Family Immigration 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..

75-Country Immigrant Visa Pause Is No Longer in Effect

Martha Arias — Wed, 02 Sep 2026 15:36:14 +0000

The U.S. Department of State has confirmed that the immigrant-visa issuance pause affecting nationals of 75 countries is no longer in effect.

According to updated guidance from the Department of State, the pause ended as of August 21, 2026, in accordance with a federal court order.

This is an important development for families and individuals who may have been affected by the earlier restriction, but I want to emphasize that it does not necessarily mean that every applicant can now immediately receive an immigrant visa. Other immigration rules, visa restrictions, eligibility requirements, security screening, public-charge considerations, and country-specific measures may still apply.

What Was the 75-Country Pause?

Beginning January 21, 2026, the Department of State paused immigrant-visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries while reviewing screening and vetting policies related in part to public-benefit and public-charge concerns.

The affected countries included:

Colombia, Brazil, Cuba, Guatemala, Jamaica, Nicaragua, Uruguay, Albania, Algeria, Armenia, Bangladesh, Egypt, Haiti, Iraq, Jordan, Morocco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Russia, Thailand, Tunisia, and many others.

The Department continued scheduling immigrant-visa interviews during the pause, but visa issuance itself was restricted for affected applicants, subject to limited exceptions.

What Changed?

The State Department now states:

“As of August 21, 2026… the January 2026 pause of immigrant visa issuance to nationals of 75 countries is no longer in effect.”

For affected applicants, that means the specific 75-country issuance pause is no longer the reason preventing an immigrant visa from being issued.

However, each case must still satisfy all other requirements of U.S. immigration law.

Does This Apply to Tourist Visas?

The earlier 75-country measure applied specifically to immigrant visas.

The Department of State expressly states that tourist visas are nonimmigrant visas and were not covered by that particular pause.

This distinction is important because “visa pause” headlines can easily create the impression that all U.S. visas were affected.

They were not.

Does This Mean All Visa Restrictions Have Ended?

No.

The end of this particular 75-country immigrant-visa pause should not be interpreted as the removal of every other immigration or visa restriction.

Separate rules and restrictions may still apply depending on:

nationality;
visa category;
public-charge requirements;
security and vetting rules;
presidential proclamations;
individual admissibility issues; and
the facts of each case.

Applicants should therefore review the rules that apply specifically to their immigration category rather than relying only on general headlines.

What About Diversity Visas?

There is an important separate development.

On August 31, 2026, the Department of State issued new guidance stating that it has paused all Diversity Visa issuances while it reviews screening and vetting procedures for the DV program.

Diversity Visa applicants may still:

submit visa applications;
attend interviews; and
have appointments scheduled.

But according to the State Department, Diversity Visas are not currently being issued, and there are no exceptions under the current guidance.

That is a separate policy from the now-ended 75-country immigrant-visa pause.

My Tips for Applicants

Do not assume an old visa restriction still applies to your case. Immigration policies can change quickly, and the 75-country issuance pause is a good example.
Check your specific visa category. Immigrant visas, tourist visas, Diversity Visas, employment visas, and other classifications may be governed by different rules.
Continue following instructions from the U.S. embassy or consulate handling your case. The end of a general pause does not automatically replace case-specific instructions.
Do not assume the end of the pause guarantees visa issuance. Applicants must still establish eligibility under U.S. law.
Use official government information. Visa policies are changing rapidly, and secondary reports may not reflect the most recent guidance.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the 75-country immigrant-visa pause still in effect?

No. The Department of State says that, as of August 21, 2026, the January 2026 pause is no longer in effect.

Was Colombia included in the affected countries?

Yes. Colombia was among the 75 countries covered by the January 2026 immigrant-visa issuance pause.

Does this mean Colombian immigrant visas can now be issued?

The specific 75-country pause no longer prevents issuance. However, applicants must still satisfy all other applicable visa and immigration requirements.

Were tourist visas included in the pause?

No. The Department of State states that the pause applied to immigrant visas, not tourist visas.

Are Diversity Visas now being issued?

Currently, no. Under separate guidance issued August 31, the Department of State has paused all Diversity Visa issuances, although applications and interviews may continue.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

What Applicants Should Know Now?

For families and individuals affected by the 75-country restriction, this is a meaningful change. But immigration policy remains fluid, and the end of one restriction does not necessarily mean that every other visa requirement or limitation has been removed.

If you have questions about an immigrant visa, consular processing, 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

DISCLAIMER: This article provides general immigration information and does not constitute legal advice. Visa eligibility and issuance depend on each applicant’s circumstances and applicable U.S. law. Government policies and procedures may change.

The post 75-Country Immigrant Visa Pause Is No Longer in Effect 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 May Deny Immigration Cases Without First Sending an RFE

Martha Arias — Fri, 14 Aug 2026 17:52:59 +0000

USCIS May Deny Immigration Cases Without First Sending an RFE: What Applicants Should Know

If you are preparing an immigration application or petition, a recent USCIS policy change makes one point especially important: do not assume USCIS will give you another opportunity to provide missing or insufficient evidence after you file.

On August 5, 2026, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services announced that it had restored greater discretion to immigration officers to deny certain benefit requests without first issuing a Request for Evidence (RFE) or Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID). The policy took effect immediately and generally applies to requests pending or filed on or after August 5, 2026, subject to situations where regulations or other applicable requirements provide otherwise.

What Does This Mean for Applicants?

An RFE is a notice from USCIS requesting additional evidence when the agency needs more information to decide a case. A NOID tells an applicant or petitioner that USCIS intends to deny the request and provides an opportunity to respond in circumstances where a NOID is required or appropriate.

The important practical lesson from the new policy is that receiving an RFE or NOID should never be treated as a guaranteed second chance to complete a case.

This does not mean USCIS will automatically deny every application that has a problem. There are circumstances in which an RFE or NOID may still be issued or required. But applicants should prepare their initial filing with the expectation that USCIS could make a decision based on the evidence already submitted.

My Tips Before Filing With USCIS

Submit the strongest complete filing you can from the beginning. Review the evidence required for your particular petition or application and make sure important supporting documents are included.

Use the current USCIS form and instructions. Immigration forms, filing requirements, fees, and supporting-document requirements can change. Always check the official USCIS website before filing.

Do not plan around receiving an RFE. An RFE can still occur, but it should not be part of your filing strategy.

Be especially careful with complicated cases. Prior immigration violations, criminal history, inconsistent records, previous denials, questions about eligibility, or complicated business and financial documentation may require additional analysis before a case is filed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this mean USCIS will no longer send RFEs?

No. USCIS can still issue Requests for Evidence when appropriate. The change means applicants should not assume that USCIS must send an RFE before denying a benefit request.

When did the new policy take effect?

USCIS states that the policy became effective on August 5, 2026, and generally applies to requests pending or filed on or after that date, unless otherwise specified by applicable regulations or policy.

Should I send extra documents just to be safe?

Not necessarily. More paperwork is not always better. The goal should be to submit relevant, organized, and sufficient evidence that addresses the requirements of your particular immigration benefit.

What should I do if I am unsure whether my evidence is sufficient?

Before filing, carefully review the USCIS requirements for your case. If your situation is complicated or you are uncertain about eligibility or supporting evidence, consider speaking with an immigration attorney before submitting the application.

LEGAL DISCLAIMER:

This article provides general immigration information and is not legal advice. Immigration cases depend on individual facts and circumstances, and government policies and procedures may change.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Preparation Matters More Than Ever

Immigration cases are decided on their individual facts and evidence. This USCIS policy change is another reminder that careful preparation at the beginning of a case matters.

If you have questions about a U.S. immigration matter or would like to discuss your individual circumstances, you may contact my office in Miami, Florida at 305-671-0018.

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

The post USCIS May Deny Immigration Cases Without First Sending an RFE appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

The U.S. Supreme Court Upholds The Birthright Citizenship

Martha Arias — Thu, 02 Jul 2026 00:22:52 +0000

Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship: What Families Should Know

In my recent conversation today with Radio Caracol, we discussed one of the most important immigration and constitutional issues affecting families in the United States: birthright citizenship.

On June 30, 2026, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Trump v. Barbara. The Court held that children born in the United States to parents who are unlawfully or temporarily present are “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and are citizens at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Citizenship Clause.

This decision is important because the Fourteenth Amendment states that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens of the United States and of the state where they reside. The executive order at issue attempted to deny citizenship to certain children born in the United States based on the immigration status or temporary presence of their parents. The Supreme Court rejected that interpretation.

For many families, this decision brings clarity. Children who were born in the United States continue to be recognized as U.S. citizens, even if their parents were undocumented or were temporarily present in the country at the time of birth.

However, it is very important to understand what this decision does not do. A U.S. citizen child does not automatically give lawful immigration status to the parents, does not automatically stop deportation, and does not automatically create a green card case for the parents.

A U.S. citizen generally must be at least 21 years old to petition for a parent. USCIS explains this requirement on its official page about bringing parents to live in the United States as permanent residents. In most family-based cases, the process begins with Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, but USCIS also explains that filing or approval of Form I-130 does not, by itself, give the relative immigration status or an immigration benefit. Families should also review the government’s general explanation of family-based immigration and sponsoring a relative.

During the interview, I also explained that this decision should not be confused with approval of “birth tourism.” The U.S. Department of State has stated that consular officers will deny a B visa application when they have reason to believe the applicant is traveling primarily to give birth in the United States to obtain U.S. citizenship for the child. You can read the State Department’s guidance here: Birth Tourism Update.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Immigration law is deeply personal because it affects children, parents, homes, businesses, and futures. A headline may sound simple, but the consequences for each family can be very different. The correct legal answer often depends on the person’s entry history, current status, prior immigration record, possible inadmissibility issues, and whether the case must be handled inside the United States or through a U.S. consulate abroad.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney

Dedicated Immigration Law Attorney in Kendall

If you have questions about birthright citizenship, family petitions, consular processing, adjustment of status, or another immigration matter, I encourage you to seek legal guidance based on your specific situation.

For professional immigration legal services, call U.S. Immigration Law Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq. and schedule your consultation today and let us help you achieve your immigration goals.

CALL NOW

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this information does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every immigration case is different, and you should consult with an immigration attorney about your specific circumstances.

ORIGINAL TRANSCRIPT:

RADIO CARACOL:
Bueno, Martha, vamos a explicarle a la audiencia qué significa jurídicamente esto que acabo de leer sobre la decisión de la Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Bueno, la decisión de la Corte fue una decisión muy específica. La pregunta que se le hizo a la Corte Suprema fue si las personas que nacen en Estados Unidos, de padres indocumentados o de personas que están temporalmente presentes en el país, si esos niños son ciudadanos americanos.

La Corte dijo que sí. ¿Por qué? Porque esas personas están sujetas a las leyes o a la jurisdicción de Estados Unidos. La Enmienda 14 de la Constitución de Estados Unidos dice que todas las personas que nacen en Estados Unidos están sujetas a la jurisdicción del país y si residen dentro del pais, son ciudadanos americanos.

El gobierno, cuando emitió esa acción ejecutiva el año pasado, sostuvo que los hijos nacidos de padres indocumentados, o de personas que estaban temporalmente en Estados Unidos, no eran ciudadanos americanos porque, según esa interpretación, no estaban sujetos a la jurisdicción de Estados Unidos porque no residian en Estados Unidos.

El que estaba indocumentado segun esta interpretacion no esta bajo juridiccion y el que esta solo temporalmente, no reside dentro de los Estados Unidos. Esto era como la interpretacion de ese memorandum de la administracion.

La Corte estuvo en desacuerdo. La Corte dijo que no; que la Enmienda establece claramente que las personas que nacen dentro de Estados Unidos están sujetas a las leyes y a la jurisdicción de este país. Entonces, esa interpretación, “sujeto a la jurisdicción”, fue básicamente lo que se interpretó.

RADIO CARACOL:
Bueno, Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración, ¿quiénes se benefician directamente con esta decisión? ¿Aplica para hijos de inmigrantes indocumentados, para personas que están con visas de turismo, estudiantes o de trabajo? ¿Quiénes se benefician directamente?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Se benefician todos. Fíjate que esto tiene un efecto hacia atrás y hacia adelante, es decir, es retroactivo porque aplica para el pasado y para el futuro, a menos que el Congreso determine otra cosa.

Los hijos de inmigrantes indocumentados que han nacido en el país son ciudadanos americanos. Imagínate si la Corte hubiera dicho otra cosa. Básicamente, medio Estados Unidos se podría desocupar, porque ¿cómo se le va a quitar la ciudadanía a todas esas personas que ya nacieron aquí y que siempre se han considerado ciudadanos?

RADIO CARACOL:
Claro, esa era precisamente la pregunta que te iba a hacer. ¿Qué habría pasado si la Corte hubiera respaldado la orden del presidente Trump? Imagínate.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:

Un día me senté a tomarme un cafecito en la mañana y a pensar en eso. Me decía: vamos a suponer que se diera esa locura de que la Corte dijera que no tienen ese derecho. ¿Cuántos millones de ciudadanos de Estados Unidos serían despojados de su ciudadanía? ¿Qué impacto económico, social y de todo tipo podría tener eso?

Imagínate que, por decir una cifra baja, cinco millones de personas recibieran una notificación diciéndoles: “Mire, señor, usted ya no es ciudadano americano. Venda su casa, venda su carro, coja su maleta y váyase”. Personas que tienen títulos universitarios, empresas, empleados, familias y toda una vida construida aquí.

Yo pensaba en cuál sería el impacto de eso y realmente me parecía abrumador. No creo haber escuchado que algo así haya pasado en ninguna parte del mundo.

El efecto de esta decisión, entonces, es que todos aquellos que nacieron aquí, aunque sus padres fueran indocumentados, siguen siendo ciudadanos americanos.

Ahora, en segundo lugar, quienes vienen temporalmente y, por una emergencia o alguna circunstancia, tienen hijos aquí, también tendrían hijos ciudadanos americanos. Pero ahí sí yo les diría a las personas que tengan cautela y que no vengan a tener hijos a Estados Unidos con ese propósito, porque eso tampoco es correcto.

Esa es una de las razones por las que algunas personas apoyaban la iniciativa o la acción ejecutiva del presidente. Claro, a nadie le parece correcto que exista turismo de embarazo o turismo por nacimiento.

RADIO CARACOL:
Para allá iba yo con una pregunta más adelante. Estaba leyendo un artículo de The Guardian donde se menciona que, tras este fallo, el presidente Trump y algunos aliados estarían buscando la forma de hacerlo por vía legislativa, aunque enfrentarían importantes obstáculos constitucionales.

Por tu experiencia, Martha, ¿crees que esta decisión es definitiva?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Desde mi conocimiento legal y de jurisprudencia, considero que, bajo la Constitución de este país, es definitiva. Sin embargo, todos sabemos que el Congreso de un país, concretamente aquí en Estados Unidos, puede cambiar la Constitución.

Ahora bien, eso se ha hecho muy pocas veces. La Constitución de Estados Unidos es una de las cartas magnas que más ha perdurado en el tiempo y no ha tenido tantas modificaciones.

La Corte Suprema interpreta la Constitución, pero no la cambia. En este caso, el Congreso también tiene que seguir la Constitución, porque el Congreso no puede emitir leyes inconstitucionales.

Entonces, si la Corte ya dijo que esto es constitucional, yo no soy constitucionalista, obviamente, pero pienso que va a ser muy complicado que el Congreso pueda modificar la Constitución para cambiar esto.

Ahora, el gobierno, el Ejecutivo en este caso, sí tiene todo el derecho de actuar de otra forma. De hecho, ya lo estaba haciendo.

Por ejemplo, cuando mujeres embarazadas entran a Estados Unidos para tener sus hijos aquí y luego el consulado se da cuenta, he conocido muchos casos en mi oficina en los que les cancelan las visas. También les exigen mostrar prueba de que pagaron el parto, porque muchas de ellas venían, tenían a sus hijos con Medicaid y luego se iban.

Entonces, todo va en su punto medio. Creo que muchas personas estamos de acuerdo en decir que quienes pagamos impuestos en Estados Unidos no tenemos por qué pagar el parto de una señora que quiere venir únicamente a tener su hijo aquí.

RADIO CARACOL:
Sí, eso es el famoso turismo por nacimiento. Incluso se dice que ofrecían paquetes turísticos para que las mujeres vinieran a tener sus hijos acá. Los niños nacían, eran ciudadanos americanos, y después se iban sin pagar la cuenta.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactamente. Eso los consulados lo han tomado con mucho cuidado y, como te digo, están negando visas y también están quitando visas.

Yo tuve clientes que me llamaban y me decían: “Es que nosotros ya teníamos todo preparado, nos debemos ir”. Y yo les decía: “Me parece que ustedes no deben hacer eso”.

Incluso, muchos de ellos tenían a uno de los padres como ciudadano americano. Y en esos casos yo les decía: si ustedes son ciudadanos americanos, ese hijo, aunque nazca fuera de Estados Unidos, también puede ser ciudadano americano por el padre o la madre. Entonces, no hay necesidad de incurrir en eso.

Sé que este tema es controversial y no a todo el mundo le cae bien, pero así es. En muchos países del mundo, la persona que nace en ese país adquiere la ciudadanía de ese país. Son pocos los países cuya Constitución establece reglas distintas. Por ejemplo, Alemania tiene reglas más estrictas sobre este tema.

Me parece que va a ser complicado para el Congreso cambiar esto. Y si miramos el tiempo que le queda al Congreso actual, teniendo elecciones en noviembre, creo que el tiempo es corto para lograr un cambio constitucional de esta naturaleza.

RADIO CARACOL:
Martha, como el tiempo apremia, ahora vamos a dar tu número telefónico porque hay muchas preguntas e inquietudes sobre este tema y sobre otros asuntos de inmigración.

Me están escribiendo por Instagram una persona pregunta si esta decisión cambia algo para los procesos migratorios de los padres. Es decir, ¿el hecho de que un hijo sea ciudadano protege automáticamente a sus padres?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
El hijo que es ciudadano americano puede pedir a sus padres, y puede continuar haciéndolo. Ahora, si esos padres están indocumentados y el hijo todavía no tiene 21 años, eso no los protege automáticamente. El hijo tiene que esperar hasta cumplir 21 años para poder pedir a sus padres.

Y si el padre o la madre entró ilegalmente a Estados Unidos, tampoco significa que esté protegido simplemente porque el hijo sea ciudadano. Lo pueden deportar igual.

Pero, en términos de petición familiar, sí: el hijo ciudadano americano puede pedir a sus padres cuando tenga 21 años o después de cumplir los 21 años.

RADIO CARACOL:
Claro que sí. Pues vamos a hacer lo siguiente. En temas de inmigración hay mucha desinformación, especialmente con este tema de la Corte. Si usted quiere estar bien informado, si conoce a alguien que tenga una situación relacionada con un niño que nació aquí y es ciudadano americano, o si hay nerviosismo en su familia por este tema, lo invito a que se comunique con la abogada Martha Arias.

Ella es abogada de inmigración y tiene muchísima experiencia para responder preguntas sobre este tema y sobre otros asuntos migratorios.

Martha, vamos a dar muy despacio tus datos, tu número telefónico y tus redes sociales para que la audiencia de Caracol se comunique contigo.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Claro. El número telefónico es 305-671-0018. Repito: 305-671-0018. Tenemos otro número que es el 305-233-3110

Mi página web es [www.ariasvilla.com](http://www.ariasvilla.com). También pueden buscarme en Google escribiendo “Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración” o “Martha Arias immigration attorney”.

En Instagram nos pueden seguir como @martha_arias98.

RADIO CARACOL:
Perfecto. Y en tu página también estás compartiendo mucha información.

Parece que hemos perdido comunicación con la abogada Martha Arias, pero repito el número telefónico: 305-671-0018. Nuevamente, 305-671-0018. Ese es el número telefónico de la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias.

Si usted tiene esta inquietud o cualquier otra pregunta de inmigración, si conoce a un familiar o a un amigo que necesite orientación, puede comunicarse con ella. Repito: 305-671-0018. Ese es el número telefónico de la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias.

HOST:
Well, Martha, let’s explain to the audience what this legally means, what I just read about the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Well, the decision of the Court was a very specific decision. The question that was asked to the Supreme Court was whether people who are born in the United States, of undocumented parents or of people who are temporarily present in the country, whether those children are American citizens.

The Court said yes. Why? Because those people are subject to the laws or to the jurisdiction of the United States. The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States says that all people who are born in the United States are subject to the jurisdiction of the country and if they reside within the country, they are American citizens.

The government, when it issued that executive action last year, maintained that the children born of undocumented parents, or of people who were temporarily in the United States, were not American citizens because, according to that interpretation, they were not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States because they did not reside in the United States.

The person who was undocumented, according to this interpretation, is not under jurisdiction, and the person who is only temporarily here does not reside within the United States. This was like the interpretation of that memorandum of the administration.

The Court disagreed. The Court said no; that the Amendment clearly establishes that people who are born inside the United States are subject to the laws and to the jurisdiction of this country. So, that interpretation, “subject to the jurisdiction,” was basically what was interpreted.

HOST:
Well, Martha Arias, immigration attorney, who benefits directly from this decision? Does it apply to children of undocumented immigrants, to people who are here with tourist visas, student visas, or work visas? Who benefits directly?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Everyone benefits. Notice that this has an effect backward and forward, that is, it is retroactive because it applies to the past and to the future, unless Congress determines otherwise.

The children of undocumented immigrants who have been born in the country are American citizens. Imagine if the Court had said something else. Basically, half of the United States could empty out, because how are we going to take citizenship away from all those people who were already born here and who have always been considered citizens?

HOST:
Of course, that was precisely the question I was going to ask you. What would have happened if the Court had supported President Trump’s order? Imagine.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
One day I sat down to have a little coffee in the morning and to think about that. I said to myself: let’s suppose that this craziness happened, that the Court said they do not have that right. How many millions of citizens of the United States would be stripped of their citizenship? What economic, social, and all kinds of impact could that have?

Imagine that, to say a low number, five million people received a notice telling them: “Look, sir, you are no longer an American citizen. Sell your house, sell your car, grab your suitcase and leave.” People who have university degrees, businesses, employees, families, and an entire life built here.

I thought about what the impact of that would be, and it really seemed overwhelming to me. I do not think I have heard that something like that has happened anywhere in the world.

The effect of this decision, then, is that all those who were born here, even if their parents were undocumented, continue to be American citizens.

Now, secondly, those who come temporarily and, because of an emergency or some circumstance, have children here, would also have American citizen children. But there I would tell people to be cautious and not to come to the United States to have children with that purpose, because that is not correct either.

That is one of the reasons why some people supported the initiative or the executive action of the president. Of course, it does not seem correct to anyone that pregnancy tourism or birth tourism should exist.

HOST:
That is where I was going with a question later. I was reading an article from The Guardian where it mentions that, after this ruling, President Trump and some allies would be looking for a way to do it through legislation, although they would face important constitutional obstacles.

From your experience, Martha, do you believe this decision is definitive?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
From my legal knowledge and jurisprudence, I consider that, under the Constitution of this country, it is definitive. However, we all know that the Congress of a country, specifically here in the United States, can change the Constitution.

Now, that has been done very few times. The Constitution of the United States is one of the fundamental charters that has endured the most over time and has not had so many modifications.

The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution, but it does not change it. In this case, Congress also has to follow the Constitution, because Congress cannot issue unconstitutional laws.

So, if the Court already said that this is constitutional, I am not a constitutional attorney, obviously, but I think it is going to be very complicated for Congress to be able to modify the Constitution to change this.

Now, the government, the Executive in this case, does have every right to act in another way. In fact, it was already doing so.

For example, when pregnant women enter the United States to have their children here and then the consulate finds out, I have known many cases in my office in which their visas are canceled. They are also required to show proof that they paid for the delivery, because many of them came, had their children with Medicaid, and then left.

So, everything goes in its middle point. I believe that many people agree in saying that those of us who pay taxes in the United States do not have to pay for the delivery of a woman who wants to come only to have her child here.

HOST:
Yes, that is the famous birth tourism. It is even said that tourist packages were offered so that women would come to have their children here. The children were born, they were American citizens, and then they left without paying the bill.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactly. The consulates have taken that very carefully and, as I tell you, they are denying visas and also taking visas away.

I had clients who called me and told me: “It is that we already had everything prepared, we should go.” And I told them: “It seems to me that you should not do that.”

Even many of them had one of the parents as an American citizen. And in those cases I told them: if you are American citizens, that child, even if born outside the United States, may also be an American citizen because the father or mother is a citizen. So, there is no need to incur in that.

I know this topic is controversial and it does not sit well with everyone, but that is how it is. In many countries of the world, the person who is born in that country acquires the citizenship of that country. There are few countries whose Constitution establishes different rules. For example, Germany has stricter rules about this topic.

It seems to me that it is going to be complicated for Congress to change this. And if we look at the time that the current Congress has left, with elections in November, I believe the time is short to achieve a constitutional change of this nature.

HOST:
Martha, since time is pressing, now we are going to give your telephone number because there are many questions and concerns about this topic and about other immigration matters.

People are writing to me on Instagram, and one person asks whether this decision changes something for the immigration processes of the parents. That is, does the fact that a child is a citizen automatically protect his or her parents?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
The child who is an American citizen can petition for his or her parents, and can continue doing so. Now, if those parents are undocumented and the child is not yet 21 years old, that does not protect them automatically. The child has to wait until turning 21 years old to be able to petition for his or her parents.

And if the father or the mother entered the United States illegally, it also does not mean that he or she is protected simply because the child is a citizen. They can be deported anyway.

But, in terms of a family petition, yes: the American citizen child can petition for his or her parents when he or she is 21 years old or after turning 21 years old.

HOST:
Of course. Well, we are going to do the following. In immigration topics there is a lot of misinformation, especially with this topic of the Court. If you want to be well informed, if you know someone who has a situation related to a child who was born here and is an American citizen, or if there is nervousness in your family about this topic, I invite you to communicate with attorney Martha Arias.

She is an immigration attorney and has a great deal of experience answering questions about this topic and about other immigration matters.

Martha, we are going to give your information very slowly, your telephone number and your social media, so that the Caracol audience can communicate with you.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Of course. The telephone number is 305-671-0018. I repeat: 305-671-0018. We have another number, which is 305-233-3110.

My website is www.ariasvilla.com. You can also look for me on Google by writing “Martha Arias, immigration attorney” or “Martha Arias immigration attorney.”

On Instagram you can follow us as @martha_arias98.

HOST:
Perfect. And on your page you are also sharing a lot of information.

It seems that we have lost communication with immigration attorney Martha Arias, but I repeat the telephone number: 305-671-0018. Again, 305-671-0018. That is the telephone number of immigration attorney Martha Arias.

If you have this concern or any other immigration question, if you know a family member or a friend who needs guidance, you can communicate with her. I repeat: 305-671-0018. That is the telephone number of immigration attorney Martha Arias.

The post The U.S. Supreme Court Upholds The Birthright Citizenship appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

Do I Have to Leave the U.S. for My Green Card?

Martha Arias — Wed, 27 May 2026 22:18:25 +0000

Can You Still Get a Green Card Without Leaving the U.S.?

USCIS Memo Raises Questions for Green Card Applicants Inside the United States

Yesterday, I spoke with Lourdes Ubieta on Radio Libre 790 about an immigration update that has caused understandable concern among many families applying for lawful permanent residence from inside the United States. During the interview, we discussed the May 21, 2026 USCIS policy memorandum addressing adjustment of status, discretion, consular processing, and the agency’s current position that adjustment of status should be granted only in extraordinary circumstances.

This is an important issue, but it must be explained carefully.

Adjustment of status is not new. USCIS discretion is not new either. The law has long allowed certain eligible applicants who are physically present in the United States to apply for lawful permanent residence without returning abroad for immigrant visa processing. USCIS continues to describe adjustment of status as the process used by eligible applicants inside the United States to apply for lawful permanent residence without having to return abroad to complete visa processing.

What is new is the May 21, 2026 USCIS policy memorandum, which reemphasizes and appears to tighten how officers should review adjustment of status as a discretionary benefit. USCIS also issued a May 22, 2026 public announcement stating that adjustment of status will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances.

That distinction matters very much.

This memorandum does not erase adjustment of status from the law. It does not repeal INA § 245. It does not mean that every person with a pending green card case must automatically leave the United States. However, it may mean that many applicants will need stronger documentation, clearer legal arguments, and a careful review of whether their case supports a favorable exercise of discretion.

WATCH IT ON YOUTUBE

What Is Adjustment of Status?

Adjustment of status is the process that allows certain eligible people already in the United States to apply for lawful permanent residence, commonly known as a green card, without completing immigrant visa processing at a U.S. consulate abroad.

This process is commonly used in many family-based and employment-based immigration cases. For example, some spouses of U.S. citizens, parents of U.S. citizens, children, workers, investors, and other eligible applicants may seek adjustment of status if they meet the requirements of the law.

The legal foundation for adjustment of status is found in Section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, often referred to as INA § 245. USCIS’ own Policy Manual explains that, when adjudicating adjustment under INA 245(a), an officer first determines whether the applicant meets the legal requirements, including inspection and admission or parole, proper filing, physical presence in the United States, visa availability where required, admissibility, and whether the applicant merits the benefit as a matter of discretion.

So, the issue is not whether adjustment of status still exists. It does.

The issue is how USCIS officers may now apply discretion under this new memorandum.

Why the May 2026 Memorandum Matters

During my interview with Lourdes Ubieta, one of the central questions was whether people who are already inside the United States and waiting for a green card will now have to leave the country and complete the process abroad.

The careful answer is: not necessarily in every case.

Some applicants may face greater pressure toward consular processing abroad. Some may be asked to provide more evidence. Some may receive more detailed questions about why adjustment of status should be granted inside the United States instead of requiring immigrant visa processing through the Department of State abroad.

But it would not be accurate to say that every applicant must automatically leave the United States.

This is why the word “case by case basis” is so important.

USCIS’ memorandum reminds officers and the public that adjustment of status is considered discretionary relief in many cases. USCIS is now emphasizing that a person may need to show why the case deserves a favorable exercise of discretion.

For families, this means the case should not be treated as a simple paperwork filing. It should be treated as a legal presentation supported by facts, documents, and a clear explanation of the person’s circumstances.

Does the Memorandum Change the Law?

No. The May 2026 memorandum does not change the statute itself.

Adjustment of status remains part of immigration law under INA § 245. Congress created that legal framework. USCIS, as the agency that adjudicates many immigration applications, can issue policy guidance about how officers should apply the law and exercise discretion. But a policy memorandum does not remove the statute from the law.

That is why I want families to understand the difference between a new law and a new policy memorandum.

This is not a new law passed by Congress. It is a USCIS policy memorandum that changes or clarifies the agency’s current approach to discretionary adjudication.

That may still have serious consequences for applicants. A policy memorandum can affect how officers review evidence, how they ask questions, how they issue Requests for Evidence, and how they decide whether a case deserves approval.

But the legal right to request adjustment of status has not simply disappeared.

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney
(305) 671-0017

Contact us today with your immigration questions.

With a passion for immigration law and a commitment to client advocacy, Immigration Law Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq. provides the experienced legal representation for U.S. citizenship, employment and business visas, specialized on investor visas, green card petitions, deportation defense, and more. Schedule a consultation with the attorney today to discuss your immigration needs.

MIAMI OFFICE:
ARIAS VILLA, PLLC
Address: 9100 S Dadeland Blvd, #510
Miami, FL 33156
Phone: (305) 671-0018
Mobile: (305) 233-3110
Email: martha@ariasvilla.com

OFFICE HOURS:
Monday: 9 AM – 5:30 PM
Tuesday: 9 AM – 6 PM
Wednesday: 9 AM – 6 PM
Thursday: 9 AM – 5:30 PM
Friday: 9 AM – 3 PM
Saturday: Closed
Sunday: Closed

What Does “Discretion” Mean in Adjustment of Status?

Discretion means that even if a person appears to meet the basic legal requirements, the officer may still consider whether the person should receive the benefit as a matter of judgment under the law.

In other words, the question may not be only:

“Is the person technically eligible?”

The question may also become:

“Does this person’s case merit approval as a favorable exercise of discretion?”

USCIS has long recognized that officers may weigh positive and negative factors when discretion applies. The USCIS Policy Manual includes guidance on legal analysis and use of discretion, including adjustment of status decisions under INA 245(a).

Positive factors may include family ties, humanitarian concerns, length of residence, lawful entry, employment history, community ties, medical circumstances, and other facts depending on the case.

Negative factors may include:

Immigration violations,
Fraud or misrepresentation,
Unauthorized employment where relevant,
Criminal history,
Prior removals,
Public safety concerns,

Or other facts that may weigh against approval. Every case is different.

What Does “Extraordinary Circumstances” Mean?

This is one of the most difficult questions right now.

USCIS has used strong language in its May 22, 2026 announcement, stating that adjustment of status will be granted only in extraordinary circumstances. However, families should understand that there is not yet a simple public checklist that answers every possible situation.

That means applicants should not assume that one fact alone will be enough.

For example, being married to a U.S. citizen may be very important, but it should not be treated as automatic approval. Having a job may be helpful, but it may not be enough by itself. Having children in the United States may be significant, but the entire case still needs to be reviewed.

In a discretionary case, USCIS may look at the totality of the circumstances. Depending on the facts, relevant evidence may include:

Lawful entry into the United States;
Length of residence in the United States;
Family ties to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents;
Hardship or serious family circumstances;
Medical conditions or caregiving responsibilities;
Employment history;
Tax history and financial support;
Education;
Community ties;
Humanitarian concerns;
Immigration history;
Whether the person has maintained status when required;
Whether the person has any prior immigration violations;
Whether the person has any criminal history; and
Whether there are facts showing why consular processing abroad may create serious hardship, risk, or practical difficulty.

These are examples of factors that may be relevant. They are not a guarantee of approval.

Adjustment of Status vs. Consular Processing

One of the major themes in the USCIS memorandum is the relationship between adjustment of status and consular processing.

Adjustment of status happens inside the United States through USCIS.

Consular processing happens abroad through the U.S. Department of State, usually at a U.S. embassy or consulate.

In many immigration categories, a person may eventually need to choose between these two paths, depending on eligibility, location, immigration history, visa availability, and other facts.

The current USCIS position appears to place greater emphasis on consular processing as the ordinary path for people seeking immigrant visas from abroad, while treating adjustment of status inside the United States as a discretionary benefit that should be granted only when the case supports it.

But this does not mean consular processing is safe for everyone.

For some people, leaving the United States may trigger serious legal consequences, including unlawful presence bars or other inadmissibility issues. For others, consular processing may create long family separations or require waivers. Some people may have circumstances that make departure especially risky or difficult.

That is why no one should leave the United States simply because of a headline or a general policy announcement.

Should People Leave the United States Now?

No one should leave the United States because of this memorandum without first speaking with an immigration attorney.

Leaving the United States can have serious consequences. Depending on the person’s immigration history, departure may trigger unlawful presence bars, interrupt a pending case, create consular processing risks, or separate a family for a long period of time.

Some people may still be eligible to pursue adjustment of status. Others may need to consider consular processing. Some may need waivers. Some may need a different immigration strategy altogether.

The correct answer depends on the facts.

Before making any decision, a person should carefully review how they entered the United States; whether;

They were inspected and admitted or paroled;
They maintained lawful status when required;
They have worked without authorization;
They have any prior immigration violations;
They have ever been ordered removed;
They have any criminal history;
Departure could trigger unlawful presence bars;
They have a qualifying relative for a waiver, if needed;
Their case has strong positive discretionary factors; and
Their case may support adjustment of status despite the stricter policy approach.

WATCH IT ON SPOTIFY

What About People Who Entered With Tourist Visas, Student Visas, or Temporary Worker Visas?

Many people enter the United States with a temporary visa. A person may enter as a tourist, student, temporary worker, exchange visitor, or in another temporary category.

The government may look closely at whether the person entered for the purpose stated at the time of entry. A visitor visa, for example, is generally for a temporary visit. A student visa is generally for study. Some employment visas are temporary, while others may allow what is called dual intent.

This is where cases become very fact-specific.

Life is not always linear. As I explained during the interview, people’s lives can change.

A student may complete a degree and receive a serious professional opportunity.
A person may meet a spouse and build a family.
A parent may come to visit a child and then face a serious medical emergency in the family.

At the same time, there is an important difference between life changing after entry and entering the United States with a preconceived plan to misuse a temporary visa.

That difference can matter in immigration law.

For people with temporary visas, the safest approach is to obtain legal advice before filing for adjustment of status, before marrying and filing a petition, before overstaying, or before making any decision that could affect immigration status.

A Note About Dual-Intent Visas

Some visa categories, such as H-1B and L-1, are often described as dual-intent categories. That generally means a person may be in a temporary nonimmigrant status while also having the possibility of pursuing permanent residence.

However, even in a dual-intent category, approval of adjustment of status is not automatic. The applicant must still meet the legal requirements, and where discretion applies, the applicant may still need to show that the case merits a favorable exercise of discretion.

This is important because people should not assume that one visa category, one family relationship, or one approved petition automatically guarantees a green card.

What About Cases Already Pending?

Many people already filed Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, before the May 21, 2026 memorandum.

People with pending cases also should not assume the memorandum will have no effect.

The May 21 memorandum appears designed to guide USCIS officers immediately. How it will be applied across pending cases, different categories, and different field offices may become clearer as attorneys and applicants begin seeing interview results, Requests for Evidence, Notices of Intent to Deny, and decisions.

For now, people with pending adjustment cases should:

Review the case with an immigration attorney;
Organize all supporting documents;
Update evidence of family ties, employment, taxes, medical issues, and hardship where relevant;
Prepare carefully for any interview;
Respond carefully to any USCIS request;
Avoid international departure without legal advice; and
Keep copies of all filings, receipts, notices, and supporting evidence.

If USCIS applies the memorandum in ways that applicants or attorneys believe are inconsistent with the statute or existing rights, legal challenges or administrative disputes may arise. But those processes can take time, and families should not rely on assumptions.

What Documents May Help Support a Discretionary Adjustment Case?

Every case is different, and not every document is useful in every case. The goal is not to overwhelm USCIS with unrelated papers. The goal is to present organized, truthful, relevant evidence that helps explain the person’s case.

Depending on the situation, helpful evidence may include:

Proof of lawful entry, admission, or parole;
Passport biographic page and visa pages;
I-94 travel record;
Marriage certificate, if applicable;
Birth certificates of children;
Proof of relationship to U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident relatives;
Tax returns;
Employment records (if applicable);
Proof of financial support;
School records;
Medical records, if relevant;
Proof of caregiving responsibilities;
Evidence of community involvement;
Church, nonprofit, school, or volunteer letters;
Proof of residence in the United States;
Evidence of hardship to family members;
Evidence of country conditions, where relevant;
Certified court dispositions for any arrest or criminal case;
Immigration records from any prior filing or encounter; and
A clear legal explanation of why the case merits a favorable exercise of discretion.

The facts should be presented honestly. Immigration officers can evaluate inconsistencies, omissions, and prior records. A case that is organized and truthful is always stronger than a case that tries to hide difficult facts.

A Human Reality Behind the Law

During my conversation with Lourdes Ubieta, we spoke about the human side of this issue. Immigration law is not only about forms and filing fees. It affects families, marriages, children, employers, students, workers, and people who have built lives in the United States.

There are cases where people abuse visas or enter with a plan that does not match the purpose of the visa. That reality exists.

But there are also many cases where life changes in ways people did not expect. A person may come to study and later be offered a meaningful job. A visitor may come to see family and then face a medical emergency. A person may fall in love, marry, and begin a family. A parent may need to remain temporarily because a child becomes seriously ill.

The law must be respected. But the facts must also be heard.

That is why a case-by-case review is so important.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Is adjustment of status still available?

Yes. Adjustment of Status still exists. However, under the May 2026 memorandum, applicants may face stricter discretionary review and may need stronger evidence showing why their case deserves approval inside the United States.

Does being eligible mean my green card will be approved?

No. Eligibility does not always guarantee approval. In adjustment cases where discretion applies, USCIS may consider whether the applicant merits a favorable exercise of discretion after reviewing the totality of the circumstances.

Will every applicant now have to leave the United States?

No. That would be too broad. Some applicants may face greater pressure toward consular processing abroad, but every case must be reviewed individually. A person should not leave the United States without legal advice.

What is consular processing?

Consular processing is the immigrant visa process completed abroad through the U.S. Department of State, usually at a U.S. embassy or consulate. It is different from adjustment of status, which is handled inside the United States through USCIS.

Is consular processing safe for everyone?

No. Consular processing may be appropriate for some applicants, but it can be risky for others. Departure from the United States may trigger unlawful presence bars or other inadmissibility issues, depending on the person’s immigration history.

What does “extraordinary circumstances” mean?

USCIS has used the phrase “extraordinary circumstances,” but there is not yet a simple public checklist that answers every possible case. The facts may include family ties, hardship, humanitarian concerns, medical issues, length of residence, employment, immigration history, and other positive or negative factors.

Does this affect spouses of U.S. citizens?

It may affect some spouses of U.S. citizens. Marriage to a U.S. citizen can be very important, but it should not be treated as automatic approval. USCIS may still review lawful entry, admissibility, immigration history, prior intent, and discretion.

Does this affect people who entered with tourist visas?

It may. A tourist visa is generally for a temporary visit. If a person entered with a tourist visa and later seeks permanent residence, USCIS may examine the facts carefully, including whether the person’s intentions changed after entry or whether there was a preconceived plan.

Does this affect students?

It may. Students may have life changes after entering the United States, such as job opportunities, marriage, or other circumstances. But students should seek legal advice before filing for adjustment of status or making decisions that could affect immigration status.

Does this affect H-1B or L-1 workers?

It may, although H-1B and L-1 are generally considered dual-intent classifications. Dual intent does not mean automatic green card approval. The applicant must still meet all requirements, and discretion may still be reviewed where applicable.

What if my Form I-485 is already pending?

If your Form I-485 is already pending, do not panic, but prepare carefully. Review your case, gather supporting evidence, and speak with an immigration attorney if you receive an interview notice, Request for Evidence, Notice of Intent to Deny, or any other USCIS communication.

Should I withdraw my adjustment of status application?

Do not withdraw an immigration application without legal advice. Withdrawing may affect your options, timing, work authorization, travel, or future strategy. Each case must be reviewed before taking action.

Can I still file for adjustment of status after this memorandum?

Possibly, if you are eligible and your case is properly prepared. However, applicants should understand that USCIS may now review the discretionary part more strictly in many cases.

What if I have a criminal record?

A criminal record can seriously affect admissibility, eligibility, and discretion. Anyone with an arrest, charge, or conviction should speak with an immigration attorney before filing or leaving the United States.

What if I overstayed my visa?

Overstay issues depend on the category, the petitioner, the applicant’s immigration history, and other facts. Some applicants may still have options, but no one should assume eligibility without legal review.

What if I cannot safely return to my country?

That may be relevant, but it must be documented carefully. Depending on the facts, other immigration options may also need to be reviewed, including asylum-related issues, waivers, or other humanitarian forms of relief.

What should I do now if I am worried?

Gather your documents, do not leave the United States without legal advice, and speak with an immigration attorney before filing, withdrawing, traveling, or changing strategy. The right step depends on your specific facts.

Practical Steps for Families Now

If you or a loved one is applying for lawful permanent residence from inside the United States, this is a time to be careful and organized.

You should review:

Your manner of entry into the United States;
Your current immigration status;
Any prior overstays or unlawful presence;
Any unauthorized employment;
Any prior removal order;
Any criminal record;
Your family ties in the United States;
Your financial and employment history;
Your medical and humanitarian circumstances;
Your pending forms and notices;
Whether you may need a waiver; and
Whether consular processing would create risks.

Do not rely only on social media posts, headlines, or advice from people whose facts are different from yours. Immigration law is very personal. A small detail can change the entire legal analysis.

Final Thoughts

My message to the community is simple: stay informed, but do not panic.

The May 2026 USCIS memorandum is serious. It may make adjustment of status more difficult for some applicants. It may require stronger documentation and clearer legal arguments. It may also cause more people to be directed toward consular processing abroad.

But it does not mean adjustment of status has disappeared. It does not mean every pending case is lost. It does not mean every applicant must immediately leave the United States.

The best step is to understand your own case before making any decision.

If you have questions about adjustment of status, a pending green card application, consular processing, waivers, or whether this USCIS memorandum may affect your family, you may contact my office for a consultation.

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law is highly fact-specific. Every case should be reviewed individually by a qualified immigration attorney.

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

BOOK AN APPOINTMENT

Spanish Transcript

Lourdes Ubieta:
Bien, amigos, gracias por continuar en sintonía del programa completamente en vivo, Radio Libre 790, 96.5. Saludamos a la audiencia también conectada por las redes sociales, YouTube y X, @RadioLibre790, @LourdesUbieta. Gracias por la sintonía.

Bueno, una norma de la administración del presidente Trump exige que los extranjeros en Estados Unidos soliciten la tarjeta de residencia permanente en el extranjero. En el extranjero, amigos oyentes. Una decisión que fue informada el viernes, un cambio importante en esa política de inmigración que estipula nuevamente que los no ciudadanos estadounidenses que hayan solicitado una tarjeta verde o estatus de residente permanente legal deben abandonar el país, incluso si se encuentran legalmente en el país e independientemente de si tienen cónyuges o familiares con ciudadanía.

Los solicitantes de la tarjeta de residencia permanente deben esperar que su solicitud sea procesada fuera de los Estados Unidos mediante trámites consulares a través del Departamento de Estado de los Estados Unidos.

Doctora Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración, gracias por acompañarme comenzando la semana con esta noticia. Hace tiempo que no teníamos una noticia tan importante como esta. Bienvenida a su casa, doctora.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Buenos días, Lourdes. Un saludo especial para usted, su equipo de trabajo y toda la audiencia. Feliz comienzo de esta semana, empezando martes. Y sí, como dice usted, con una noticia un poquito estresante.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Exactamente. Ayúdenos a entender, abogada. Las personas que en este momento están en los Estados Unidos, que han hecho todo bien, están esperando nada más por su tarjeta, su tarjeta que les va a decir que usted es residente permanente legal en los Estados Unidos. ¿Ahora tienen que salir de los Estados Unidos y esperar la aprobación de su residencia en su país de origen?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Sí, es la nueva política administrativa. Aquí tenemos que dar un poquito de información a todas las personas. El estatuto, que es el Immigration and Nationality Act, la Ley de Inmigración y Nacionalidad, ese es el estatuto, esa es la ley. Es una ley del Congreso; o sea, es una ley orgánica hecha por el Congreso de los Estados Unidos.

Esa ley le permite a una persona ajustar estatus dentro de los Estados Unidos, lo que en inglés se llama adjustment of status, siempre y cuando la persona haya entrado legalmente. Y hay algunas pocas excepciones de quienes pueden ajustar estatus si no han entrado legalmente, son pocas excepciones.

Ahora, sigue. Eso todavía está en la ley. Esa ley no la cambió esta política que estamos hablando hoy. Lo que pasa es que en esa ley orgánica también dice que una persona que va a ajustar estatus bajo la sección 245 de la ley, que es esta de la que estamos hablando, el ajuste de estatus, es una petición que es discrecionaria. Es decir, el gobierno puede, a su discreción, aprobarla o negarla. Eso también lo dice la ley, siempre ha estado allí. Correcto.

Ahora, lo que este memorándum está diciendo, este memorándum que sale fechado el 21 de mayo de este año 2026, lo que está diciendo es que el gobierno va a ejercer esa discreción que tiene la ley orgánica caso por caso. En inglés se dice on a case-by-case basis, dependiendo, y solamente lo va a aprobar cuando se muestren circunstancias extraordinarias de por qué la persona debe ajustar ese estatus dentro de los Estados Unidos.

Entonces, en otras palabras, el gobierno tiene el derecho a emitir políticas administrativas, y en este caso el gobierno está emitiendo esta política administrativa, que le da derecho, vamos a decirlo así, la ley orgánica cuando dice que el ajuste de estatus debe ser discrecionario.

Entonces ellos, en otras palabras, cogen esa palabra “discrecionaria” y la usan para emitir esta política administrativa, diciendo caso por caso si la persona nos muestra una razón extraordinaria. O sea, va a ser más difícil, por decirlo así, que a la persona le aprueben su residencia dentro del país. La persona tendría que salir, pero no quiere decir que no las podemos presentar. Sí, porque ahora nosotros, los abogados o los peticionarios, vamos a tener que mostrar cuál es esa razón extraordinaria que ellos piden, cuáles son los factores que tienen que mostrar para poder lograr ese factor extraordinario.

O sea, no es una tarea fácil, obviamente, ni para el peticionario ni para nosotros. Pero tampoco es que nos están excluyendo ese derecho. Y eso quiero que la gente lo entienda, porque el estatuto sigue permitiendo un ajuste de estatus bajo la sección 245. Esto es una política administrativa de esta administración que está queriendo hacer valer esa discreción, vamos a decirlo así, en una forma más estricta y sometida a un estándar de prueba más alto.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Nuevamente, doctora, porque esta es la pregunta que me están haciendo los oyentes mientras la escuchamos, ¿no? La persona que en este momento está esperando su residencia permanente, ¿tendrá que salir del país o la otra opción es demostrar que, como es caso por caso, en su caso se puede quedar esperando el ajuste de estatus dentro de Estados Unidos?

Yo me pregunto: ¿cuáles serían esas condiciones? ¿Tener trabajo? ¿Un trabajo en el que no se pueda ausentar del país? ¿Cuáles son las variables para que una persona pueda esperar ese ajuste de estatus dentro de los Estados Unidos?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Sí, esa es una buena pregunta. Esa pregunta suya vamos a dividirla en dos.

¿Cuáles son las variables o lo que tendríamos que mostrar como factores para mostrar una condición extraordinaria, porque la persona merece hacer ese ajuste de estatus dentro del país?

No hay todavía un memorándum de inmigración que explique. Sin embargo, siempre en otros casos se han hablado de factores como, por ejemplo, la educación de la persona; si tiene capacidad económica para solventarse sin convertirse en una carga pública; la historia criminal, si tiene delitos o récords criminales; las circunstancias en que salió de su país y si puede regresar a su país; los lazos comunitarios que tiene dentro de los Estados Unidos, vamos a decir que si tiene toda su familia aquí o por lo menos la familia cercana; qué lazos comunitarios todavía tiene en su país de origen; cuestiones también, por ejemplo, como enfermedades, condiciones médicas, todo eso. Eso es parte de lo que uno puede mostrar para esa razón extraordinaria.

El dolor extremo, si existe o si lo hay, en el familiar que lo pide. Vamos a decir, es un hijo que está pidiendo a la mamá o es un esposo que está pidiendo a su esposa. Si ese esposo o ese hijo, pues, sufriría en una condición, un dolor extraordinario, en caso de que no se le dé la residencia a su beneficiario. Entonces, todos esos son los factores.

¿Qué quiere decir eso? Que le va a tocar probar con más documentos. Lo que necesitan es más trabajo para uno y para las personas. Y obviamente para el mismo oficial adjudicador, porque el oficial adjudicador ahora va a estar empapelado con una cantidad de documentos que van a tender a mostrar esa condición extraordinaria.

Entonces, vuelvo y repito, esto salió la semana pasada, el 21, en el memorándum. Yo me leí el memorándum. El memorándum habla de lo que estamos hablando aquí: caso por caso, razones humanitarias, lo discrecionario, eso es lo que habla. Todavía los oficiales no tienen unas guías exactas, y lo digo porque compañeros abogados de inmigración tuvieron cita el viernes después de que fue emitido. Y ahora, hoy, en el transcurso de la mañana, que nosotros tenemos unas comunicaciones por vía email, los mismos oficiales todavía no tienen guías. Ellos están pidiendo a las personas que tuvieron cita, por ejemplo hoy, prueba de razón extraordinaria y pruebas como lo que mencioné ahora: tiempo aquí, familia acá, todo eso.

Entonces, las guías me imagino que van a seguir saliendo. Hay que estar informándonos poco a poco de qué otras guías van a tener, pero por ahora lo que yo les mencioné de esos factores es algo para lo cual las personas tienen que empezar a recolectar documentación.

Ahora, en cuanto a la primera pregunta, que es también muy importante, si esto va a afectar a las personas que ya tenían peticiones pendientes antes de que se emitiera este memorándum el 21 de mayo. Yo no, vuelvo y repito, no hay todavía unas guías explícitas de inmigración hacia los oficiales o públicas donde ya…

Lourdes Ubieta:
Habitualmente no es retroactivo, ¿no? Es a partir del momento de la fecha de publicación. Las leyes habitualmente no son retroactivas, ¿no?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Sí, las leyes, eso es un tema interesante, porque las leyes del Congreso pueden ser retroactivas. La ley de casos o jurisprudencia normalmente no lo es. Ahora, esto no es ni del Congreso ni es de un juez, es la misma política administrativa.

Como política administrativa, administrativamente tampoco en la mayoría de los casos el Ejecutivo puede emitir políticas hacia atrás. Entonces, yo no creo que desde el punto de vista, vamos a decir, de la mecánica de la ley, de cómo aplica, podamos emitir una política administrativa, sea un año o dos años atrás, porque entonces tendríamos un caos legal total.

Entonces, no creo que vaya a aplicar hacia el pasado, pero esto es mi opinión como abogada y teniendo en cuenta los fundamentos de la ley y las interpretaciones que uno estudia en la universidad. La administración puede salir y decir: “Sí, yo lo puedo aplicar a los casos pendientes, no adjudicados”. Y ahí entonces entraríamos en, vamos a decir, una discusión legal entre nosotros, los abogados, y la administración, que a lo mejor iría a una demanda federal para tratar de probar que esto no debería aplicar a los que tienen peticiones pendientes, solamente a peticiones recibidas por inmigración después de mayo 21.

Pero vuelvo y repito, Lourdes, no hay en el memorándum ni en ninguna guía nada que diga que inmigración está diciendo que lo va a aplicar en forma retroactiva. Pero obviamente nosotros suponemos que va a ser así. Yo tengo una cita, por ejemplo, esta semana, y me imagino que voy a ir preparada a ver qué me va a decir el oficial, si le va a dar un requerimiento de evidencias, y obviamente nosotros vamos a tener que argumentar que no aplicaba a nuestros clientes.

Pero eso no quiere decir que la batalla va a estar… Si la administración lo va a aplicar a casos que estaban pendientes, pues eso irá a mayores o iremos por allí, si esto irá a las cortes. Pero los procesos que van a las cortes, como usted sabe, son lentos y toman tiempo. Entonces, una respuesta inmediata no sé si la vamos a tener.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Muy bien, doctora. Los no inmigrantes, como estudiantes, trabajadores temporales o personas con visas de turista, vienen a Estados Unidos por un corto tiempo y con un propósito específico, dicen desde el Departamento de Inmigración, y luego nuestro sistema está diseñado para que se vayan cuando termine su visita. Su visita no debería funcionar como el primer paso en el proceso de la tarjeta de residencia. Eso es lo que dice Koller, el vocero del Departamento de Inmigración.

Y es verdad, veíamos personas que han llegado como turistas y luego buscaban la manera de quedarse legalmente en los Estados Unidos, doctora. Ahora parece que es como un cambio en la visión del tema migratorio.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, esa parte siempre ha sido igual también. La persona que entra con una visa de turista le dan seis meses para estar. Claro, no quiere decir que se tiene que quedar los seis meses. Obviamente viene por una semana, qué sé yo, diez semanas, diez días a visitar a sus familiares o a pasear, vacacionar, pero eso es lo mismo. Lo mismo el que entra con una visa de estudiante. Pero lo que pasa es que la vida no es lineal.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Blanca y negra, así es, por supuesto.

Abogada Martha Arias:
La vida no es lineal.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Pero es que hay que ir caso por caso, doctora. Eso es, hay que ir caso por caso.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Cada ser humano tiene unos, vamos a decir, unos giros, unos cambios en la vida normal. Unos cambios que son de un momento a otro.

Por ejemplo, ¿cuántas veces no pasa con todos estos muchachos que vienen a estudiar, a hacer una carrera aquí, y les ofrecen un empleo tremendo? Y les ofrecen un empleo tremendo porque tienen la capacidad intelectual, porque tienen las habilidades.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Eso es bueno para Estados Unidos. Es bueno para los Estados Unidos.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Y eso, por ejemplo, es una razón. El mismo Elon Musk entró con una visa primero de H-1B, que es una visa de habilidades extraordinarias, y se quedó y ha generado riqueza, empleo y cosas en los Estados Unidos. El mismo Albert Einstein, ¿no entró como un hombre que entró con la capacidad intelectual? Este país está hecho de una cantidad de extranjeros con unos niveles que han sobresalido a nivel mundial por sus mismas capacidades.

La vida cambia, la vida da vueltas. Los que llegan a estudiar y estudian una carrera de tres o cuatro años y encuentran el amor de su vida allí y se casan y deciden quedarse aquí porque ya llevan tres o cuatro años estudiando aquí, ya tienen trabajo y todas las carreras: médicos, ingenieros, cualquier carrera que usted quiera. O sea, la vida da vueltas. Esa persona inicialmente seguro tenía la intención de regresar a su país, pero se encontró eso y ¿por qué no?

Lo mismo vemos en la misma administración. Vemos las esposas de muchas personas que están en la administración que entraron aquí con cualquier otra visa que haya sido y se quedaron y encontraron el amor, se unieron y se casaron y recibieron un ajuste de estatus. O sea, esa es la vida. La vida nos trae vueltas y puede ser que lo que uno planeó no salga. La vida no es lineal.

Entonces eso es el punto. De pronto, yo no sé, estamos poniendo las cosas, la flexibilidad, y la misma ley es planteada de esa forma. Si la persona entró legalmente, tiene la posibilidad de pedir un ajuste de estatus, la ley lo dice. O sea, ese concepto de flexibilidad lo tiene la ley. Lo que pasa es que ahora la administración quiere establecer la política administrativa más estricta, tal vez sin mirar mucho el factor humano de entender.

Es cierto que hay abusos, Lourdes, usted y yo lo sabemos y todo el mundo lo sabe.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Por supuesto.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Es que tiene que haber siempre una línea media.

Lourdes Ubieta:
El caso por caso es la respuesta, mi doctora. Caso por caso.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Sí, caso por caso, pero también una línea media, porque hay gente que viene, sí, con la visa de turista y viene ya con la intención preconcebida de quedarse. Yo personalmente, como abogada, tengo cantidades de casos que me llaman a consultarme. Un ciudadano americano me dice: “Yo quiero traer a mi pareja. Ella tiene o él tiene visa de turista”. Y yo le digo: “Mire, la forma correcta es con la visa de fiancé o que lo pida la persona estando allá, porque con visa de turista no es lo correcto”.

Eso nunca ha sido un consejo que uno, por ejemplo, como abogado honesto dé. Pero la gente a veces hace esas cosas locas. Entra con su visa de turista y se queda acá, y ya.

Entonces esas son las cosas que hay que ver, porque obviamente lo que es incorrecto se sanciona, pero no todo el mundo tiene esa malicia tampoco. A veces viene inocentemente. Yo tuve una clienta que vino, una señora inocentemente, visitaba a su hijo y a su hijo le diagnosticaron una enfermedad terrible y le tocó quedarse a cuidar a su hijo porque la esposa tenía que seguir trabajando para mantener la casa, para mantener a los hijos que tenían, y ella cocinándole y cuidando al hijo. O sea, imagínate esas cosas que pasan. Esa es la vida.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Muy bien, doctora, le agradezco muchísimo atendernos esta mañana y compartir esta información con los oyentes tan importante. La información en la inmigración. Somos un país de inmigrantes en los Estados Unidos, amigos oyentes.

Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración. Doctora, feliz semana. Gracias por acompañarme.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Gracias, feliz día.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Igualmente.

English Translation

Lourdes Ubieta:
Well, friends, thank you for continuing to stay tuned to the program, completely live, Radio Libre 790, 96.5. We also greet the audience connected through social media, YouTube and X, @RadioLibre790, @LourdesUbieta. Thank you for tuning in.

Well, a rule from President Trump’s administration requires foreigners in the United States to apply for the permanent residence card abroad. Abroad, listening friends. A decision that was reported on Friday, an important change in that immigration policy that again states that non-U.S. citizens who have applied for a green card or legal permanent resident status must leave the country, even if they are legally in the country and regardless of whether they have spouses or relatives with citizenship.

Applicants for the permanent residence card must expect their application to be processed outside the United States through consular processing through the United States Department of State.

Attorney Martha Arias, immigration attorney, thank you for joining me as we begin the week with this news. It has been a while since we had news as important as this. Welcome to your home, attorney.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Good morning, Lourdes. A special greeting to you, your work team, and the entire audience. Happy beginning of this week, starting Tuesday. And yes, as you say, with a little bit of stressful news.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Exactly. Help us understand, attorney. The people who right now are in the United States, who have done everything correctly, are waiting only for their card, their card that will tell them that they are a legal permanent resident in the United States. Do they now have to leave the United States and wait for the approval of their residence in their country of origin?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Yes, it is the new administrative policy. Here we have to give a little bit of information to all people. The statute, which is the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Immigration and Nationality Law, that is the statute, that is the law. It is a law of Congress; that is, it is an organic law made by the Congress of the United States.

That law allows a person to adjust status inside the United States, what in English is called adjustment of status, as long as the person entered legally. And there are a few exceptions for those who can adjust status if they did not enter legally; they are few exceptions.

Now, it continues. That is still in the law. This policy that we are talking about today did not change that law. What happens is that in that organic law it also says that a person who is going to adjust status under section 245 of the law, which is this one that we are talking about, adjustment of status, is a petition that is discretionary. That is to say, the government can, at its discretion, approve it or deny it. The law also says that; it has always been there. Correct.

Now, what this memorandum is saying, this memorandum that comes out dated May 21 of this year, 2026, what it is saying is that the government is going to exercise that discretion that the organic law has case by case. In English it is said on a case-by-case basis, depending, and it will only approve it when extraordinary circumstances are shown as to why the person must adjust that status inside the United States.

So, in other words, the government has the right to issue administrative policies, and in this case the government is issuing this administrative policy, which gives it the right, let us say it that way, the organic law when it says that adjustment of status must be discretionary.

So they, in other words, take that word “discretionary” and use it to issue this administrative policy, saying case by case if the person shows us an extraordinary reason. In other words, it is going to be more difficult, so to speak, for the person to have their residence approved inside the country. The person would have to leave, but that does not mean that we cannot file them. Yes, because now we, the attorneys or the petitioners, are going to have to show what that extraordinary reason is that they are asking for, what the factors are that they have to show in order to achieve that extraordinary factor.

In other words, it is not an easy task, obviously, neither for the petitioner nor for us. But it is not that they are excluding that right from us either. And that is what I want people to understand, because the statute continues to allow adjustment of status under section 245. This is an administrative policy of this administration that is wanting to enforce that discretion, let us say it that way, in a stricter form and subjected to a higher standard of proof.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Again, attorney, because this is the question that the listeners are asking me while we are listening to you, right? The person who right now is waiting for their permanent residence, will they have to leave the country or is the other option to show that, since it is case by case, in their case they can stay waiting for the adjustment of status inside the United States?

I ask myself: what would those conditions be? Having work? A job from which they cannot be absent from the country? What are the variables so that a person can wait for that adjustment of status inside the United States?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Yes, that is a good question. That question of yours, we are going to divide it into two.

What are the variables or what we would have to show as factors to show an extraordinary condition, because the person deserves to do that adjustment of status inside the country?

There is not yet an immigration memorandum that explains. However, always in other cases there has been talk of factors such as, for example, the person’s education; if they have the economic capacity to support themselves without becoming a public charge; the criminal history, if they have crimes or criminal records; the circumstances in which they left their country and whether they can return to their country; the community ties they have inside the United States, let us say if they have all their family here or at least the close family; what community ties they still have in their country of origin; issues also, for example, such as illnesses, medical conditions, all of that. That is part of what one can show for that extraordinary reason.

The extreme pain, if it exists or if there is any, in the family member who petitions for them. Let us say, it is a son who is petitioning for the mother or it is a husband who is petitioning for his wife. If that husband or that son, well, would suffer in a condition, an extraordinary pain, in the event that residence is not given to their beneficiary. So, all those are the factors.

What does that mean? That they will have to prove with more documents. What they need is more work for us and for the people. And obviously for the adjudicating officer himself, because the adjudicating officer now is going to be covered with a quantity of documents that will tend to show that extraordinary condition.

So, I repeat again, this came out last week, on the 21st, in the memorandum. I read the memorandum. The memorandum talks about what we are talking about here: case by case, humanitarian reasons, the discretionary aspect, that is what it talks about. The officers still do not have exact guidelines, and I say it because fellow immigration attorneys had appointments on Friday after it was issued. And now, today, during the course of the morning, since we have communications by email, the same officers still do not have guidelines. They are asking people who had appointments, for example today, for proof of an extraordinary reason and proof such as what I mentioned now: time here, family here, all of that.

So, I imagine the guidelines will continue to come out. We have to keep informing ourselves little by little about what other guidelines they are going to have, but for now what I mentioned to you about those factors is something for which people have to begin collecting documentation.

Now, regarding the first question, which is also very important, whether this is going to affect people who already had pending petitions before this memorandum was issued on May 21. I do not, I repeat again, there are not yet explicit immigration guidelines to the officers or public ones where already…

Lourdes Ubieta:
Usually it is not retroactive, right? It is from the moment of the publication date. Laws usually are not retroactive, right?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Yes, laws, that is an interesting topic, because laws from Congress can be retroactive. Case law or jurisprudence normally is not. Now, this is neither from Congress nor is it from a judge; it is the same administrative policy.

As an administrative policy, administratively, in most cases the Executive cannot issue policies backward either. So, I do not believe that from the point of view, let us say, of the mechanics of the law, of how it applies, we can issue an administrative policy, whether one year or two years back, because then we would have total legal chaos.

So, I do not believe it will apply to the past, but this is my opinion as an attorney and taking into account the foundations of the law and the interpretations that one studies in university. The administration can come out and say: “Yes, I can apply it to pending cases, not adjudicated.” And there then we would enter into, let us say, a legal discussion between us, the attorneys, and the administration, which perhaps would go to a federal lawsuit to try to prove that this should not apply to those who have pending petitions, only to petitions received by immigration after May 21.

But I repeat again, Lourdes, there is nothing in the memorandum nor in any guidance that says immigration is saying that it is going to apply it retroactively. But obviously we suppose that it will be that way. I have an appointment, for example, this week, and I imagine that I am going to go prepared to see what the officer is going to tell me, if he is going to give a request for evidence, and obviously we are going to have to argue that it did not apply to our clients.

But that does not mean that the battle is going to be… If the administration is going to apply it to cases that were pending, then that will go further or we will go there, if this will go to the courts. But the processes that go to the courts, as you know, are slow and take time. So, an immediate answer, I do not know if we are going to have it.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Very well, attorney. Nonimmigrants, such as students, temporary workers, or people with tourist visas, come to the United States for a short time and with a specific purpose, they say from the Department of Immigration, and then our system is designed for them to leave when their visit ends. Their visit should not function as the first step in the process of the residence card. That is what Koller says, the spokesperson for the Department of Immigration.

And it is true, we saw people who have arrived as tourists and then looked for a way to stay legally in the United States, attorney. Now it seems that it is like a change in the vision of the immigration issue.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, that part has always been the same also. The person who enters with a tourist visa is given six months to stay. Of course, it does not mean that they have to stay the six months. Obviously they come for one week, I do not know, ten weeks, ten days to visit their relatives or to walk around, vacation, but that is the same. The same with the one who enters with a student visa. But what happens is that life is not linear.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Black and white, that is right, of course.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Life is not linear.

Lourdes Ubieta:
But it is that one has to go case by case, attorney. That is it, one has to go case by case.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Each human being has, let us say, some turns, some changes in normal life. Some changes that are from one moment to another.

For example, how many times does it not happen with all these young people who come to study, to complete a career here, and they are offered a tremendous job? And they are offered a tremendous job because they have the intellectual capacity, because they have the skills.

Lourdes Ubieta:
That is good for the United States. It is good for the United States.

Attorney Martha Arias:
And that, for example, is a reason. Elon Musk himself entered first with an H-1B visa, which is a visa of extraordinary abilities, and he stayed and has generated wealth, employment, and things in the United States. Albert Einstein himself, did he not enter as a man who entered with intellectual capacity? This country is made up of a quantity of foreigners with levels that have stood out worldwide because of their own abilities.

Life changes, life turns. Those who come to study and study a career of three or four years and find the love of their life there and get married and decide to stay here because they already have three or four years studying here, they already have work and all the careers: doctors, engineers, any career that you want. In other words, life turns. That person initially surely had the intention of returning to their country, but they found that and why not?

The same thing we see in the same administration. We see the wives of many people who are in the administration who entered here with whatever other visa it may have been and stayed and found love, joined together and married and received adjustment of status. In other words, that is life. Life brings us turns and it may be that what one planned does not come out. Life is not linear.

So that is the point. Suddenly, I do not know, we are placing things, flexibility, and the same law is set forth in that form. If the person entered legally, they have the possibility of requesting adjustment of status, the law says it. In other words, that concept of flexibility is in the law. What happens is that now the administration wants to establish the administrative policy more strictly, perhaps without looking much at the human factor of understanding.

It is true that there are abuses, Lourdes, you and I know it and everyone knows it.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Of course.

Attorney Martha Arias:
It is that there must always be a middle line.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Case by case is the answer, my attorney. Case by case.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Yes, case by case, but also a middle line, because there are people who come, yes, with the tourist visa and come already with the preconceived intention of staying. I personally, as an attorney, have quantities of cases that call me to consult me. An American citizen tells me: “I want to bring my partner. She has or he has a tourist visa.” And I tell him: “Look, the correct way is with the fiancé visa or for the person to petition for them while they are there, because with a tourist visa it is not the correct thing.”

That has never been advice that one, for example, as an honest attorney gives. But people sometimes do those crazy things. They enter with their tourist visa and stay here, and that is it.

So those are the things that have to be seen, because obviously what is incorrect is sanctioned, but not everyone has that malice either. Sometimes they come innocently. I had a client who came, a lady innocently, she was visiting her son and her son was diagnosed with a terrible illness and she had to stay to take care of her son because the wife had to continue working to maintain the house, to maintain the children they had, and she was cooking for him and taking care of the son. In other words, imagine those things that happen. That is life.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Very well, attorney, I thank you very much for attending us this morning and sharing this very important information with the listeners. Information in immigration. We are a country of immigrants in the United States, listening friends.

Martha Arias, immigration attorney. Attorney, happy week. Thank you for joining me.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you, have a nice day.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Likewise.

The post Do I Have to Leave the U.S. for My Green Card? appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

Humanitarian Parole Resumes for Certain Nationalities Amid Confusing New Restrictions

Martha Arias — Wed, 11 Jun 2025 17:39:52 +0000

This morning on Noticias 990 AM, I had the opportunity to discuss the latest developments affecting beneficiaries of Humanitarian Parole and recent travel restrictions to the United States.

USCIS has lifted the suspension on pending Humanitarian Parole applications for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans. This means cases that were already filed before the program ended may now proceed, though new applications are not being accepted. However, the overall situation remains confusing: while those abroad may be able to enter if their parole is approved, the program remains terminated for those already inside the United States.

I explained that every case is different. Some people may continue their asylum processes, others may be eligible for residency through the Cuban Adjustment Act, while others without options may face risks of unlawful presence and even deportation. I also described the challenges in seeking bonds for detained asylum seekers, as prosecutors often argue that “bare-bones” or weak asylum claims present a risk for absconding.

We also discussed new travel restrictions affecting countries such as Cuba and Venezuela. People from these countries with visas issued before June 9 can still enter, but those with visas issued after that date cannot. There are strict exceptions, but immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, as well as green card holders, are still eligible to enter.

If you have questions about your immigration status or need personalized guidance, my office is here to help. Call us at 305-671-0018.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

Eduardo:
Amigas, amigos, vamos a hablar en esta parte de Noticias 990 de inmigración. Hemos invitado precisamente a la abogada Martha Arias, especialista en inmigración. Abogada Arias, buenos días. Gracias por estar con nosotros. Muchísimas gracias por atender nuestra llamada. Uno de los temas de inmigración por estas horas tiene que ver con el Parol Humanitario. La administración, el gobierno ha reanudado los trámites para los beneficiarios del Parol. El Departamento de Inmigración y Ciudadanía, USCIS, ha levantado la suspensión sobre las solicitudes de Parol Humanitario que benefician a cubanos, haitianos, nicaragüenses y venezolanos. ¿Cuál es el impacto de esta medida? ¿Qué esperan ustedes, abogados de inmigración, que suceda en los próximos días?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Sí, efectivamente. Gracias, Eduardo. Lo que está pasando es que una juez ordenó que se reanude el trámite de esas peticiones de parol que ya habían presentado las personas, estaban en proceso cuando se terminó ese parol humanitario por parte de la nueva administración. Entonces, el proceso debe reanudarse para llegar a una decisión.
Sin embargo, hay una petición, por ejemplo, si la persona apenas va a aplicar para la I-134A, que es el affidavit de soporte que presenta ese sponsor o ese patrocinador, esas peticiones sí no se van a procesar, las nuevas. Es decir, son peticiones que ya están pendientes al momento que se terminó el parol. Esas son las que tengo entendido que se van a comenzar o se van a reanudar el procesamiento.

Aaron:
¿Se puede saber en cuánto tiempo se van a procesar, abogada, estas peticiones?

Abogada Martha Arias:
No, no sabemos en cuánto tiempo. Lo que sí dice el comunicado es que se va a seguir el proceso regular de investigación porque usted sabe que cada proceso tiene una investigación donde se revisan antecedentes penales, se revisa todos los antecedentes de las personas en todas partes del mundo. Entonces, no sabemos cuánto va a ser el tiempo, pero pues sí sabemos que dijeron que va a ser una investigación de cada caso.

Aaron:
Mientras tanto, ¿esta gente está protegida, tiene que tomar alguna medida especial, abogada, por cualquier eventualidad?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, acuérdense que estos son procesamientos de peticiones de parol de personas que están fuera de los Estados Unidos. Es este parol humanitario para que ellos entren a los Estados Unidos. O sea que estas personas están fuera del país. El parol, por eso es que es confuso. El parol humanitario lo terminó el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional y fue apelado, hubo una pausa. Después la Corte Suprema el 30 de mayo dijo que el presidente sí tenía la autoridad o el Ejecutivo de terminarlo y el juicio continúa. Pero lo que es el parol humanitario en sí para esas personas que están aquí dentro de los Estados Unidos, incluso que se les vencía a finales de año, el año entra, esto sigue terminado. Por eso es que es confuso. Está terminado para los que están aquí, pero entonces van a procesar los casos de los que están apenas para entrar. Como que no tiene mucho sentido para mí, por lo menos no tiene lógica. Porque vamos a suponer que a un cubano o un venezolano le aprueben este parol. Entonces apenas entre, ¿qué va a quedar, terminado apenas entre? O sea, serviría no más para el propósito de entrar, pero después una vez aquí no va a estar activo. Es un poquito, me parece, contradictorio. Todo es confuso porque no le veo la lógica a esto.

Eduardo:
Ahora, ante esta confusión, abogada, ¿qué pasa con aquellos que usted menciona que están aquí adentro, que el parol ya no está activo para ellos? ¿Hay alternativas? ¿Qué es lo que usted le recomienda en la oficina?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, cada caso es distinto. Por ejemplo, yo tengo clientes que tienen un asilo pendiente y pueden continuar con este caso de asilo. No van a incurrir en presencia ilegal porque ese asilo los protege para no incurrir en presencia ilegal, tienen permiso de trabajo. Ese es un grupo de personas.
Hay otro grupo de personas que, por ejemplo, son cubanos, entonces ya completaron el año y un día o están a punto de completar el año y un día y pueden aplicar entonces a su residencia a través del Ajuste Cubano.
Hay otro grupo de personas que no tienen nada, ni asilo, ni TPS del 2021, que es el que está vigente este septiembre, no tienen peticiones familiares. Esas son las personas que están en un peligro porque esas personas sí están incurriendo en presencia ilegal y pues pueden ser sujetas a una detención y a una deportación.
Hay otro grupo de personas que se casaron con ciudadano americano o con residentes y esas personas están en proceso de residencia a través de sus peticiones. Esas también están protegidas por esa petición de residencia que está en trámite.
Entonces, como usted ve, los casos son distintos dependiendo de cada persona. Yo en mi oficina he aconsejado a los que, por ejemplo, le doy un ejemplo, un caso de una pareja. Él entró con el parol humanitario, la esposa es residente, no ciudadana, y lo pidió. Y la petición está más o menos a unos seis meses de salir. Esa persona decidió inteligentemente salir del país para no incurrir en presencia ilegal y no dañar su petición de residencia a través de la esposa. Esa persona va a salir y va a continuar su procesamiento consular. También, tal vez tenga que estar alejado seis meses, un año de su familia, pero la esposa puede viajar a visitarlo y continuar el proceso porque quedarse en el país es como someterse a una posible deportación que en el futuro le impida regresar más rápido.
Entonces, como te digo, cada caso es distinto.

Aaron:
Estamos conversando con la abogada de Migración Martha Arias y estamos viendo algunos casos en estas últimas horas, abogada. ¿Qué pasa si una persona es detenida por ICE? Pero esa persona ya tiene la solicitud de asilo, no tiene antecedentes criminales, tiene su permiso de trabajo activo. ¿Esto se considera una detención arbitraria? ¿Qué hace usted como abogada cuando se presenta un caso como este?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Cuando se presenta un caso como este, lo primero que uno tiene que pedir es una fianza para lograr que esa persona salga de detención y continuar su caso fuera de detención. Aquí hay que analizar porque hay personas que tienen el caso de asilo con la corte y otros que lo tienen con USCIS o con Citizenship and Immigration Services.
Entonces hay que analizar con quién lo tiene. Si el caso está con USCIS y los detienen y los mandan a la corte, es posible que entonces ese caso de asilo ya no continúe con USCIS sino que va a seguir con la corte. La verdad, cuando una persona entra por la frontera, si esa persona entró por la frontera, el estatuto dice que la persona que entra sin una admisión o sin un parol debe ser detenida. Entonces es posible que esa persona sea detenida mientras dura su proceso de asilo en la corte. Lo que pasa es que hay que tratar de pedir una fianza y le digo la verdad, no está fácil pedir fianzas, sobre todo aquí en el sur de la Florida, porque los fiscales, que son los que representan al Departamento de Seguridad Nacional y las Cortes de Inmigración, están oponiéndose a esas fianzas.
Y una de las cosas que yo he visto como se están oponiendo es que antes de eso le explico, cuando uno presenta una fianza para una persona que es detenida, la ley le exige al abogado probar dos cosas: uno, que la persona no va a ser un peligro para la comunidad y dos, que la persona no tiene riesgo de que se pierda o que se esconda y no se presente a la corte, en inglés se llama “risk of absconding”. Entonces nos toca probar esas dos cosas y ¿qué es lo que pasa cuando hay una persona que nunca ha tenido un delito, nunca ha sido arrestada, no tiene antecedentes? Obviamente nosotros argumentamos que no es un peligro para la sociedad porque no tiene ningún récord criminal. Y dos, cuando para probar que no se va a esconder uno muestra que tiene un esposo, que tiene dos hijos, esposa o que muestra el apoyo de su empleador o muestra lo que uno más puede.
¿Qué pasa en estos casos? Los argumentos que he visto últimamente que están haciendo los fiscales de inmigración es: “Ah, no, es que miramos la petición de asilo y la petición de asilo es muy débil. Ahí no hay evidencia, esta persona tiene una gran probabilidad de que no va a triunfar en su caso de asilo. Por lo tanto, un riesgo para tu país. Por lo tanto, esta persona sí presenta un riesgo de que se esconda y no se presente en el futuro.” O sea que esas personas que presentaron asilos débiles o simplemente la planilla así, como nosotros los abogados llamamos el “bare-bone petition”, o sea, lo esquelético, lo huesitos nomás, esa persona tiene un peligro de que no le den la fianza, diciendo que se va a esconder porque su petición de asilo es débil. Esos son los argumentos que estamos lidiando nosotros los abogados para lograr una fianza.
Si no se logra la fianza, entonces la persona debe continuar defendiendo su caso de asilo en la Corte de Inmigración bajo detención.

Eduardo:
Abogada Martha Arias, obviamente esta semana entró en vigor la restricción de entrada de viajes a Estados Unidos, esto digamos afecta directamente a países como Afganistán, Birmania, Chad, pero hay restricciones para Cuba, para Venezuela específicamente, son siete países que tienen restricciones de viaje. ¿Qué pasa con las personas que ya tenían un visado que les permitía entrar a Estados Unidos?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Las personas de Cuba y de Venezuela que ya tenían un visado pueden ingresar a los Estados Unidos si ese visado fue emitido antes de junio 9. No van a tener problema, de pronto es aconsejable que tengan toda la documentación al día y que pronto sepan que pueden experimentar retardos en el ingreso a los Estados Unidos, en su admisión, porque los cuestionarán y les harán preguntas, pero pueden ingresar. Los que tengan una visa de inmigrante o de no inmigrante, visa de inmigrante de la residencia, la visa emitida por los consulados o una visa de no inmigrante como la visa de turista, la visa de estudiante, la J, la M, que son de estudiantes, pero es práctico. Ellos tampoco van a poder ingresar si esa visa fue emitida después de junio 9.
En Haití la limitación sí es estricta. Ninguna persona con visa, incluso emitida antes, puede entrar. Entonces, el consejo sería que esperen a ver qué decisión porque si hay personas que tienen citas en los consulados para su residencia los próximos meses. Yo tengo, por ejemplo, un cubano que su esposa residente hizo la petición y tiene cita en dos meses en el consulado. Esa persona seguramente le van a cancelar sus citas según han anunciado porque como es cubano tiene la restricción de entrar, aunque le apruebe el cónsul la audiencia no va a poder entrar. La visa de residente. Entonces hay excepciones. Las excepciones son los que ya son residentes, ya tienen su tarjeta de “green card“. Esos sí van a poder viajar y volver a entrar sin problema, también aquellos esposos de o cónyuges de ciudadanos americanos.
Entonces, si por ejemplo hay un ciudadano que es americano, si a su cónyuge le toca la cita en dos meses, esa cita sí se va a dar y esa residencia sí puede ser emitida y la persona sí puede entrar. Los familiares inmediatos son los esposos de ciudadanos americanos, los padres de ciudadanos americanos y los hijos menores de 21 años. Esas personas van a poder entrar.

Eduardo:
Perfecto. Ahora, abogada, alguna persona que nos está escuchando en este momento y necesita asesoría de un abogado experto en inmigración, ¿dónde la puede localizar?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Mi oficina, el teléfono es 305-671-0018. Si van conduciendo, pues mi página web es ariasvilla.com. Ariasvilla.com o solo acuérdense de mi nombre Martha Arias con la intermedia estudio Martha y en todas las redes sociales me pueden encontrar Martha Arias.

Eduardo:
Muchísimas gracias por compartir este tiempo con nosotros.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Gracias a ustedes, feliz día.

Eduardo:
Igualmente, era la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias, estaba en Noticias 990.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

Eduardo:
Friends, let’s talk in this segment of Noticias 990 about immigration. We have invited immigration attorney Martha Arias, a specialist in immigration. Attorney Arias, good morning. Thank you for being with us. Thank you very much for answering our call. One of the immigration topics at this hour has to do with Humanitarian Parole. The administration, the government, has resumed the processing for beneficiaries of Parole. The Department of Immigration and Citizenship, USCIS, has lifted the suspension on applications for Humanitarian Parole that benefit Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans. What is the impact of this measure? What do you, immigration attorneys, expect to happen in the coming days?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Yes, indeed. Thank you, Eduardo. What is happening is that a judge ordered that the processing of those parole applications already submitted by people, which were in process when that humanitarian parole was ended by the new administration, should be resumed to reach a decision.
However, there is a request, for example, if the person is just going to apply for the I-134A, which is the affidavit of support presented by that sponsor, those applications will not be processed, the new ones. That is, applications that were already pending at the time the parole was ended—those are the ones, as I understand, that are going to begin or resume processing.

Aaron:
Can it be known how long it will take to process these applications, attorney?

Attorney Martha Arias:
No, we don’t know how long it will take. What the statement does say is that the regular investigation process will be followed because you know that each process has an investigation where criminal backgrounds are checked, all the person’s background is reviewed worldwide. So, we do not know how long it will be, but we do know they said there will be an investigation for each case.

Aaron:
Meanwhile, are these people protected, do they have to take any special measures, attorney, just in case?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, remember that these are processing of parole petitions for people who are outside the United States. This is humanitarian parole for them to enter the United States. So, these people are outside the country. Parole, that’s why it’s confusing. Humanitarian parole was ended by the Department of Homeland Security and was appealed, there was a pause. Then the Supreme Court on May 30 said that the president or the Executive did have the authority to end it and the trial continues. But what is the humanitarian parole itself for those who are already here inside the United States, even those that were expiring at the end of the year, next year, that is still ended. That’s why it’s confusing. It’s ended for those who are here, but then they are going to process the cases of those who are just coming in. For me, at least, it doesn’t make sense. Let’s suppose a Cuban or a Venezuelan is approved for this parole. So as soon as they enter, it’s already ended, as soon as they come in. So, it would only serve for the purpose of entering, but after once here it will not be active. For me, it seems contradictory. Everything is confusing because I don’t see the logic in this.

Eduardo:
Now, given this confusion, attorney, what happens to those you mention who are here inside, for whom parole is no longer active? Are there alternatives? What do you recommend in your office?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, every case is different. For example, I have clients who have a pending asylum case and they can continue with that asylum case. They will not incur unlawful presence because that asylum protects them from incurring unlawful presence; they have work permits. That is one group of people.
There is another group, for example, Cubans, who have already completed one year and a day or are about to complete one year and a day and can then apply for their residency through Cuban Adjustment.
There’s another group who have nothing—no asylum, no TPS from 2021 (which is the one that is current this September), no family petitions. Those are the people who are in danger because those people are indeed accruing unlawful presence and may be subject to detention and deportation.
Another group are those who married a U.S. citizen or resident and are in the process of residency through their petitions. Those are also protected by that pending residency petition.
So, as you see, cases are different depending on each person. In my office, for example, I advised, let me give you an example, a couple’s case. He entered with humanitarian parole, the wife is a resident, not a citizen, and she petitioned for him. The petition is about six months from being ready. That person decided intelligently to leave the country to avoid accruing unlawful presence and not damage his residency petition through his wife. That person is going to leave and continue with his consular processing. Maybe he’ll have to be away from his family for six months or a year, but the wife can travel to visit him and continue the process, because staying in the country is like submitting to a possible deportation that in the future would prevent him from returning more quickly.
So, as I say, every case is different.

Aaron:
We are speaking with immigration attorney Martha Arias and reviewing some recent cases, attorney. What happens if a person is detained by ICE, but they already have an asylum application, no criminal background, their work permit is active. Is this considered an arbitrary detention? What do you do as an attorney in such a case?

Attorney Martha Arias:
When a case like this comes up, the first thing you have to do is request a bond to get that person released from detention and continue their case outside detention. Here, you have to analyze because there are people who have their asylum case with the court and others with USCIS or with Citizenship and Immigration Services.
So you have to analyze who has it. If the case is with USCIS and they are detained and sent to court, it is possible that the asylum case will no longer continue with USCIS but instead with the court. The truth is, when someone enters through the border, if that person entered through the border, the statute says that a person who enters without an admission or parole must be detained. So it is possible that person will be detained while their asylum case is pending in court. The thing is, you have to try to request a bond, and honestly, it’s not easy to request bonds, especially here in South Florida, because prosecutors who represent the Department of Homeland Security in Immigration Courts are opposing those bonds.
One thing I’ve seen is before, let me explain, when you present a bond for a person who is detained, the law requires the attorney to prove two things: one, that the person will not be a danger to the community and two, that the person is not a flight risk (that is, risk of absconding). So, we have to prove those two things. What happens when a person has never had any criminal record, has never been arrested, no background? Obviously, we argue that they are not a danger to society because they have no criminal record. And to prove they will not abscond, you show they have a spouse, two children, a wife, or employer support, or whatever else you can.
What happens in these cases? The arguments I’ve seen lately from immigration prosecutors are, “No, we look at the asylum petition and the asylum petition is very weak. There’s no evidence, this person has a high probability of not succeeding in their asylum case. Therefore, a risk for your country. Therefore, this person does present a risk of absconding and not appearing in the future.” So, those who filed weak asylums or just the form, as we lawyers call “bare-bone petition,” only the skeleton, just the basics, those people are in danger of being denied bond because they say they will abscond because their asylum petition is weak. Those are the arguments we attorneys are dealing with to try to get a bond.
If the bond is not granted, then the person must continue defending their asylum case in Immigration Court while detained.

Eduardo:
Attorney Martha Arias, obviously this week travel restrictions to the United States came into effect, this directly affects countries like Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, but there are restrictions for Cuba, for Venezuela specifically, there are seven countries with travel restrictions. What happens to people who already had a visa that allowed them to enter the United States?

Attorney Martha Arias:
People from Cuba and Venezuela who already had a visa can enter the United States if that visa was issued before June 9. They will not have a problem, maybe it’s advisable to have all your documents in order and to know you may experience delays upon entering the United States, at admission, because they will question you and ask questions, but you can enter. Those with an immigrant or non-immigrant visa, immigrant visa for residency, visa issued by consulates, or a non-immigrant visa like tourist visa, student visa, J, M, which are for students, but practically, they also cannot enter if that visa was issued after June 9.
In Haiti, the limitation is strict. No one with a visa, even issued before, can enter. So, the advice would be to wait and see what decision is made because there are people with consular appointments for their residency in the coming months. For example, I have a Cuban client whose resident wife made a petition and has an appointment in two months at the consulate. That person, as announced, will surely have their appointment canceled because, as a Cuban, he is restricted from entering even if the consulate approves the interview; he will not be able to enter. The resident visa. So, there are exceptions. Exceptions are those who are already residents, already have their green card. They can travel and reenter without problem, also spouses of U.S. citizens.
So, for example, if someone is already a U.S. citizen and their spouse has an appointment in two months, that appointment will be held, that residency can be granted, and the person can enter. Immediate relatives are spouses of U.S. citizens, parents of U.S. citizens, and children under 21. Those will be able to enter.

Eduardo:
Perfect. Now, attorney, anyone listening right now who needs advice from an expert immigration attorney, where can they reach you?

Attorney Martha Arias:
My office, the phone number is 305-671-0018. If you’re driving, my website is ariasvilla.com. Ariasvilla, with a lowercase v, ariasvilla.com, or just remember my name Martha Arias with the middle name estudio Martha, and on all social networks you can find me as Martha Arias.

Eduardo:
Thank you very much for sharing this time with us.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you, happy day.

Eduardo:
Likewise, that was immigration attorney Martha Arias, on Noticias 990.

The post Humanitarian Parole Resumes for Certain Nationalities Amid Confusing New Restrictions appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

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

Can You Work While Waiting for Your Green Card?

Can You Work While Your Green Card Application Is Pending?

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

Form I-485: Applying for Permanent Residence

Form I-765: Applying for Permission to Work

When Can You Start Working?

What If Only Your Form I-130 Is Pending?

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

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

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

October 2026 Update: DHS Finalizes Restrictions on Automatic EAD Extensions

When Should You Renew Your EAD?

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

Five Practical Questions to Ask Before Accepting a Job

Frequently Asked Questions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Planning Your Employment While Waiting for Permanent Residence

Official Government Resources

75-Country Immigrant Visa Pause Is No Longer in Effect

What Was the 75-Country Pause?

What Changed?

Does This Apply to Tourist Visas?

Does This Mean All Visa Restrictions Have Ended?

What About Diversity Visas?

My Tips for Applicants

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the 75-country immigrant-visa pause still in effect?

Was Colombia included in the affected countries?

Does this mean Colombian immigrant visas can now be issued?

Were tourist visas included in the pause?

Are Diversity Visas now being issued?

What Applicants Should Know Now?

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

Update — August 19, 2026

New Public Charge Rules Take Effect September 18, 2026

What Green Card Applicants Should Know

What Changes on September 18?

What About Benefits Received Before September 18?

What If My Green Card Application Is Already Pending?

Does the Rule Apply to Everyone Seeking a Green Card?

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

My Tips Before September 18

Frequently Asked Questions

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

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

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

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

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

What Green Card Applicants Should Do Now

Dedicated Immigration Law Attorney Martha Arias

USCIS May Deny Immigration Cases Without First Sending an RFE

USCIS May Deny Immigration Cases Without First Sending an RFE: What Applicants Should Know

What Does This Mean for Applicants?

My Tips Before Filing With USCIS

Frequently Asked Questions

Does this mean USCIS will no longer send RFEs?

When did the new policy take effect?

Should I send extra documents just to be safe?

What should I do if I am unsure whether my evidence is sufficient?

Preparation Matters More Than Ever

The U.S. Supreme Court Upholds The Birthright Citizenship

Supreme Court Upholds Birthright Citizenship: What Families Should Know

Dedicated Immigration Law Attorney in Kendall

Do I Have to Leave the U.S. for My Green Card?

Can You Still Get a Green Card Without Leaving the U.S.?

USCIS Memo Raises Questions for Green Card Applicants Inside the United States

What Is Adjustment of Status?

Why the May 2026 Memorandum Matters

Does the Memorandum Change the Law?

Martha L. Arias, Esq. Immigration Law Attorney (305) 671-0017

Contact us today with your immigration questions.

What Does “Discretion” Mean in Adjustment of Status?

What Does “Extraordinary Circumstances” Mean?

Martha L. Arias, Esq.
Immigration Law Attorney
(305) 671-0017