Lourdes Ubieta Archives - 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..

Third-Country Deportations, Florida License Changes, and the Risks of Misrepresentation

Martha Arias — Tue, 14 Apr 2026 00:12:52 +0000

This morning on Radio Libre, I joined journalist Lourdes Ubieta for an important conversation about several immigration issues that are creating anxiety for many families right now: deportations to third countries, changes tied to Florida driver licenses and identification cards, election-related risks for non-citizens, and the very serious consequences of fraud or misrepresentation in immigration matters.

One of the first issues we discussed was the growing concern over removals to third countries. This is an area where people can become confused very quickly, especially when they hear that someone was not returned directly to his or her country of nationality. In some cases, withholding of removal may protect a person from being sent back to one specific country if that person can show a qualifying future danger there. That form of protection is different from asylum, and the legal standards are not identical. USCIS materials make clear that withholding of removal is tied to a higher standard and focuses on the likelihood that the person’s life or freedom would be threatened if returned.

We also talked about the pressure building inside the immigration court system. That concern is understandable. EOIR has continued announcing additional immigration judges and temporary immigration judges, including a public April 8, 2026 update announcing 15 immigration judges and 17 temporary immigration judges. More staffing does not answer every due process concern, but it does signal continued pressure toward faster case movement.

Another subject that deserves public attention is Florida’s HB 991. In the interview, we discussed driving license and identification changes. The current enrolled text states that by July 1, 2027, Florida driver licenses and identification cards issued to qualified applicants must include the applicant’s legal citizenship status as last recorded in the system. The same legislation also includes election-related provisions that many immigrants and mixed-status families should not ignore.

This is where I always urge extra caution. A person should never claim U.S. citizenship on a license application, voter form, immigration filing, or any government document unless that claim is true and legally supported. These mistakes can create long-term immigration damage. In some situations, the damage may go far beyond a delay. USCIS’s current NTA policy is stricter than many people realize, and an unfavorable decision can now place some applicants into removal proceedings where they are no longer lawfully present after the denial.

I also want parents to take one message very seriously: do not assume that a child who grew up in the United States automatically became a U.S. citizen. I have seen too many painful cases where a young adult believed that he or she could vote, register, or answer “yes” to a citizenship question without fully understanding the consequences. Before anyone registers to vote, signs a form, or answers a citizenship question, that person should know exactly what his or her legal status is.

Another point from the interview remains just as important as ever: be careful who prepares your immigration paperwork. A poorly prepared filing is not a small problem. It can affect timing, eligibility, credibility, and, in some cases, future defense options. The cost of a mistake is often much greater than people expect.

If you heard the interview this morning and you are unsure how these developments may affect your case, take the time to review your history carefully before filing anything new. Truthfulness, consistency, and proper legal guidance matter now more than ever.

Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not create an attorney-client relationship. It is not legal advice. Immigration outcomes depend on the specific facts of each case, and laws, procedures, and agency policies can change.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT

LOURDES UBIETA:
Bueno, dos temas que quería conversar con ustedes, amigos. Hoy en día subió a dos millones de personas el número de auto deportados desde que la administración del presidente Trump, en ejercicio como el número 47, pues… dos millones de personas se han auto deportado del país. De esos millones que entraron, mayoritariamente en el gobierno del presidente Biden, además de esos dos millones que se han auto deportado, que han decidido irse, también hay un número significativo de personas que han sido deportadas.

Y ha comenzado, dentro de todo este proceso migratorio, la deportación de inmigrantes a terceros países. Y muchos ya comenzaron a llegar a uno de nuestros países, a Costa Rica, ¿no? Un primer grupo de inmigrantes deportados desde Estados Unidos a terceros países llegaron a Costa Rica. Fueron unos 25 de ellos, ciudadanos de Albania, de Camerún, de China, de Guatemala, de Honduras, de India, de Kenia, de Marruecos. Toda esa gente había entrado aquí, amigos oyentes, por la frontera sur. Sabíamos quiénes eran: Camerún, Kenia, Marruecos… bueno, deportados, y llegaron a Costa Rica.

Quiero darle la bienvenida a la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias, que está con nosotros a esta hora. Abogada, hace tiempo que no conversábamos. Bienvenida a su casa.

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, sí, Lourdes. Días sin conversar. Un gusto hablar con usted y con toda esa audiencia. Y mejor aún, un gusto verla, porque ahora tenemos…

LOURDES UBIETA:
Ahí tenemos a nuestra abogada de inmigración en pantalla, amigos oyentes. Ya no es solo escucharla, sino que la vemos. Un placer, doctora.

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, lo mismo. Ya le pusimos cara a la voz, eso es.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Bienvenida como siempre a su casa. Sabe que la apreciamos mucho aquí en Radio Libre y le agradecemos que nos haya acompañado por tanto tiempo en todas estas crisis migratorias que hemos tenido en los últimos tiempos. Y bueno, quería, en primer lugar, conocer su opinión, ¿verdad?, porque las cifras que nos han llegado son de dos millones —el número no es redondo, pero casi— de auto deportados, o sea, personas que han decidido irse del país. Y después entiendo que 900.000, corríjame usted, doctora, si estoy mal, es el número de personas que sí han sido deportadas efectivamente de los Estados Unidos.

Proceso que para algunos es lento, para otros, en medio de tantas personas que hay que procesar, pues… no sé cómo lo ve usted, si le parece que vamos rápido, si le parece que va lento, cómo ve usted este proceso.

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Yo veo que esos datos parecen ser reales y un estimado muy cercano. De pronto pienso que las personas deportadas pueden ser incluso más, si sumamos a aquellas que son deportadas directamente de la frontera, más las que están deportando los jueces. Así que estimo que es bastante cercano ese dato, Lourdes. Y lo que también creo es que esas cantidades aumenten aún más próximamente.

La razón es que están contratando más jueces para estos casos, que son los que llaman jueces temporales. La semana pasada, por ejemplo, recibí un comunicado del departamento de Executive Office for Immigration Review, o como nosotros lo llamamos, EOIR, por sus siglas, que decía que se juramentaron 17 jueces temporales y 19 nuevos jueces. O sea que, si usted suma, son más de 30 jueces juramentados en una semana que van a ejercer, obviamente, funciones de jueces de inmigración para ayudar en estos procesos de deportación masiva que el presidente anunció y que está cumpliendo.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Sí. En el año 2025, la cifra que se está manejando de deportados fue de 600.000. Entre el 20 de enero y el 31 de diciembre de 2025. El año fiscal 2026, que está en curso, que suma solo octubre del 25 a febrero del 26, los jueces de inmigración han emitido 262.021 órdenes de deportación y salidas voluntarias.

También hay arrestos de ICE durante el primer año de la administración de Trump, arrestos realizados por haberse… ¿se acuerda?, o aplicado las salidas voluntarias. En fin, hay un tema que también es la nacionalidad de las personas. Básicamente estamos hablando de nacionales de México, de Guatemala, de Honduras, pero también de otros países africanos, etcétera, etcétera, etcétera.

En este proceso que está en plena, digamos, en plena ejecución, y vemos el uso de los terceros países, abogada, en este caso Costa Rica, cuando una persona es deportada a un tercer país, ¿cuál es el objetivo de eso? ¿Por qué no puede ser deportada a…? Porque aquí hay nacionales de Guatemala y de Honduras. En vez de ser deportada a sus propios países, ¿por qué los deportan a un tercer país como Costa Rica?

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Bueno, puede ser que a estas personas les fue aprobado un withholding of removal. La mayoría de esos son los casos. El withholding of removal es una deportación que no se ejecuta, se sostiene, porque la persona puede recibir una persecución futura en su país.

Entonces, esa figura del withholding of removal, que es muy parecida a la del asilo… La diferencia es que en el asilo la persona tuvo una persecución pasada y va a tener una persecución futura. En el withholding, la persona va a tener es una persecución futura.

Cuando le dan el withholding a la persona, la persona puede vivir y trabajar en los Estados Unidos, pero el estatuto sí autoriza que esa persona pueda ser enviada a un tercer país que no sea su país de donde pidió el withholding, donde su vida corre peligro, y esto si ese tercer país lo recibe.

Entonces, históricamente, el withholding… esta es la primera vez, por lo menos en mis 23 años que yo llevo como abogada de inmigración, que veo que el gobierno de los Estados Unidos busca ese tercer país, hace el arreglo con ese tercer país y envía a las personas allá. Porque aunque esto sí ha estado en el estatuto siempre, Lourdes, y déjeme aclararlo, porque a veces las personas piensan que esta es la primera vez que ha ocurrido. Sí es primera vez que ocurre, que se envía y que el gobierno haga la gestión. Pero no es que esto no esté en el estatuto y se haya creado del día a la mañana. Esto siempre ha existido en el estatuto, sobre todo para las personas con withholding.

Ahora, el problema aquí, que es donde viene mucho la queja, es que muchas de esas personas que también están siendo enviadas allá no tienen tampoco un withholding. Son personas que vinieron a pedir aquí asilo y su país no las recibe de regreso. Entonces esa es otra situación por la que están mandando estas personas. Entonces es como una combinación de esas personas que tienen withholding y de los que les han negado alguna petición en los Estados Unidos y su país no los recibe de regreso.

No sé por qué se ve que los países que están mandando a Costa Rica, por ejemplo, ahora estos últimos, son de Albania, Camerún, China, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Kenia, Marruecos. Yo, como usted, me pregunto por qué. ¿Por qué Honduras aquí? Claro, caso de withholding.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Claro, un caso de withholding. Exacto. Bueno, lo interesante es que Costa Rica también está otorgando estatus migratorio a algunos de ellos porque en el 2025 recibieron 200 deportados de Estados Unidos y a 85 les dieron… perdón, de 285, fueron repatriados a sus países de origen, doctora. Es decir, lo que no logro entender es por qué no los repatrian directamente de Estados Unidos a sus países. Imagino que será por lo que usted explica, y no pasar por un tercer país. En definitiva, muchos, en el caso de Costa Rica, se quedan en Costa Rica y les dan un estatus migratorio.

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Exacto. Es lo que Costa Rica… Lo que Costa Rica, creo entender, hizo con Estados Unidos es primero tratarlos humanamente y darles vivienda por una semana, revisar sus casos de asilo a ver si califican y, si no, enviarlos a otros países, pero no a países donde vayan a recibir una persecución.

No me imagino… es que a lo último los que hayan sido repatriados a su propio país es que tal vez al fin hicieron algún arreglo con su país, o la persona dijo: “Bueno, me voy a mi país, prefiero irme a mi país que estar aquí”. Quién sabe cómo fue la situación. El punto es que sí les están revisando peticiones de asilo allá, en Costa Rica, a los que apliquen.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Estamos conversando con la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias, amigos oyentes, a esta hora con nosotros en vivo. Doctora, en la Florida se van a implementar cambios en las licencias de conducir. Amigos oyentes, atención con esto.

A partir del 1 de enero del 2027 comienza la aplicación de la ley HB 991. Lo hemos conversado en otros programas. Esta ley lo que establece es que todas las licencias e identificaciones emitidas en el estado de la Florida indicarán explícitamente si la persona portadora de esa identificación es ciudadana estadounidense o si posee otro estatus legal. Básicamente van a tener unas letricas que dicen “citizen” o “non-citizen”. Doctora, ¿qué le parece esto?

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Me parece… a ver, aquí yo digo: obviamente para el inmigrante que no tenga un estatus legal va a ser problemático, pero no es algo que vaya a causar tanto revuelo, pienso yo, porque hoy en día muchas personas que no tienen un estatus legal igual no pueden obtener la licencia. Los que obtienen la licencia son residentes o ciudadanos o tienen un estatus legal, como alguna visa de turista, digo, de inversionista, de estudiante, cualquier visa que le da ese estatus. Entonces, de pronto no es lo más impactante, porque ya hemos visto que Florida ha sido muy estricta en otorgar licencias a personas sin estatus.

Lo que sí me parece a mí impactante que va a ser es la persona que se haya arriesgado o haya sido tan… bueno, no sé qué palabra usar que no sea una palabra de locura, pero una persona que se haya arriesgado, una persona que tenga la locura de sacar una licencia de conducir diciendo que es ciudadano americano. Ahí sí lo van a coger con una prueba contundente para una posible deportación.

Y déjeme explicarlo, Lourdes. Yo he tenido casos donde la persona ha usado un certificado de nacimiento de una persona de Puerto Rico, por ejemplo, diciendo que es ciudadano americano, y sacan la licencia. Lo que pasa es que a veces es difícil para el gobierno probarle a la persona que hizo eso, porque aunque ese certificado figura en ese archivo de la persona con Florida, con el Departamento de Motores y Vehículos, ahí había formas, sobre todo antes, de lograr una defensa.

Ya cuando usted tiene una licencia de conducir con una foto que diga que es ciudadano americano, si esa persona cometió fraude, ahí sí va a ser súper fácil que el gobierno le pruebe a esa persona el fraude. Entonces aquí yo voy con esto: sí le debería dar mucho temor a aquellos que les gusta hacer esas cosas locas, porque aquí sí va a ser una prueba contundente. Uno.

Dos, otra cosa. Lo que yo pienso: las personas que tienen, sobre todo los jóvenes, Lourdes, los jóvenes, por Dios, o que los papás que nos escuchan les digan a los jóvenes que tengan mucho cuidado en votar en una elección federal, estatal o local sin preguntar siquiera si son ciudadanos o no.

Aunque parezca no lógico, pasa muchísimas veces y lo he visto miles de veces. Porque fíjese usted: un joven llega a los Estados Unidos muy jovencito, de dos años, tres años, qué sé yo. El papá y la mamá son ciudadanos americanos. El joven nunca se hizo ciudadano, pero él tiene en su mente que este es su país, habla inglés perfecto, vive acá y piensa que puede votar. Y llega al colegio y le dicen: “Mira, es hora de registrarse”, no sé qué, y lo registran, como ocurría antes. O quién sabe yo quién lo llama y lo registra, y ese joven vota. Dios mío, ¿cómo le parece? Si ese joven vota, en eso queda registrado como que votó o dijo que era ciudadano americano sin serlo. Y eso es deportación sin derecho a tener un perdón, Lourdes. Eso va deportado de por vida.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Termina en deportación sin derecho a perdón.

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
¿Cómo le parece? Entonces aquí es donde digo yo: más aún hoy en día, los jóvenes deben protegerse y tener cuidado, porque ellos van a tener una licencia y no van a poder decir al departamento olímpicamente: “Es que yo soy ciudadano”. Obviamente siempre hay que probarlo, pero tienen que tener todavía más cuidado.

O sea que es una medida que va a impactar muchas cosas en la parte migratoria, pero también aquellos que son amigos de lo no bueno o de lo no correcto tienen que tener todavía más cuidado, porque ahora sí es más difícil.

Lourdes, yo estaba leyendo un resumen de ese proyecto, ese bill, de esa ley que pasó. Fíjese, hay una cosa que me llama la atención dentro de muchas, pero esta tiene que ver también con los inmigrantes, y es que aquellos que vayan a ser candidatos y que tengan doble ciudadanía lo van a tener que expresar también al Departamento de Motores y Vehículos. Eso me suena un poquito complicado. No sé si es que les van a impedir que sean… que sean candidatos. ¿Qué es eso? ¿Por qué se requería? Porque para mí todas las cosas tienen un porqué, ¿cierto? ¿Por qué ese requerimiento?

Yo sé que a nivel federal hay ciertos cargos que una persona que no nació en los Estados Unidos no puede ejercer, como el de la presidencia. Otros cargos sí. Entonces, ¿por qué aquí les van a pedir que publiquen ante el Departamento de Motores y Vehículos su doble ciudadanía?

Otra cosa, eso es para los candidatos que vayan a ser candidatos a un cargo público. Y habla también, dice —y mira, está aquí interesante— a partir de julio 1 se crea un estatuto de limitación de cinco años para las personas que hayan sido acusadas o convictas de una felonía en violación al código electoral. Esto también es algo interesante.

¿Por qué? Porque quiere decir que va a haber un statute of limitations, que quiere decir como una fecha límite en que se pueden presentar cargos en contra de una persona que haya violado el estatuto o el código electoral como felonía. Entonces me parece a mí que en estos cinco años, a partir de julio 1 del 2026 —porque esa parte del bill empieza ahora en julio— las personas que hayan cometido alguna violación en el estatuto electoral van a poder recibir unos cargos de felonía.

Y esto es delicado porque, volviendo al punto de esos jóvenes que no sabían o que no sé qué, pueden recibir esas notificaciones de haber cometido una felonía. ¿Cuál sería el consejo? Hablen con su abogado. Y aquí van a necesitar dos abogados: el abogado penal, el abogado criminalista, y el abogado de inmigración, para que los dos manejen esto de una forma que posiblemente esa persona no tenga unas consecuencias mayores.

Por eso esta empieza a partir de julio. O sea que no solamente tenemos la parte de las licencias de conducir, hay muchas otras cosas que, sobre todo en cuanto a las elecciones y a los candidatos, van a tener también unos efectos muy interesantes, diría yo —no tengo una palabra más específica que “interesantes”— realmente van a ser delicados o sensibles, esa es la palabra, para muchos inmigrantes.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Aquí tengo un oyente que nos dice que la embajada de los Estados Unidos en República Dominicana ha hecho énfasis en decir la verdad y no presentar documentos falsos. Parece que hay casos de fraude de visa de Estados Unidos y dicen que el fraude en solicitudes de visa no solo afecta oportunidades migratorias, sino que también te puede llevar a procesos judiciales y a penas de prisión en República Dominicana.

La embajada de los Estados Unidos —el fraude de visa de Estados Unidos puede cerrar las puertas de por vida— está advirtiendo la embajada de los Estados Unidos en Santo Domingo. Han alertado sobre las graves consecuencias de cometer fraude en esas solicitudes de visa. Volvemos a lo de siempre, al primer punto. Mentir en una solicitud de cualquier tipo de documento en Estados Unidos es una felonía.

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Exacto. Y tiene que tener cuidado porque ahora, más que nunca, con el proceso de desnaturalización —que es otra de las metas del gobierno actual— pueden revisar o revisitar todas esas aplicaciones migratorias de las personas para determinar si esa persona cometió fraude o mintió.

Fíjese lo delicado de esto. Fraude, obviamente, implica un poquito más. Es una conducta todavía que la persona tiene que hacer un poco más. Misrepresentation o mentir es distinto, porque es simplemente algo que la persona haya dicho bajo juramento a un oficial de inmigración o que lo haya puesto en las aplicaciones, que también son bajo juramento.

Entonces, si una persona mintió o cometió algo que se llama misrepresentation, también puede tener esta consecuencia tan fuerte. Ahí es donde vengo yo, como abogada, y le digo a las personas: hoy más que nunca tengan cuidado. ¿A quién le dan su caso de inmigración? ¿A quién? Hay mucha gente que es la señora de la esquina o de allí que llena aplicaciones y que no sé qué. Pues fíjese usted que si esa persona llena mal esa aplicación, va a tener estas consecuencias graves y hasta un proceso de desnaturalización, por lo menos durante esta administración.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Doctora, como siempre, un placer. Martha Arias, amigos oyentes, ustedes necesitan una abogada de inmigración. Martha Arias ahí está, lista para tomar sus consultas. Mis queridos amigos oyentes, si hay algo delicado es precisamente un proceso migratorio en los Estados Unidos, no solamente por los costos económicos —que sería lo de menos— sino lo que se te puede retrasar un proceso, una petición en los Estados Unidos, si haces algo mal. Y digamos, si es de buena fe, aun siendo de buena fe, ¿o no, doctora?, lo que se demora un trámite mal hecho en volver a echar ese trámite para atrás y comenzar nuevamente, deshacerlo… y saben que el tiempo pasa inexorablemente. Eso sí que no se recupera. Así que…

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Si me permiten un segundo, esta nota es importante: la administración actual ha ordenado a todos los oficiales de inmigración que, cuando se niegue una residencia, esa persona sea automáticamente enviada a un proceso de deportación a la corte. O sea que un proceso mal hecho ya no es como antes, que uno simplemente lo presenta otra vez. Ahora te vas para la corte directamente.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Imagínese usted. Bueno, demasiado riesgo. Martha Arias, gracias por acompañarnos en el día de hoy, doctora. Un placer, y un placer verla en streaming.

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Gracias, gracias. Un placer verla a usted y a todo el estudio. Me encantan todas las banderas.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Tiene que venir un día, que tenemos la de Colombia. Mira, ahí está.

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, yo veo la de Colombia allí. Sí, exacto.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Bueno, un gran abrazo, doctora.

DRA. MARTHA ARIAS:
Gracias. Feliz día a todos.

ENGLISH TRANSCRIPT

LOURDES UBIETA:
Well, two topics that I wanted to discuss with you, friends. Today the number of self-deported people has gone up to two million since President Trump’s administration, serving as number 47. Well… two million people have self-deported from the country. Of those millions who entered, mostly during President Biden’s administration, in addition to those two million who have self-deported, who have decided to leave, there is also a significant number of people who have been deported.

And within all of this immigration process, deportations of immigrants to third countries have begun. And many have already begun arriving in one of our countries, Costa Rica, right? A first group of immigrants deported from the United States to third countries arrived in Costa Rica. There were about 25 of them, citizens of Albania, Cameroon, China, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Kenya, Morocco. All those people had entered here, dear listeners, through the southern border. We knew who they were: Cameroon, Kenya, Morocco… well, deported, and they arrived in Costa Rica.

I want to welcome immigration attorney Martha Arias, who is with us at this hour. Attorney, it has been a long time since we talked. Welcome to your home.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, yes, Lourdes. Days without talking. A pleasure to speak with you and with all that audience. And even better, a pleasure to see you, because now we have…

LOURDES UBIETA:
There we have our immigration attorney on screen, dear listeners. It is no longer only hearing her, but now we see her. A pleasure, attorney.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, the same. Now we have put a face to the voice, that is it.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Welcome, as always, to your home. You know that we appreciate you very much here at Radio Libre and we thank you for having accompanied us for so long through all these immigration crises that we have had in recent times. And well, I wanted, first of all, to know your opinion, right?, because the figures that have reached us are two million — the number is not round, but almost — self-deported people, that is, people who have decided to leave the country. And then I understand that 900,000, correct me, attorney, if I am wrong, is the number of people who have indeed been deported effectively from the United States.

A process that for some is slow, for others, in the middle of so many people who have to be processed, well… I do not know how you see it, whether it seems to you that we are going fast, whether it seems to you that it is going slowly, how you see this process.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
I see that those figures appear to be real and a very close estimate. I suddenly think that the deported people may even be more, if we add those who are deported directly from the border, plus those that the judges are deporting. So I estimate that that figure is quite close, Lourdes. And what I also believe is that those quantities will increase even more soon.

The reason is that they are hiring more judges for these cases, which are the ones they call temporary judges. Last week, for example, I received a communication from the department of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, or as we call it, EOIR, by its initials, which said that 17 temporary judges and 19 new judges were sworn in. So if you add them up, there are more than 30 judges sworn in in one week who are obviously going to exercise functions as immigration judges to help in these mass deportation processes that the president announced and is carrying out.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Yes. In the year 2025, the figure being handled for deported people was 600,000. Between January 20 and December 31 of 2025. Fiscal year 2026, which is under way, which counts only October 2025 to February 2026, immigration judges have issued 262,021 deportation orders and voluntary departures.

There are also ICE arrests during the first year of the Trump administration, arrests carried out for having… do you remember?, or having applied voluntary departures. In short, there is a topic that is also the nationality of the people. Basically we are speaking of nationals of Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, but also of other African countries, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

In this process that is in full, let us say, in full execution, and we see the use of third countries, attorney, in this case Costa Rica, when a person is deported to a third country, what is the objective of that? Why can that person not be deported to…? Because here there are nationals of Guatemala and Honduras. Instead of being deported to their own countries, why are they deported to a third country like Costa Rica?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Well, it may be that these people were approved for withholding of removal. Most of those are the cases. Withholding of removal is a deportation that is not carried out, it is held back, because the person may receive future persecution in his or her country.

So that figure of withholding of removal, which is very similar to asylum… The difference is that in asylum the person had past persecution and is going to have future persecution. In withholding, the person is going to have future persecution.

When they give withholding to the person, the person can live and work in the United States, but the statute does authorize that that person can be sent to a third country that is not the person’s country from which he or she asked for withholding, where his or her life is in danger, and this if that third country receives the person.

So, historically, withholding… this is the first time, at least in my 23 years that I have been practicing as an immigration attorney, that I see the government of the United States seek that third country, make the arrangement with that third country, and send the people there. Because although this has indeed always been in the statute, Lourdes, and let me clarify it, because sometimes people think that this is the first time that this has happened. Yes, it is the first time that it happens, that people are sent and that the government makes the arrangement. But it is not that this is not in the statute and that it was created from one day to the next. This has always existed in the statute, especially for people with withholding.

Now, the problem here, which is where much of the complaint comes from, is that many of those people who are also being sent there do not have withholding either. They are people who came here to request asylum and their country will not receive them back. So that is another situation for which they are sending these people. So it is like a combination of those people who have withholding and those whose petition in the United States has been denied and whose country will not receive them back.

I do not know why it is seen that the countries they are sending to Costa Rica, for example, now these latest ones, are from Albania, Cameroon, China, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Kenya, Morocco. I, like you, ask myself why. Why Honduras here? Of course, a withholding case.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Of course, a withholding case. Exactly. Well, what is interesting is that Costa Rica is also granting immigration status to some of them because in 2025 they received 200 deportees from the United States and 85 were given… pardon me, of 285, they were repatriated to their countries of origin, attorney. That is to say, what I cannot understand is why they do not repatriate them directly from the United States to their countries. I imagine it will be because of what you explain and not pass through a third country. In the end, many, in the case of Costa Rica, stay in Costa Rica and are given an immigration status.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactly. It is what Costa Rica… What Costa Rica, I understand, did with the United States is first to treat them humanely and give them housing for a week, review their asylum cases to see if they qualify, and if not, send them to other countries, but not to countries where they are going to receive persecution.

I cannot imagine… it is that in the end those who were repatriated to their own country may be that they finally made some arrangement with their country, or the person said, “Well, I am going to my country, I prefer to go to my country than stay here.” Who knows how the situation was. The point is that they are indeed reviewing asylum petitions there, in Costa Rica, for those who apply.

LOURDES UBIETA:
We are speaking with immigration attorney Martha Arias, dear listeners, at this hour with us live. Attorney, in Florida changes are going to be implemented in driver’s licenses. Dear listeners, pay attention to this.

As of January 1, 2027, implementation of law HB 991 begins. We have discussed it in other programs. What this law establishes is that all licenses and identifications issued in the state of Florida will explicitly indicate whether the person carrying that identification is a United States citizen or whether he or she has another legal status. Basically they are going to have little letters that say “citizen” or “non-citizen.” Attorney, what do you think of this?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
It seems to me… let us see, here I say: obviously for the immigrant who does not have legal status it is going to be problematic, but it is not something that is going to cause so much upheaval, I think, because today many people who do not have legal status still cannot obtain the license. Those who obtain the license are residents or citizens or have a legal status, such as some tourist visa, I mean, investor visa, student visa, any visa that gives that status. So, suddenly, it is not the most shocking thing because we have already seen that Florida has been very strict in granting licenses to people without status.

What does seem shocking to me is the person who took the risk or was so… well, I do not know what word to use that is not a word of craziness, but a person who took the risk, a person who has the madness to get a driver’s license saying he or she is an American citizen. There they are really going to catch that person with solid proof for a possible deportation.

And let me explain it, Lourdes. I have had cases where the person used a birth certificate of a person from Puerto Rico, for example, saying that he or she is an American citizen, and they get the license. What happens is that sometimes it is difficult for the government to prove to the person that he or she did that, because although that certificate appears in that file, in that record of the person with Florida, with the Department of Motor Vehicles, there were ways there, especially before, of achieving a defense.

Once you have a driver’s license with a photo that says that you are an American citizen, if that person committed fraud, then it is going to be super easy for the government to prove that fraud to that person. So here is where I go with this: it should give a lot of fear to those who like to do those crazy things, because here it is indeed going to be strong proof. One.

Two, another thing. What I think: the people who have, especially the young people, Lourdes, the young people, for God’s sake, or that the parents who are listening to us tell the young people to be very careful about voting in a federal, state, or local election without even asking whether they are citizens or not.

Even though it may seem illogical, it happens many times and I have seen it thousands of times. Because look: a young person arrives in the United States very young, at two years old, three years old, who knows. The father and mother are American citizens. The young person never became a citizen, but he has in his mind that this is his country, he speaks perfect English, he lives here and thinks he can vote. And he gets to school and they say, “Look, it is time to register,” I do not know what, and they register him, as used to happen before. Or who knows who calls him and registers him, and that young person votes. My God, what do you think? If that young person votes, then it remains recorded that he voted or said that he was an American citizen without being one. And that is deportation without the right to have a waiver, Lourdes. That one goes deported for life.

LOURDES UBIETA:
It ends in deportation without the right to a waiver.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
What do you think? So here is where I say: even more so today, young people must protect themselves and be careful, because they are going to have a license and they are not going to be able to say to the department, with complete ease, “It is that I am a citizen.” Obviously it always has to be proven, but they have to be even more careful.

So it is a measure that is going to impact many things in the immigration part, but also those who are friends of what is not good or not correct have to be even more careful, because now it is indeed more difficult.

Lourdes, I was reading a summary of that project, that bill, of that law that passed. Look, there is one thing that catches my attention among many, but this also has to do with immigrants, and it is that those who are going to be candidates and who have dual citizenship are going to have to express it also to the Department of Motor Vehicles. That sounds a little complicated to me. I do not know if they are going to prevent them from being… from being candidates. What is that? Why was that required? Because to me everything has a reason, right? Why that requirement?

I know that at the federal level there are certain offices that a person who was not born in the United States cannot exercise, like the presidency. Others yes. So why here are they going to ask them to publish before the Department of Motor Vehicles their dual citizenship?

Another thing, that is for candidates who are going to be candidates for public office. And it also speaks, it says — and look, this is interesting — starting on July 1 a five-year statute of limitations is created for people who have been accused or convicted of a felony in violation of the election code. This is also something interesting.

Why? Because it means that there is going to be a statute of limitations, which means like a deadline within which charges can be brought against a person who has violated the statute or the election code as a felony. So it seems to me that in these five years, starting July 1, 2026 — because that part of the bill begins now in July — people who may have committed some violation in the election statute are going to be able to receive felony charges.

And this is delicate because, returning to the point of those young people who did not know or who, I do not know, may receive those notifications of having committed a felony. What would the advice be? Speak with your attorney. And here they are going to need two attorneys: the criminal attorney and the immigration attorney, so that the two of them handle this in a way that possibly that person does not have greater consequences.

That is why this starts in July. So we not only have the driver’s license part, there are many other things that, especially in terms of elections and candidates, are also going to have very interesting effects, I would say — I do not have a more specific word than “interesting” — they are really going to be delicate or sensitive, that is the word, for many immigrants.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Here I have a listener who tells us that the United States Embassy in the Dominican Republic has emphasized telling the truth and not presenting false documents. It seems there are cases of United States visa fraud and they say that fraud in visa applications not only affects immigration opportunities, but can also lead you to judicial proceedings and prison sentences in the Dominican Republic.

The United States Embassy — United States visa fraud can close the doors for life — the United States Embassy in Santo Domingo is warning. They have alerted about the serious consequences of committing fraud in those visa applications. We return to the usual, to the first point. Lying on an application for any type of document in the United States is a felony.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactly. And you have to be careful because now, more than ever, with the denaturalization process — which is another of the goals of the current government — they can review or revisit all those immigration applications of people to determine whether that person committed fraud or lied.

Look how delicate this is. Fraud, obviously, implies a little more. It is a conduct that the person has to do a little more. Misrepresentation or lying is different, because it is simply something that the person may have said under oath to an immigration officer or may have placed in the applications, which are also under oath.

So if a person lied or committed something called misrepresentation, that person can also have this very strong consequence. That is where I come in, as an attorney, and tell people: today more than ever be careful. To whom do you give your immigration case? To whom? There are many people who are the lady on the corner or over there who fills out applications and I do not know what. Well, notice that if that person fills out that application badly, it is going to have these serious consequences and even a denaturalization process, at least during this administration.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Attorney, as always, a pleasure. Martha Arias, dear listeners, if you need an immigration attorney, Martha Arias is there, ready to take your consultations. My dear listeners, if there is something delicate, it is precisely an immigration process in the United States, not only because of the economic costs — which would be the least of it — but also because of how much a process or petition in the United States can be delayed if you do something wrong. And let us say, if it is in good faith, even being in good faith, right, attorney?, how long a poorly done filing takes to set that filing back and start again, undo it… and you know that time passes inexorably. That is what cannot be recovered. So…

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
If you allow me one second, this note is important: the current administration has ordered all immigration officers that when a residency is denied, that person is automatically sent to a deportation process in court. So a badly done process is no longer like before, when one simply filed it again. Now you go to court directly.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Just imagine. Well, too much risk. Martha Arias, thank you for joining us today, attorney. A pleasure, and a pleasure to see you on streaming.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Thank you, thank you. A pleasure to see you and the whole studio. I love all the flags.

LOURDES UBIETA:
You have to come one day when we have the Colombian one. Look, there it is.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, I see the Colombian flag there. Yes, exactly.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Well, a big hug, attorney.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Thank you. Happy day to everyone.

The post Third-Country Deportations, Florida License Changes, and the Risks of Misrepresentation appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

New U.S. Citizenship Test in 2025 What You Need to Know

Martha Arias — Mon, 22 Sep 2025 20:19:40 +0000

Last Friday, I had the pleasure of joining Lourdes Ubieta on Radio Libre 790 to discuss the important changes recently announced regarding the U.S. naturalization test.

As many of you know, passing the civics test is a key step toward becoming a U.S. citizen. Under the new rules, which go into effect on October 20, 2025, applicants will face a more demanding process. Instead of answering 6 out of 10 questions correctly, applicants will now have to answer 12 out of 20 questions correctly. The pool of study questions will also expand from 100 to 128 questions.

There are also exemptions: If you are 65 years or older and have lived in the United States as a lawful permanent resident for at least 20 years, you will continue to take a simplified test. You will be given 10 questions drawn from a specially selected set of 20, and you must answer 6 correctly to pass.

During my conversation with Lourdes, we also reflected on the role of “good moral character” in naturalization. This remains a legal requirement, and USCIS carefully reviews applicants’ history. While there is much speculation about expanded background investigations, what is certain is that applicants should be mindful of their public conduct, both offline and online.

If you are preparing for your citizenship exam, I encourage you to stay informed and prepare carefully. Becoming a U.S. citizen is an important milestone, and it is worth taking the time to study and understand the process.

If you have questions about your own case, please reach out to my office at (305) 671-0018 or follow me on social media. I am here to guide you through every step of your journey toward citizenship.

DISCLAIMER: This post is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration laws and policies can change frequently, and the details provided here may not apply to every individual situation. If you are seeking citizenship or have questions about your case, you should consult directly with a qualified immigration attorney.

References

USCIS – 2025 Civics Test Overview
https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship-resource-center/naturalization-test-and-study-resources/2025-civics-test

USCIS – Check for Test Updates
https://www.uscis.gov/citizenship/find-study-materials-and-resources/check-for-test-updates

USCIS – News Release: Naturalization Test Changes (2025)
https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/news-releases/uscis-unveils-first-changes-to-naturalization-test-in-multi-step-overhaul-of-american-citizenship

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Spanish Transcript

Lourdes Ubieta:
Queridos oyentes, si ustedes están en el proceso de hacerse ciudadanos americanos, los felicito. Hay que hacerse ciudadano americano. Parte de ese proceso es hacer un examen. Hacer un examen, cuando yo hice mi examen. En esa época, hace muchos años, era un CD, ya ni los CDs existen. Y yo lo metía en el carro y todo lo que iba, el tiempo que iba manejando, iba escuchando todas las preguntas y toda la información para uno hacer su examen y pasarlo, ¿verdad? Hay gente que lo raspan en el examen de ciudadanía. Pero bueno, ahora la noticia es que hay un nuevo examen para obtener la ciudadanía estadounidense.
Y entiendo que entra en vigor este mismo mes de octubre y ahora los solicitantes van a tener que responder correctamente 12 de 20 preguntas en lugar de 6 de 10 como era antes.
Pero a mí me hicieron más de 6 preguntas cuando yo hice mi examen. Ah, porque son 6 de 10. Te hacen 10 y tienes que contestar bien 6. Bueno, está bien. Me parece bien. O sea, si vas a hacerte ciudadano americano… tienes que saber cuántos miembros hay en la Corte Suprema, qué significan las estrellas, saber del himno nacional y qué sé yo. Las preguntas de la, no recuerdo mucho más de las preguntas de cuántos congresistas hay, cuántos senadores hay, cómo se divide el gobierno, qué quiere decir que los estados sean independientes grandes temas del gobierno federal, etcétera. Vamos a la bienvenida a la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias. Ella está con nosotros, amigos oyentes, si ustedes están en cualquiera de estos procesos, llámenla Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración. Ahí está ahora con nosotros, doctora. Bienvenida. Qué bueno que me acompaña. Muchas gracias.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Buenos días. Un placer estar con ustedes. Gracias por invitarme. Saludos para usted, Lourdes.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Igualmente para usted. Y a la audiencia. Igualmente para usted siempre bienvenida doctora gracias por su tiempo. Bueno, hay cambios, hay cambios introducidos por la administración del presidente Trump que se concentran en las consultas que el funcionario de USCIS le hará oralmente a los solicitantes. Ahora van a ser 12 de 20 antes eran 6 de 10. ¿Qué sabemos de esto?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno lo que sabemos es que, a ver, hoy estamos a 19, el 17 fue publicado en el Registro Federal el anuncio sobre el cambio del examen de ciudadanía. Según están mirando, son 30 días después de la publicación que entra en vigencia. Estoy viendo que están publicando que a partir del 20 de octubre entra en vigencia este nuevo examen. Como usted bien lo dijo, van a hacer más preguntas. En vez de estudiar 100 preguntas, que es lo que hay hoy, van a tener que estudiar 128. De esas 128 les van a hacer hasta 20 preguntas; de esas 20 preguntas tienen que pasar doce. Hoy en día son hasta diez preguntas y de las diez tienen que pasar seis. Este es uno de los cambios. Entonces, el número de preguntas a estudiar y el número de preguntas a responder.
También otro, se considera, pues que otro de los cambios es que van a poder ya entrar en aquellas entrevistas o investigaciones vecinales donde la persona va a poder, más bien el servicio de inmigración va a poder hacer preguntas a los vecinos de ese aplicante, para determinar el buen carácter moral del aplicante. Yo personalmente no pienso, pues es que a todos los que apliquen vayan a ir a tocarle al vecino a preguntar si es buena gente o no. Yo me imagino que habrán algunos temas dentro de la aplicación de una persona que de pronto lleve a inmigración a tomar esa decisión de hacer esa investigación vecinal. Pienso pues que ojalá que sea así, porque pues tampoco creo que al azar si una persona no tiene ningún recorrido criminal. Si tú eres vicio, pues no creo que al azar vayan a estar haciendo eso.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Aleatorio, ¿verdad?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Imagínate usted. entonces es una locura.

Lourdes Ubieta:
O sea, básicamente estamos hablando que las modificaciones incluirían entonces esa consulta a vecinos y entiendo que también a compañeros de trabajo sobre el carácter moral de estas personas, la constancia de no haber hecho algún tipo de comentarios contra los Estados Unidos. Pero ¿cómo se puede probar eso a menos que lo hayan publicado en redes sociales, no que hayan hecho comentarios contra, qué sé yo, contra los símbolos patrios, contra la administración de justicia, contra el sistema de salud, qué sé yo, contra qué, ¿no? ¿Y de qué manera? Porque ¿cómo se prueba eso? Me imagino que redes sociales nada más, ¿no?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Yo creo que puede haber otros campos. Además de las redes sociales, también, por ejemplo, en la misma radio. O sea, nosotros, usted, Lourdes, yo y todos los que de alguna forma estemos en la radio informando la ley o algo pues también si alguien lo llama nos llaman a dar una opinión en la radio o en televisión pues también tienen que estar atentos a ello además de la radio y las redes sociales hay personas que escriben o emiten artículos sean en las universidades o en mismas asociaciones.
Entonces, también yo digo que artículos escritos sean a nivel interno de organización o sean publicados en algún sitio, revista o algo, pues también van a tener que tener cuidado. Pero fíjate, a mí lo que me parece aquí es que a veces hay como lo que llaman double standard, como una doble faz, porque yo estoy viendo el otro día estaba viendo una activista precisamente ya es de nacionalidad colombiana que estaba posteando cosas, por ejemplo quemando un corán y diciendo que todas las personas que tenían esa religión pues no deberían existir básicamente para yo no decir otra palabra más fea.
Eso también es feo, eso también es, creo que irrespetuoso. O sea, si por ejemplo a nosotros no nos guste, yo no, puede ser no adepta a esa religión, pero pues hay que respetar o por lo menos no llegar a esos extremos de violencia, de expresar ese pensamiento en forma tan violenta. Otra cosa que vi, por ejemplo, de esta activista es que tenía un inmigrante sentado vendado y disparó al inmigrante y dijo, ah, bueno, esto es más barato que deportarlo. O sea, eso me parece a mí que son expresiones muy feas, muy violentas, poco empáticas del ser humano. Y yo pienso que esas personas también deberían ser sancionadas, que no es solamente quien hable del gobierno. Yo pienso que tenemos que tener un centro, cierto, son más unas opiniones muy fuertes también.
Bueno, a las redes sociales y todo lo que van a estar mirando los vecinos pues eso será interesante. Será interesante verlo. Será interesante verlo porque yo como abogada, si igual estoy defendiendo a un cliente y me dicen que un vecino dijo esto, pues bajo la ley de inmigración. Hay no hay inmigración bajo la ley Lourdes. Hay un principio que se llama hearsay. Está dentro del código de evidencias. Hay un código de evidencias que dice, pues, cómo uno prueba lo que tiene que probar. Dentro del código hay una figura que se llama “hearsay”. “Hearsay” es como escuché decir. Esa sería la traducción en español. Escuché decir. Entonces, la por ley las cortes no deben en la mayoría de los casos aceptar “hearsay”, es decir, cosas que alguien dijo que no les está diciendo bajo juramento en la corte. Entonces ese vecino que va y dice, ay, sí, yo veo ese señor que todos los días hace fiesta y toma todos los días o fuma sustancias indebidas todos los días, por ejemplo.
Entonces, ¿qué pasa? Que esa persona tiene derecho a confrontar a ese vecino y en una corte. Si alguien va a ir a testificar, tiene que jurar bajo juramento que está diciendo la verdad. Entonces esas investigaciones me asustan, Lourdes, porque es que esa persona que está echándole cuenta que no está bajo juramento y que tal que sea mentiroso, que tal que tenga un problema mental o que odie al vecino. O sea, hasta qué punto esas investigaciones vecinales van a ser realmente.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Yo no creo que eso vaya a ser procedente. Y verdaderamente ahora algo importante aquí, ¿quiénes quedan exentos de este examen? Los inmigrantes mayores de 65 años, atención con esto, que hayan permanecido como residentes permanentes de Estados Unidos por al menos 20 años, serán evaluados con la prueba antigua, la de solo 10 preguntas que estarán incluidas en una guía de estudio de 20 ítems con contenidos del examen del 2008 y del 25. Y dependiendo de su fecha de presentación de ciudadanía, estos extranjeros solo necesitarán responder correctamente seis preguntas para aprobar. Esto lo indica la norma oficial. Así que si usted es mayor de 65 años, tiene 20 años de residente en los Estados Unidos y se quiere ser su ciudadano, su examen va a ser solo de 10 preguntas.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Eso es un cambio también, Lourdes, porque en la norma actual, si una persona tiene más de 20 años de residente y más de 65 de edad, tiene que tomar un examen que son solo 20 preguntas que se estudian y de esas 20 solo le hacen 5. Entonces fíjate, también es un cambio porque entonces están aumentando de 20 a 100.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Una más…

Abogada Martha Arias:
No, una más, no. Ya van a estudiar.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Claro, pero de 5 a 6 que tienen que aprobar.

Abogada Martha Arias:
De 5 a 6, bueno de 5 que le hacen tienen que aprobar 3.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Ah, yo entendí aquí no, aquí es 6 tienen que aprobar 6.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Y tienen que estudiar las 100 que se estudian y no las 20 que son las que estudie hoy en día uno mayor de 65 años y 20 residentes hay un examen solamente que estudian más 20 preguntas y de estas 20 le hacen 5. Según eso van a estudiar 100 y de esos 100 le van a hacer 10. O sea, va a ser como el que estaba hoy para el resto de la gente. Así también hay un cambio.

Lourdes Ubieta:
Doctora Martha Arias, gracias por acompañarme en el programa abogada de inmigración amigos oyentes. Si ustedes están en ese proceso que tienen que hacer su examen, consulten a la abogada Martha Arias, nuestra abogada de migración en Radio Libre. Gracias. Feliz fin de semana, doctora.

English Translation

Lourdes Ubieta:

Dear listeners, if you are in the process of becoming American citizens, congratulations. One must become an American citizen. Part of that process is taking a test. Take a test, when I took my test. At that time, many years ago, it was a CD, CDs don’t even exist anymore. And I used to put it in the car and all the time I was driving, I was listening to all the questions and all the information so one could do their test and pass it, right? There are people who fail the citizenship test. But well, now the news is that there is a new test to obtain American citizenship.

And I understand that it comes into effect this October and now the applicants will have to answer correctly 12 out of 20 questions instead of 6 out of 10 as it was before.

But they asked me more than 6 questions when I took my test. Oh, because it’s 6 out of 10. They ask you 10 and you have to answer 6 correctly. Well, that is fine. I think that is fair. I mean, if you are going to become an American citizen… you have to know how many members there are in the Supreme Court, what the stars mean, know the national anthem and what else. The questions about, I don’t remember much more of the questions about how many congressmen there are, how many senators there are, how government is divided, what it means that the states are independent big topics of the federal government, etcetera. Let’s welcome the immigration attorney Martha Arias. She is with us, friends listeners, if any of you are in any of these processes, call her Martha Arias, immigration attorney. There she is now with us, attorney. Welcome. It’s great that you accompany me. Thank you very much.

Attorney Martha Arias:

Good morning. A pleasure to be with you. Thank you for inviting me. Greetings to you, Lourdes.

Lourdes Ubieta:

Same to you. And to the audience. Likewise to you, always welcome attorney, thanks for your time. Well, there are changes, there are changes introduced by President Trump’s administration that focus on the inquiries that the USCIS official will make orally to the applicants. Now they will be 12 out of 20, before it was 6 out of 10. What do we know about this?

Attorney Martha Arias:

Well what we know is that, let’s see, today is the 19th, the 17th the announcement about the change of the citizenship test was published in the Federal Register. According to what they are seeing, it is 30 days after the publication that it goes into effect. I’m seeing that they are publishing that starting October 20 this new test goes into effect. As you well said, they are going to ask more questions. Instead of studying 100 questions, which is what there is today, they will have to study 128. Of those 128 they will ask up to 20 questions; out of those 20 questions they have to pass twelve. Today there are up to ten questions and out of the ten they have to pass six. This is one of the changes. So, the number of questions to study and the number of questions to answer.

Also another, it is considered, well that one of the changes is that they will be able to enter in those neighborhood interviews or investigations where the person will be able, rather the immigration service will be able to ask questions of the neighbors of that applicant, to determine the moral good character of the applicant. I personally don’t think, well that to all who apply they will go knock on people’s homes to ask if they are good people or not. I imagine that there will be certain issues within the application of a person that might lead immigration to choose to make that neighborhood investigation. I think well that I hope that that is the case, because also I don’t believe that at random if a person doesn’t have any criminal record. If you are vice, well I don’t believe that at random they will be doing that.

Lourdes Ubieta:

Random, right?

Attorney Martha Arias:

Imagine, you. Then it’s madness.

Lourdes Ubieta:

That is to say, basically we are speaking that the modifications would include then that consultation with neighbors and I understand also coworkers about the moral character of these people, the proof of not having made some type of comments against the United States. But how can that be proven unless they have published it on social media, not that they have made comments against, say, the patriotic symbols, against the justice system, against the health system, say, against what, right? And in what way? Because how is that proven? I imagine social media only, right?

Attorney Martha Arias:

I believe that there can be other fields. In addition to social media, also, for example, on radio itself. I mean, us, you, Lourdes, me, and everyone who in some way is on the radio informing the law or something well also if someone calls us they call us to give an opinion on the radio or on television well also they have to be attentive to that. In addition to radio and social media there are people who write or issue articles whether in universities or in the same associations.

So also I say that written articles whether at internal organization level or published somewhere, journal or something, well also they will have to be careful. But look, what seems to me here is that sometimes there is what they call double standard, like a double face, because I was seeing the other day there was an activist, precisely already of Colombian nationality who was posting things for example burning a Qur’an and saying that all people who had that religion well should not exist basically for me to not say another more ugly word.

That also is ugly, that also is, I believe disrespectful. I mean, if for example we don’t like it, I don’t, perhaps I do not adhere to that religion, but well one must respect or at least not reach those extremes of violence, of expressing that thought in such violent form. Another thing I saw, for example, of this activist is that she had an immigrant sitting blindfolded and she shot the immigrant and said, ah, well, this is cheaper than deporting him. I mean, that to me seems very ugly, very violent expressions, little empathy from a human being. And I think that those people likewise should be sanctioned; that it is not only who talks about the government. I think that we have to have a center, right, they are more very strong opinions as well.

Well, social media and everything they will be looking at, neighbors, well that will be interesting. It will be interesting to see. It will be interesting to see because I as an attorney, if I likewise am defending a client and they tell me that a neighbor said this, well under immigration law. There is not immigration under the law Lourdes. There is a principle called hearsay. It is inside the rules of evidence. There is an evidence code that says, well, how one proves what one has to prove. Inside the code there is a figure called “hearsay”. “Hearsay” is like “I heard somebody say.” That would be the translation in Spanish. I heard people say. So, by law the courts in most cases should not accept “hearsay”, that is things that someone said that are not telling you under oath in court. So that neighbor who goes and says, oh yes, I see that gentleman who every day has a party and drinks every day or smokes illegal substances every day, for example.

Then what happens? That person has the right to confront that neighbor and in a court. If someone is going to testify, they have to swear under oath that they are telling the truth. So those neighborhood investigations frighten me, Lourdes, because it is that the person is realizing that they are not under oath and that maybe they are lying, maybe they have a mental problem or maybe they hate the neighbor. I mean, up to what point are those neighborhood investigations really.

Lourdes Ubieta:

I don’t believe that that will be applicable. And truly now something important here, who are exempt from this test? Immigrants older than 65 years, attention with this, who have remained as permanent residents of the United States for at least 20 years, will be evaluated with the old test, the one with only 10 questions, which will be included in a study guide of 20 items with contents from the 2008 and 2025 exam. And depending on their citizenship application filing date, these foreigners will only need to answer correctly six questions to pass. This is what the official rule indicates. So if you are older than 65, have 20 years as resident in the United States and want to become a citizen, your test will be only 10 questions.

Attorney Martha Arias:

That is a change also, Lourdes, because in the current rule, if a person has more than 20 years of residence and over 65 in age, they have to take a test which is only 20 questions that are studied and of those 20 only 5 are asked. So notice, also it’s a change because then they are increasing from 20 to 100.

Lourdes Ubieta:

One more…

Attorney Martha Arias:

No, one more, no. They already will study.

Lourdes Ubieta:

Of course, but from 5 to 6 that they have to pass.

Attorney Martha Arias:

From 5 to 6, well of the 5 that they ask they have to pass 3.

Lourdes Ubieta:

Ah, I understood here no, here it is 6 they have to pass 6.

Attorney Martha Arias:

And they have to study the 100 that are studied and not the 20 that are what one older than 65 years and 20 resident has a test only that they study more 20 questions and of those 20 they ask 5. According to that they will study 100 and from those 100 they will ask 10. I mean, it will be like what it is today for everybody else. So also there is a change.

Lourdes Ubieta:

Attorney Martha Arias, thank you for joining me on the program Immigration Attorney Friends Listeners. If you are in that process that you have to do your test, consult attorney Martha Arias, our immigration attorney on Radio Libre. Thank you. Happy weekend, attorney.

The post New U.S. Citizenship Test in 2025 What You Need to Know appeared first on Miami Immigration Lawyer - Attorney Martha L. Arias, Esq..

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

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?

Adjustment of Status vs. Consular Processing

Should People Leave the United States Now?

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

A Note About Dual-Intent Visas

What About Cases Already Pending?

What Documents May Help Support a Discretionary Adjustment Case?

A Human Reality Behind the Law

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Is adjustment of status still available?

Does being eligible mean my green card will be approved?

Will every applicant now have to leave the United States?

What is consular processing?

Is consular processing safe for everyone?

What does “extraordinary circumstances” mean?

Does this affect spouses of U.S. citizens?

Does this affect people who entered with tourist visas?

Does this affect students?

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

What if my Form I-485 is already pending?

Should I withdraw my adjustment of status application?

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

What if I have a criminal record?

What if I overstayed my visa?

What if I cannot safely return to my country?

What should I do now if I am worried?

Practical Steps for Families Now

Final Thoughts

Experienced Immigration Law Attorney

Spanish Transcript

Third-Country Deportations, Florida License Changes, and the Risks of Misrepresentation

New U.S. Citizenship Test in 2025 What You Need to Know

References

Spanish Transcript

English Translation

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