United States, and if it is a student visa, then until the studies last.

But if that person requests asylum, it means that those six months that were given under the tourist visa, the person is no longer going to have them, the person is going to lose that tourist status. And that visa, even though the person already has it in the passport, no longer has validity because the person already immigrated, in a certain way showed an intention to immigrate.

So, in practice, during the 23 years that I have practiced as an immigration attorney, I have never seen a person…

CARLOS:
So you started practicing very young.

AGUSTÍN:
You started in high school…

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
About five years old.

CARLOS:
[inaudible]

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Someone told me that it is not that we are old; it is that we have accumulated youth. It is an amount of accumulated youth.

But going back to what I was telling you: during these 23 years, I have never seen a person who comes to the United States with a tourist visa and requests asylum, whether the asylum is approved or denied, then leaves the United States and tries to apply again for a tourist visa and receives it.

Nobody. They never give that visa again because the person has already shown an intention to immigrate.

I even had a client whose asylum was approved; the person stayed about five or six years and went back to the home country. Later, the person tried to renew the tourist visa and return, and it was never approved again, nor was it approved for the person’s children, who left when they were very young.

So, let us say that de facto this has always happened: they never renew the person’s tourist visa.

The only difference with what is happening now is that they are going to send, let us say, a not very pleasant little letter saying: “Your visa has been canceled.”

But who said we are going to need it anymore? The person is already in the United States. [inaudible] This, in fact, has always happened.

AGUSTÍN:
All right, attorney. I am very curious about the I-220A issue because I maintain that the I-220A was given to a group of people who entered the United States and the government gave them some type of processing at some border location, at some office there within the territory of the United States.

Those people were given some document that later allowed them to obtain a work permit, and many of them even obtained a driver’s license in the state where they went to live.

For practical purposes, I understand that the government accepted them because otherwise they would not have been given either the driver’s license, which is an official state document, or the work permit, which is a federal document.

If I arrived home tonight and found ten people sitting in my living room, eating, drinking, they had taken off their shoes, they were watching television, and I became angry and said, “Who are you? How did you get in here?”

“Oh, no, your son opened the door and allowed us to come in.”

I cannot call the police and accuse them of trespassing if my son allowed them to enter.

So I maintain, as a simple matter of common sense, that these people were admitted, and if they were admitted and were given these documents, then they meet the requirement of the 1966 law that would allow them to apply under the Adjustment Act.

Do you have any idea what the timeline is for the pending judicial process?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes. Well, the process at this moment is that the Eleventh Circuit sent the case back to the Appeals Board, in that Cabrera-Fernández case, which is the case. It sent the case back to the Appeals Board so that they would reinterpret or reanalyze the definition they had previously given regarding the I-220A.

You remember that at some point the court said no, that the I-220A is not parole, although it was not explicitly in the best case, with the best facts, where the Court of Appeals said that.

So the Appeals Board, in this case, had it returned.

And I am talking about the Eleventh Circuit, which is the one in Atlanta. It returned this case to the Board of Immigration Appeals, which is the Board of Immigration Appeals, telling them: “You are interpreting this incorrectly. Your interpretation is not correct. I am sending it back to you so that you analyze it again and interpret the law correctly.”

That return from the Eleventh Circuit to the Appeals Board is pending.

AGUSTÍN:
Now, let me interrupt you for a moment. Now we are going to enter the speculative territory of someone who has 23 years and tremendous experience in these matters.

Does your sense or instinct tell you that the return from the Atlanta Court of Appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals, with that instruction and with an indication from which one can infer that they are being called out for an incorrect interpretation, could result in a benefit for the petitioners?

For those listening to us on the radio, the attorney is now thinking very carefully.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Let us see. From the legal point of view, I think that it is entirely possible and that should happen.

From the legal point of view, I would not see another line of reasoning, another analysis, that would lead to a different decision. That would be the correct thing.

Because the way the attorneys argued it and the way it is argued, it is very clear. And as you told me, it is very clear that it has to be that way.

Now, that is from the legal point of view. From the practical point of view, seeing certain decisions from the Appeals Board concerns me. It concerns me very much what decision they may issue because the current Appeals Board is no longer that board where there were jurists who did very deep and well-done analyses.

We now have a new board, practically new, because many judges are new…

AGUSTÍN:
Politicized?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Politicized to the maximum, serving the Executive’s directives regarding immigration matters.

AGUSTÍN:
And who has the last word in this case, Atlanta or the Immigration Board?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Atlanta. Because when it is returned to the BIA, the BIA goes back, interprets it, and if the parties again file a petition for review before the Eleventh Circuit, then it goes back to the Eleventh Circuit for another analysis and the final decision.

Well, final up to… I mean, overall, because from the Eleventh Circuit it can go to the Supreme, of course, or to the Supreme Court.

But then, apart from these two things, if you asked me what my instinct is, my sixth sense, my instinct is that this is going to have to be resolved by the Executive or Congress in some way.

And we have seen how María Elvira Salazar has requested that at least those who have I-220A be given parole in place, similar to what was given to members of the military.

I think that if the Appeals Board does not make that favorable decision, perhaps this will come through the Executive.

Why do I think that?

Because look at the Cuban adjustment-of-status applications that most attorneys and people have pending with I-220A before USCIS and before the court: most are on stand-by. That is one.

Two: some of those that are not on stand-by involve judges who have had the courage, I think, to say: “That I-220A is parole.” We have one recently that was given in Orlando.

So that is why I think that these cases are on stand-by and on hold. There is some decision coming from above where they tell them: “Look, hold it, hold it, keep it there, but do not [inaudible], because something is going to happen here.”

And I think something is going to happen more through the Executive or Congress than through the Appeals Board.

CARLOS:
Very well. We are left with all of that uncertainty because what… Agustín, attorney, the issue of admission for the person who was given an I-220A.

The person appeared —I am going to give a border example— appeared at the border and said, “Here I am,” because the person requested an appointment through the application, and then an I-220A was issued.

AGUSTÍN:
But look, Carlos and attorney, long before the attorney graduated from law school, and when you lived on Margarita Island and I was already around here, a Cuban rafter would arrive in the Keys on a vehicle tire.

The moment the person touched land, four or five passersby who were there would receive him, buy him a Coca-Cola to hydrate him, give him a sandwich, and call the police.

Then the police would come, and the police probably did not even take him away. They took him to the transit home run by Arturo Cobo there in Key West. Arturo would house them and, the next day, they would take them to immigration.

And they would process them and give them exactly the same paper they gave the I-220A people. They gave them an admission paper, and with that admission paper the person would obtain a driver’s license, obtain a Social Security number, and then, after one year and one day, would go to an immigration attorney and apply for residence under the 1966 Adjustment Act.

There is not a great difference. The document’s name may change, but the spirit of one and the other is practically identical.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
You are absolutely right. Although, if we look at it from the legal point of view, and these are the arguments that have been made, immigration law has only two forms.

How does a person determine whether he or she entered the United States, let us say, legally? Obviously it is through the border, by land or by air, I do not know, by sea; well, they can enter.

But there are two legal forms of entering. The two legal forms are an admission, which is when the person enters with a visa: tourist visa, investor visa…

When the person enters that way, they give the stamp, it is stamped that the person entered in the system and was admitted in the category under which the person entered.

The other form that is in the law —this is in the statutory law of the United States Congress— the other form is parole.

Parole, let us call it permission. It is like Agustín was saying just now: if you opened the door for that person, you gave that person permission to enter your house.

You did not give the person the key, which would be admission, because admission would be the key: you gave the person the key to open the door.

No. You did not give this person the key. You opened the door for the person and allowed the person to sit in the living room. That permission is called parole.

So there is no other name in the statute: either admission or parole.

AGUSTÍN:
Which comes from the French word parole. It is like an acceptance that the person can remain here, a stay.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
On one’s word. We are allowing the person to enter, a permission.

Now, if the person enters at that moment, what is the correct document? If they give that permission, the correct document to show it is called parole, and it is a form, the I-94, which is the same one they give for admission, but they put a stamp saying parole under Section 212(d)(5)(A), which is the section that says it is humanitarian parole.

It is stamped there, they sign it, and it remains in the system as parole. There is no other, there is no other.

So what happens? If the person is not given that parole and is deported from the border, they remove the person and give the person an I-220B. That is when the person was already deported but went through an interview and, I believe, was allowed to enter.

That is something different. There is no parole there either. There is a deportation, except the person is carrying it out inside with that I-220B.

What happens when they give the incorrect document, which is that I-220A, which is the one the officers gave at entry? That document is for the person to be released on recognizance, on his or her word.

We are now talking, let us say, about the parts of the process.

Part one is: I admit you or I give you parole, okay?

Part two is: I am going to give you this document so you can enter.

And part three, which can be together with part two, is: I am going to place you in custody or I am going to allow you to enter.

Obviously, if the person has an admission and has a visa, they are not going to place the person in custody.

If the person has parole because they are allowing the person to enter, they can determine whether they place the person in custody or not.

And they are not placing the person in custody; they are allowing the person to leave on recognizance.

AGUSTÍN:
But they are not only allowing them to leave, or did not only allow them to leave at the time; they gave them a path to obtain a driver’s license and a work permit.

In the absence of a national identity document, as the document is called in Spain, and the identity card in the Dominican Republic —exactly— in the absence of that, which we do not have here in the United States, the only other document today that has a national standard is the driver’s license.

And if, in order to get a driver’s license, you are required to have regularized immigration status, these people presented the paper they were given at that moment of entry or during processing, and with that they obtained their driver’s license and their work permit.

I do not remember the text, the exact words of the 1966 Adjustment Act, but I seem to remember reading at some point that it said “legally admitted.”

And if it is legally admitted, is that not what the 1966 law says?

Admitted. What does admitting mean? To admit means to authorize someone to enter.

If you go to a nightclub where there is a doorman —this was very common in the 1980s and 1990s— and 50 people want to enter the nightclub but everyone cannot fit, there is a doorman and the doorman selects who enters.

That is an admission.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Well, there I do disagree, although in general terms we could say yes.

But immigration law, the statute, defines what an admission is for immigration purposes, for purposes of the statute.

So an admission, it says clearly, is when the person is allowed to enter or enters the United States with a type of visa that allows the person to be admitted.

So the definition of admission in the statute is different from what we know on the street from the point of view of the language, where it can have another connotation.

There is a different definition, a different definition.

But what is clear is that there are only two ways to enter legally: either parole or admission. There are no others.

So the fact that some people were processed and given the wrong document, that they should not have been given an I-220A and should have been given parole, that is not the immigrants’ fault.

That is the fault of the way they were processed, right?

That is one of the main arguments.

CARLOS:
Now, but in a challenge —and excuse me for interrupting you, attorney—, in a challenge in court, can you as an attorney argue, beyond what the word admission may mean from the point of view of legal language, that this person entered and was given a series of documents that have recognized the entry and therefore the person’s stay in the United States?

In the case of Cubans, does that allow the person to apply under the Cuban Adjustment Act, or can a person only apply for Cuban Adjustment if the person previously has parole?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, it has to be parole or admission.

And because the person was allowed in, was processed, was permitted to enter, and did not have a visa for it to be called an admission, then it cannot be anything other than parole.

The officers at entry gave the person a form that was called X, Y, or Z; in this case it was called the I-220A.

CARLOS:
And in court you can say: “It is not the immigrant’s fault; it was the government that incorrectly issued a document.”

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactly. Well, that is the argument. That is precisely the argument that has been in court and that has reached the Eleventh Circuit.

That is the situation: the government gave the wrong document, but that is not the immigrant’s problem.

That document should not have been called I-220A; it should have been called parole because there is no other.

AGUSTÍN:
I will go to another point.

When you enter the United States as a tourist, you cannot work legally. You cannot work, and if you work, you are outside the law.

If you enter as a student, with a student visa to study a degree at a university, you cannot work as a student with a student visa.

At the moment that the federal government —and this is my opinion, but I think it is an opinion that has some support, we could say quasi-legal support—, at the moment that the federal government, which is the institution that grants a work permit, and permits are not given to tourists, permits are not given to people who are in transit, permits are not given to someone who comes to play a soccer game in the Cup, because that is not a work permit…

The player comes to perform athletic work but has to leave afterward; the player cannot stay here working at McDonald’s.

And a student who comes to complete a university degree is not allowed to work.

At the moment the federal entity grants a work permit to a person, is it not recognizing that person’s short-, medium-, or long-term stay in the United States?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
It is recognizing the stay, but the work permit for most of these people was not granted because of the I-220A.

It was granted because many of them requested asylum.

So it was granted under the asylum category, which is C08, not because the I-220A itself allowed them to work.

So most of them entered, were allowed to request asylum, and it was through the asylum application that they obtained the work permit.

AGUSTÍN:
Well, then, do you believe this will be resolved this year?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
I hope so.

What I do not know is whether this will be before November or after November. That is the million-dollar question.

But I hope it will be this year because this decision that came through the Appeals Board was sent back around February. In other words, it has already been many months.

And I do not know whether perhaps the government is also saying: “Put it on hold while we get the [decision] from Congress or the Executive.”

And that could be it, but I do not, do not, do not know.

But the hope is that we can get it done as quickly as possible because look: many of these people with I-220A who have been unable to resolve their cases are being deported.

And how sad it would be if they deport and deport more people and then a benefit comes out for those who remain.

CARLOS:
That could be planned: let us get rid of as many as possible and, when we grant the benefit, whoever survived stayed.

Attorney, we do not want to say goodbye without asking you about the latest decision, which is the issue of stopping interviews at all consulates for the issuance of an immigrant visa or a permanent resident card.

The government is arguing, or at least saying, that, first, this is temporary and, second, it is for —I believe the word they used was— training of our consular personnel so that they can be somewhat stricter and more thorough in the interviews.

And it also appears that it has something to do with the public-charge issue.

I was saying that it is certainly an inconvenience.

It is no less true that there are people who use their permanent residence to come and stay here for four months and, before the six months are up, leave and come back in.

And there are people who have that practice, which seems unusual to us, because there are people who have done everything they need to do to become residents of the United States.

What is your assessment?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Well, effectively, as I told you, we are going to wait to see how the judge decides this emergency motion, to see whether the judge also orders that this be enforced and this new order by the Executive, by the Department of State, be annulled.

We will see. We may know in a few weeks.

What do I think about this? I think it is more of an excuse to continue delaying immigration processes because one of the intentions, one of the government’s goals —obviously they have said it clearly— is to reduce immigration in the United States.

Reducing immigration therefore includes delaying those consular processes and also delaying processes inside the United States, leaving them there, letting people leave, and that is one way of reducing that immigration.

I think it is an excuse because look: during Mr. Trump’s first administration, he issued a public-charge rule that is almost the same as what we have now, if not identical, and President Biden, when he came in, eliminated it.

And now, well, we again have the same one that is about to take effect.

At that time, consular officers had already been instructed on how to handle that public-charge issue.

They had been given all of the guidance. In fact, the State Department’s own website had a process that people had to submit, how to prove that they were not going to become a public charge.

So, if most of those consular officers are still in their consular positions, then they already have that training. One.

Two: look, to provide training about one little part of public charge, about how to interview people, and to pause all cases indefinitely without yet knowing when they are going to finish that training, because the pause is indefinite…

If we compare that with the training being received by new judges who are being sworn in, who do not have much immigration knowledge, and that training is limited and is not indefinite, then I begin to think: immigration law is so complex; it is one of the most difficult areas after tax law.

So if a judge who has much more complex cases to decide receives such rapid training, then why would consular officers be given indefinite training about only one small part of the legislation, which is a small part dealing with public charge?

It does not make sense to me.

AGUSTÍN:
Attorney, the judges they are hiring for immigration are not people like you, attorneys with experience in immigration law. Are they bringing them in from other…?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Some, very few, of those entering as immigration judges come from what we call the private bar, meaning the bar of immigration defense attorneys.

There are few. Yes, there are some, but they are very few because few immigration defense attorneys want to enter that field.

Most of these judges are veterans. Obviously, all of them are attorneys, of course, but they are veterans or people who have belonged in some way to the Armed Forces in the United States.

But many, and the majority —and you can read it, it is written— most of them today do not have immigration experience.

So that is complicated with these judges because, because immigration is so complex, the decisions are very… some of them are erroneous.

And, apart from that, they are not judges who already come with more… [inaudible]. They are not going to be as neutral as a judge should be, as is required, but they also come a little more [inaudible], as if they were officers of the Department of Homeland Security.

So yes, the situation we are seeing is complicated.

There are attorneys —it has not happened to me, thank God— but attorneys who are reporting judges threatening them with filing complaints with the bar when the attorney is zealously representing the client.

Not because of improper things, obviously. A person who does something unethical or violates the rules can be reported.

But apparently there is, especially in some New York courts, some very hostile behavior by judges toward defense attorneys.

And this is also affecting us and, obviously, the clients.

This is what is happening with this new, let us say, wave of immigration judges that we are seeing.

AGUSTÍN:
Attorney, if you allow me, I am going to give your telephone number because we have had you here for almost 40 minutes, and the least I can do is recommend to the listeners: if any listener needs the best immigration adviser they can find, I recommend our friend Martha Arias.

The telephone number is 305-671-0018.

Attorney, thank you very much.

CARLOS:
Thank you, attorney. A pleasure. [inaudible]

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Thank you very much for inviting me. Have a wonderful rest of the week.

CARLOS:
When you can, come by here so you can see the studio.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
I have to come back. Otherwise I will not get to see it. With the remodeling they did, I have not seen it.

CARLOS:
You will be welcome here. Thank you, attorney. Very good.

The post Immigrant Visa Interviews Paused Worldwide: I-220A and B1/B2 Updates Discussed on Actualidad Radio appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

Worldwide Immigrant Visa Pause, Public Charge and ICE Enforcement

Martha Arias — Thu, 27 Aug 2026 19:27:53 +0000

Worldwide Immigrant Visa Appointment Pause

What Applicants Should Know

Today, I joined journalist Magali Schwartzman on DNEWS for a conversation about the rapidly changing immigration landscape in the United States.

We discussed the recent disruption of immigrant visa appointments at U.S. consulates, ongoing litigation involving the State Department’s earlier 75-country immigrant visa policy, changes surrounding public-charge screening, and the increased focus on immigration enforcement.

These developments continue to move quickly, and court decisions and government instructions can significantly change how a policy is implemented from one day to the next.

I sincerely thank Magali Schwartzman and the DNEWS team for the invitation and for giving their audience an opportunity to better understand what is happening.

I invite you to watch the full interview for our complete conversation.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

This information is provided for general educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Experienced Immigration Law Attorney

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

SEND A MESSAGE

The post Worldwide Immigrant Visa Pause, Public Charge and ICE Enforcement appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

Immigration Changes Discussed on TVV International with Jessica Morales

Martha Arias — Mon, 24 Aug 2026 15:40:43 +0000

On Friday, I joined Jessica Morales on TVV International to discuss several important developments in U.S. immigration law, including the new public-charge rule taking effect September 18, changes to Form I-485 and Form I-765, recent developments involving advance parole, and changes affecting asylum proceedings.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

With immigration policies and procedures continuing to change, it is especially important to verify the current requirements before submitting an application or making decisions about international travel.

My sincere thanks to Jessica Morales and the team at TVV International for the opportunity to help keep our community informed.

DISCLAIMER: This information is provided for general educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Experienced Immigration Law Attorney

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

The post Immigration Changes Discussed on TVV International with Jessica Morales appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

Venezuela TPS and Immigration Changes: My Conversation With Unión Radio Noticias

Martha Arias — Thu, 20 Aug 2026 20:22:57 +0000

This morning, I joined Unión Radio Noticias to discuss the uncertainty many Venezuelans are experiencing as immigration policies and protections continue to change in the United States.

During the interview, we spoke about the end of TPS protections for many Venezuelans, concerns surrounding work authorization and immigration enforcement, travel outside the United States, asylum, voluntary departure, and the difficult decisions many families are now facing.

We also discussed something that is sometimes overlooked: the emotional impact these rapid changes can have not only on immigrants and their families, but also on the legal professionals and staff working with them every day.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Immigration law is changing quickly, and circumstances can be very different from one person to another. Before making an important decision about travel, remaining in the United States, filing an immigration application, or leaving the country, it is important to understand how current law applies to your individual situation.

My sincere thanks to the hosts and the entire Unión Radio Noticias team for inviting me and for giving their audience an opportunity to stay informed about these important issues.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Experienced Immigration Law Attorney in Miami

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

DISCLAIMER: This article provides general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration matters depend on individual circumstances and current law.

The post Venezuela TPS and Immigration Changes: My Conversation With Unión Radio Noticias appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

New Public Charge Rules Take Effect September 18, 2026: What Green Card Applicants Should Know

Martha Arias — Tue, 18 Aug 2026 17:23:31 +0000

Update — August 19, 2026

USCIS issued new public-charge implementation guidance on August 18, 2026. The guidance will take effect on September 18, 2026, together with the new public-charge rule, and will apply to affected Forms I-485 postmarked or electronically submitted on or after that date.

USCIS has also announced that it will publish a revised Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, for implementation of the new rule. Older editions of Form I-485 postmarked or electronically submitted on or after September 18 will not be accepted. Applicants filing near the effective date should check the official USCIS Form I-485 page before submitting their application to make sure they are using the edition USCIS currently requires.

Applications properly filed and accepted by USCIS before September 18, 2026, and still pending on that date, remain subject to the public-charge criteria under the 2022 rule.

Official USCIS guidance:
https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-issues-guidance-on-making-public-charge-inadmissibility-determination

Official Form I-485 page:
https://www.uscis.gov/i-485

New Public Charge Rules Take Effect September 18, 2026

What Green Card Applicants Should Know

A significant change to the U.S. immigration public charge rules will take effect on September 18, 2026, and I want to clarify what it means—especially because this is an area where confusing headlines can easily cause unnecessary fear.

The Department of Homeland Security has rescinded most of the public-charge regulations adopted in 2022.

Beginning September 18, immigration officers will have broader discretion to evaluate whether an applicant who is subject to the public-charge ground of inadmissibility is likely at any time to become a public charge.

But there are two very important points to understand:

Receiving a public benefit does not automatically mean your green card will be denied, and the public-charge rule does not apply to every immigration applicant.

What Changes on September 18?

Under the U.S. Immigration Law, officers making a public-charge determination must consider the applicant’s circumstances as a whole, including at least:

Age
Health
Family status
Assets, resources and financial status
Education and skills

An Affidavit of Support, Form I-864, may also be considered when applicable, and it remains legally required for most family-sponsored immigrants and certain employment-based immigrants.

Beginning September 18, DHS will have broader discretion to consider additional relevant circumstances, including an applicant’s application for, approval or certification to receive, or receipt of means-tested public benefits, as part of the totality of the circumstances.

Importantly, no single factor—including receipt of a means-tested benefit—automatically determines the outcome of a public-charge decision.

What About Benefits Received Before September 18?

This is an especially important distinction.

DHS states that previously excluded means-tested public benefits received before September 18, 2026 will not suddenly be evaluated under the broader new approach.

For benefits received before September 18, DHS will continue applying the standards of the 2022 rule. That generally limited benefit consideration to certain public cash assistance for income maintenance and long-term institutionalization at government expense.

For previously excluded means-tested benefits, the broader consideration begins with benefits applied for or received on or after September 18, 2026.

What If My Green Card Application Is Already Pending?

The filing date matters.

If an adjustment-of-status application is postmarked or electronically submitted before September 18, 2026 and accepted by USCIS, and it remains pending when the new rule takes effect, DHS says it will be adjudicated under the criteria of the 2022 rule.

Applications for adjustment of status postmarked or electronically submitted on or after September 18, 2026 will be subject to the new framework.

Applicants should not, however, rush to submit an incomplete or inaccurate application simply to file before the effective date. A properly prepared filing remains extremely important.

Does the Rule Apply to Everyone Seeking a Green Card?

No.

There are statutory exemptions from the public-charge ground of inadmissibility.

This is particularly important for many members of our South Florida community: eligible applicants adjusting status under the Cuban Adjustment Act remain exempt from the public-charge ground of inadmissibility.

Refugees and asylees adjusting status under the applicable provisions of immigration law are also among those exempt.

The new rule removes the regulatory list of exemptions, but it does not eliminate exemptions established by Congress.

What About Benefits Received by My Children or Other Family Members?

Generally, USCIS is focused on benefits received by the person applying for adjustment of status, not benefits received independently by other family members.

For example, the fact that a U.S. citizen child receives a public benefit does not simply mean that the parent is considered to have received that benefit.

However, certain financial circumstances involving the household may still be relevant—for example, if a family member’s benefits are actually providing the applicant’s financial support or if the circumstances reveal information relevant to the applicant’s own income and financial situation.

This is another reason these cases should be evaluated individually rather than relying on broad statements about whether a particular benefit is always “safe” or “unsafe.”

My Tips Before September 18

Know whether the public-charge ground applies to your immigration category. Some applicants are statutorily exempt.

Pay attention to your filing date. Applications accepted by USCIS and filed before September 18 are treated differently from applications filed on or after the effective date.

Do not assume receiving one benefit automatically means a denial. Public charge is a prospective determination based on the totality of the applicant’s circumstances.

Do not assume all family benefits count against you. Benefits received by a child, spouse or another household member generally are not treated as benefits received by the applicant.

Check the current Form I-485 before filing. USCIS has announced that it will publish a revised Form I-485 in connection with implementation of the new rule.

If you are uncertain, obtain advice based on your individual circumstances before making decisions about immigration filings or public benefits. Eligibility for a benefit and its possible immigration consequences are separate questions.

Frequently Asked Questions

Will receiving Medicaid, SNAP or another means-tested benefit automatically cause my green card to be denied?

No. DHS expressly states that receipt of means-tested public benefits alone is not outcome-determinative.

Beginning September 18, however, an applicant’s application for, approval to receive, or receipt of qualifying means-tested benefits may be considered along with age, health, family circumstances, finances, education, skills and other relevant factors.

Are benefits I received before September 18 going to be reconsidered under the new rule?

Previously excluded means-tested benefits received before September 18 will not be evaluated retroactively under the broader new standard. DHS says benefits received before the effective date will be treated consistently with the 2022 rule.

I filed Form I-485 before September 18. Which rules apply?

If the application was postmarked or electronically submitted before September 18, was accepted by USCIS, and remains pending, DHS states that it will be adjudicated under the criteria established by the 2022 rule.

A rejected application is different. DHS specifically states that it looks to the filing currently before USCIS rather than the date of an earlier filing that USCIS rejected.

Does this change affect someone applying under the Cuban Adjustment Act?

Eligible applicants adjusting status under the Cuban Adjustment Act remain statutorily exempt from the public-charge ground of inadmissibility. The new rule does not remove that exemption.

Will my child’s public benefits automatically count against me?

Generally, no. USCIS does not treat a family member’s benefit receipt as though the adjustment applicant personally received that benefit.

There can be limited circumstances in which household financial information is relevant to the applicant’s overall financial situation, so individual facts still matter.

What Green Card Applicants Should Do Now

The September 18 change is significant, but it should not cause people to panic or immediately stop receiving benefits for which they or their family members are lawfully eligible.

The more important step is to understand whether the public-charge ground applies to your case, which rules apply based on your filing date, and how your individual circumstances may be evaluated.

Public-charge determinations are highly individualized. One person’s immigration situation may be very different from another’s.

If you have questions about adjustment of status, a green card application, or how these changes may relate to your immigration case, you may contact

DISCLAIMER: This article provides general immigration information and does not constitute legal advice. Public-charge rules do not apply to every immigration category, and each case depends on its individual facts and circumstances. Immigration laws, forms, policies and procedures may change.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Dedicated Immigration Law Attorney Martha Arias

If you have questions about adjustment of status, a green card application, or how these changes may relate to your immigration case, you may contact my office at 305-671-0018.

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

The post New Public Charge Rules Take Effect September 18, 2026: What Green Card Applicants Should Know appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

USCIS Is Moving Toward Mandatory Online Filing

Martha Arias — Mon, 17 Aug 2026 15:05:32 +0000

USCIS Is Moving Toward Mandatory Online Filing

What Changed on August 11, 2026?

If you recently saw headlines suggesting that USCIS has suddenly eliminated paper immigration applications, that is not what happened on August 11, 2026.

A new Department of Homeland Security interim final rule gives U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services the authority to require electronic filing for certain immigration benefit requests in the future. However, the rule itself does not immediately require every USCIS application or petition to be filed online.

The rule became effective on August 11, 2026.

What Actually Changed?

Under the new rule, USCIS may eventually require electronic filing for a benefit request that has already been available for electronic filing for at least 180 days.

But USCIS cannot simply make a particular filing electronic-only without warning. When USCIS decides to impose a mandatory electronic-filing requirement, it must announce that requirement on its official website and provide at least 60 days of advance notice before the mandate takes effect.

The Federal Register specifically explains that the August 11 rule does not itself impose or announce a mandatory electronic-filing requirement for any particular benefit request. Instead, it gives USCIS the authority and procedures to establish those requirements later.

Does This Mean Paper Filing Is Gone?

No—not today.

Applicants and petitioners should continue following the current filing instructions for the particular USCIS form they are submitting.

Some forms can already be filed online, while others continue to use paper filing or have different electronic options. USCIS maintains an official list of forms currently available for online filing:

https://www.uscis.gov/file-online/forms-available-to-file-online

The important change is that USCIS now has a regulatory path to make electronic filing mandatory for eligible forms in the future.

What Will Electronic Filing Mean?

When USCIS eventually requires electronic filing for a particular benefit request, filing electronically may include completing the form through a USCIS online account or, where USCIS makes that option available, uploading a completed PDF through an approved online account.

That means “electronic filing” does not necessarily mean every form will have to be completed through the same type of online questionnaire.

What About People Who Cannot File Online?

The new rule also establishes a process through which someone may request permission to file on paper when mandatory electronic filing would create undue hardship.

The rule creates Form I-936, Request for Waiver of E-Filing Requirement, for this purpose. USCIS will evaluate waiver requests individually and may consider circumstances such as geographic location, socioeconomic conditions, and access to technology or public internet resources.

Importantly, simply being unfamiliar with USCIS’s online system or not already having an online account generally will not, by itself, be enough to qualify for a waiver.

My Tips for Applicants

Check the filing instructions before every submission. Do not assume that the filing method you used previously is still the correct one.

Use USCIS.gov as your source. If USCIS makes electronic filing mandatory for a particular form, the agency will announce the requirement and its effective date on its official website.

Do not stop filing paper forms simply because of the August 11 announcement. If the current instructions permit paper filing and USCIS has not announced a mandatory electronic-filing date for that particular request, follow the current instructions.

Pay attention to future USCIS notices. Filing a form using the wrong method after a mandatory electronic-filing requirement takes effect could create serious filing problems, particularly when deadlines or priority dates are involved.

Frequently Asked Questions

Did USCIS eliminate paper filing on August 11, 2026?

No. The rule gives USCIS authority to require electronic filing in the future. It does not itself make every USCIS benefit request electronic-only.

Can USCIS make any form electronic-only immediately?

No. Before USCIS can mandate electronic filing, the benefit request must have been available for electronic filing for at least 180 days. USCIS must then provide at least 60 days’ advance notice before the mandatory requirement begins.

Will every immigration form eventually become online-only?

The rule does not establish a date by which every USCIS form must become electronic-only. USCIS will decide separately whether and when to mandate electronic filing for particular forms, classifications, or types of requests.

Can someone still file on paper after USCIS makes electronic filing mandatory?

The rule establishes a waiver process for individuals who can demonstrate that mandatory electronic filing would create undue hardship. A waiver must be approved before the related benefit request can be submitted on paper under that exception.

What Applicants Should Do Now

For now, there is no reason to panic or assume that paper applications have suddenly disappeared.

The more important message is that USCIS is clearly moving toward a more electronic filing system, and applicants, families, employers, professionals, and investors should pay close attention to the filing instructions that apply at the time their case is submitted.

Immigration filing procedures can change, and using the correct filing method is an important part of properly preparing a case.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Do you have questions about Immigration?
Contact my office today.

If you have questions about a U.S. immigration matter or would like to discuss your individual circumstances, you may call us at (305) 671-0018 or schedule your consultation and let us help you achieve your immigration goals.

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

The post USCIS Is Moving Toward Mandatory Online Filing appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..