Venezuela Archives - Arias Villa Law

TPS for Venezuelans After the Court Decision

Martha Arias — Wed, 04 Feb 2026 18:58:09 +0000

What This Means in Real Life and What You Should Do Next

Yesterday, I had the opportunity to speak on Unión Radio Noticias with journalist—and fellow attorney—Eduardo Rodríguez Giolitti, to discuss the current legal landscape for Venezuelans after the most recent federal court decision related to TPS.

During our conversation, I emphasized one key point: even though TPS is not currently in effect as it was before, the litigation surrounding its termination has continued to produce important legal consequences. In practical terms, one of the most meaningful impacts of this decision appears in detention situations, particularly when a person may need to request habeas corpus relief. When someone with TPS history is detained, a decision like this can become a valuable legal tool to challenge detention and protect due process rights.

We also discussed how politics and diplomacy can influence legal strategy. In my view, one realistic possibility—especially considering shifting conditions and diplomatic dynamics—is a form of deferred protection known as “Deferred Action.” Many people remember that something like this was used before TPS was granted in prior years. Deferred Action is typically granted for one year and can allow a person to apply for a work permit. While nothing is guaranteed, it remains a pathway that could be considered at the government level.

If you would like a confidential consultation, you can call my office at (305) 671-0018. You can also follow my updates on social media, where I share information whenever immigration news changes.

Most importantly, I repeated the same recommendation I have shared before: keep pursuing a lawful immigration status if you are eligible, and do so through proper legal channels—without fraud and without shortcuts that can cause serious consequences later.

As I explained on air, there are very limited groups of people who may still have TPS coverage through October, depending on whether they properly filed and obtained approval during the specified re-registration window. For everyone else, the situation can become legally delicate—especially for those who do not have a pending asylum case—because unlawful presence may begin to accumulate, and that can create future immigration barriers.

If you are Venezuelan and you are unsure of your current status, your expiration dates, or what options may still be available, this is not a moment to guess. It is a moment to get clarity.

Disclaimer: This post is for general informational purposes and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case is different and should be evaluated individually.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

Host:
Martha Arias, siempre colaboradora de este espacio, abogada de inmigración, está de nuevo con nosotros desde Miami, en los Estados Unidos. Bueno, Martha, ayúdanos a entender qué significa esto, en qué cambia el panorama. Buenos días.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Buenos días. Un saludo para usted, Saúl y Eduardo. Muchísimas gracias por invitarme.
A ver, ¿en qué cambia esto el panorama? Yo diría que el mayor impacto —y lo dicen también los legal advisories, o sea, los consejos o las sugerencias que hacen otros abogados, expertos en estos litigios federales— el mejor beneficio de esta decisión es en casos de detención, cuando se vaya a pedir un habeas corpus. ¿Por qué?
Porque sabemos que ya el TPS no existe, pero el litigio continúa. Entonces, si una persona que tiene TPS es detenida, esa persona puede invocar el habeas corpus y este tipo de decisión es el que le va a ayudar o le va a servir para ese caso de detención. Yo diría que este es el mayor impacto que puede tener esta decisión.

Host:
Ahora, doctora, pensando un poquito más allá, ¿cómo puede impactar el tema político en las decisiones del derecho, en este caso TPS? Porque estamos hablando de un estatus de protección. Podríamos hablar también de asilos para venezolanos, pero con esta nueva etapa de relaciones diplomáticas entre Venezuela y Estados Unidos, ¿hacia dónde se podría pensar, incluso en cambios en alguna de las instancias o por lo menos de las figuras legales que se aplican a los venezolanos?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Yo pienso que, en términos políticos, una de las cosas que yo veo posible que le otorguen a los venezolanos en este momento es tal vez un estatus de protección diferida que se llama Deferred Action. No sé si usted se acuerda: en el primer mandato del presidente Trump, el Deferred Action fue concedido por el presidente Trump a los venezolanos antes de que llegara el TPS.
Yo veo este litigio del TPS —que no sé cuándo tenga fin— porque a pesar de esta decisión, a pesar de la decisión de la Corte Suprema, el litigio continúa. Entonces, no sabemos cuándo realmente tenga fin este litigio y si va a ser un éxito para los venezolanos, y podrán tener su TPS antes de octubre de este año, que vamos a decir que se vencerían las extensiones que fueron dadas por el presidente Biden.
Entonces, yo pienso que la acción diferida es viable; es algo que el gobierno puede dar. Dada la situación, los cambios que hay en Venezuela y las relaciones que hay en este momento, no sería imposible que el gobierno de los Estados Unidos otorgara una acción diferida. Normalmente una acción diferida se otorga por un año y le da derecho a la persona a tener un permiso de trabajo.

Host:
Amigo, estamos conversando desde Miami, Estados Unidos, con Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración. Esto da cuenta de la independencia o separación de poderes, o autonomía institucional en los Estados Unidos, porque ¿cómo asociar lo que ha sido la posición de Donald Trump como presidente de los Estados Unidos ante el tema migratorio y esta decisión de una Corte Federal que pareciera, con su decisión, dar una buena noticia a quienes están afectados por no contar con el TPS?

Abogada Martha Arias:
A ver, es un tema muy… a mí me apasiona este tema. Es un tema muy interesante. Es cierto: aquí hay como lo que se llama la revisión o los controles de los poderes públicos, ¿sí? Entonces, el Ejecutivo, el Legislativo y el Judicial, entre ellos se controlan. En este caso, el Judicial está tratando de controlar esas decisiones. El Ejecutivo está, vamos a decir, empujando, peleando, dando la pelea, y pues siguen las cortes tratando de dar una decisión.
Lo que pasa es que hay unos requisitos legales de cómo, cuándo se otorga un TPS y también unos requisitos legales de cómo, cuándo y en qué momento se puede terminar ese TPS.
El TPS de Venezuela… las partes están argumentando por la forma como se terminó: que hubo una transición de un presidente a otro y fue en ese mismo momento cuando las personas ya habían pagado su re-registración, habían hecho toda la documentación necesaria para una re-registración; viene la nueva administración y en menos de 15–20 días lo termina. Esto crea una cierta violación, y allí es donde se están enfocando las partes.
Eso, la decisión del juez Chen —el juez federal de California— lo dijo antes y quedó ratificada ahora por la decisión del 29 de enero de la Corte de Apelaciones. Dijo que la terminación fue ilegal, que la terminación no podía haberse hecho; pero pues precisamente por el procedimiento, la forma como se hizo, es lo que las partes demandantes están alegando como violación a la ley.

Host:
Doctora, en algún momento, cuando conversamos, nos decía la recomendación legal para todos los venezolanos que tienen este estatus o incluso tienen dudas de cuál es su estatus legal: asesórense legalmente, valga la redundancia. Hoy, 3 de febrero, ¿es la misma recomendación? ¿Siente que pudiera haber mayor tranquilidad para los venezolanos? ¿O básicamente sigan buscando su estatus legal, independientemente de lo que pase de la política entre Venezuela y Estados Unidos?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Sí. Yo les aconsejo que sigan tratando, si es posible bajo la ley, buscar un estatus legal. Obviamente, teniendo en cuenta todo lo que son las vías legales, sin cometer fraude, sin hacer cosas indebidas: eso es lo que deben estar haciendo.
Es complicado, es muy complicado, porque si bien el TPS técnicamente ya terminó desde noviembre, son unos pocos, muy pocos, que lo tienen hasta octubre. Los que tienen el TPS de Venezuela hasta octubre son los que sí presentaron su petición de re-registración entre enero 17 del año pasado, 2025, y febrero 15. Los que tienen la re-registración durante ese período y la presentaron, y se las aprobaron: esas personas son las que todavía tienen el TPS hasta octubre de este año. Entonces son muy pocas.
¿Quién entonces es el resto? ¿Qué está haciendo el resto? El resto está fuera de estatus, a no ser que tenga un asilo pendiente. Entonces, mi preocupación con los que no tienen asilo pendiente es que ya están incurriendo en presencia ilegal a partir de noviembre. Técnicamente terminó el TPS y empezaron a incurrir en presencia ilegal, y esto los puede afectar en el futuro.

Host:
Martha, muchísimas gracias siempre por tu disposición y tu aporte. Mucho éxito. Un fuerte abrazo y nos mantenemos en contacto.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Gracias a ustedes. Feliz resto de semana.

Host:
Gracias, doctora. Gracias. Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración, vía Zoom desde Miami, Estados Unidos. Volveremos.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

Host:
Martha Arias, always a collaborator of this segment, an immigration attorney, is again with us from Miami, in the United States. Well, Martha, help us understand what this means, how the landscape changes. Good morning.

Attorney Martha Arias, Esq.:
Good morning. Greetings to you, Saúl, and Eduardo. Thank you very much for inviting me.
Let’s see, how does this change the landscape? I would say the greatest impact—and the legal advisories say it too, meaning the advice or the suggestions that other attorneys, experts in these federal litigations, make—the best benefit of this decision is in detention cases when a habeas corpus is going to be requested. Why?
Because we know that TPS no longer exists, but the litigation continues. So, if a person who has TPS is detained, that person can invoke habeas corpus, and this type of decision is what will help them or serve them for that detention case. I would say this is the greatest impact that this decision can have.

Host:
Now, attorney, thinking a little further, how can the political issue impact legal decisions, in this case TPS? Because we are talking about a protection status. We could also talk about asylum for Venezuelans, but with this new stage of diplomatic relations between Venezuela and the United States, in what direction could one think—even changes in some of the instances or at least in the legal figures that apply to Venezuelans?

Attorney Martha Arias, Esq.:
I think that, in political terms, one of the things I see as possible that the current administration could grant to Venezuelans right now is maybe a deferred protection status that is called Deferred Action. I don’t know if you remember: in President Trump’s first term, Deferred Action was granted by President Trump to Venezuelans before TPS arrived.
I see this TPS litigation—which I don’t know when it will end—because despite this decision, despite the Supreme Court decision, the litigation continues. So, we do not know when this litigation will truly end and whether it will be a success for Venezuelans, and whether they will be able to have their TPS before October of this year, which we are going to say is when the extensions given by President Biden would expire.
So, I think deferred action is viable; it is something the government can give. Given the situation, the changes in Venezuela, and the relations that exist at this moment, it would not be impossible for the United States government to grant deferred action. Normally, deferred action is granted for one year and gives the person the right to have a work permit.

Host:
My friend, we are speaking from Miami, United States, with Martha Arias, an immigration attorney. This shows the independence or separation of powers, or institutional autonomy in the United States, because how do we associate what has been Donald Trump’s position as President of the United States on the migration issue and this decision of a Federal Court that seems, with its decision, to give good news to those who are affected by not having TPS?

Attorney Martha Arias, Esq.:
Let’s see, it is a very… this topic fascinates me; it is a very interesting topic. It is true: here there is what is called the review or the checks of the public powers, yes? So, the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial, they control each other. In this case, the Judicial is trying to control those decisions. The Executive is, let’s say, pushing, fighting, giving the fight, and so the courts keep trying to give a decision.
What happens is that there are legal requirements for how and when TPS is granted, and also legal requirements for how, when, and at what moment that TPS can be terminated.
Venezuela’s TPS… the parties are arguing about the way it was terminated: that there was a transition from one president to another and it was at that very moment when people had already paid their re-registration, had done all the necessary documentation for a re-registration; the new administration comes in and in less than 15–20 days terminates it. This creates a certain violation, and that is where the parties are focusing.
That, the decision of Judge Chen—the federal judge in California—said it before and it was now ratified by the decision of January 29 by the Court of Appeals. It said the termination was illegal, that the termination could not have been done; but precisely because the procedure, the way it was done, is what the plaintiff parties are alleging as a violation of the law.

Host:
Attorney, at some point when we spoke, you told us the legal recommendation for all Venezuelans who have this status or even have doubts about what their legal status is: get legal advice, to state the obvious. Today, February 3, is it the same recommendation? Do you feel that there could be greater peace of mind for Venezuelans? Or basically, keep seeking their legal status, regardless of what happens politically between Venezuela and the United States?

Attorney Martha Arias, Esq.:
Yes. I advise them to continue trying, if it is possible under the law, to seek a legal status. Obviously, taking into account all legal pathways, without committing fraud, without doing improper things: that is what they should be doing.
It is complicated; it is very complicated, because although TPS technically already ended in November, there are a few, very few, who have it until October. Those who have Venezuela TPS until October are those who did file their re-registration request between January 17 of last year, 2025, and February 15. Those who have the re-registration during that period and filed it, and it was approved: those people are the ones who still have TPS until October of this year. So, they are very few.
So who is the rest? What is the rest doing? The rest is out of status unless they have a pending asylum. So my concern with those who do not have a pending asylum is that they are already accruing unlawful presence starting in November. Technically TPS ended and they began accruing unlawful presence, and this can affect them in the future.

Host:
Martha, thank you very much as always for your willingness and your contribution. Much success. A big hug and we will stay in touch.

Attorney Martha Arias, Esq.:
Thank you all. Have a good rest of the week.

Host:
Thank you, attorney. Thank you. Martha Arias, immigration attorney, via Zoom from Miami, United States. We will be back.

The post TPS for Venezuelans After the Court Decision appeared first on Arias Villa Law.

How New Security Screening Measures for 19 Countries Affect Immigration Process?

Martha Arias — Thu, 04 Dec 2025 23:49:25 +0000

In recent days, many immigrant families have expressed deep concern as federal agencies begin implementing additional national-security requirements for nationals of 19 countries. These measures build on a Presidential Proclamation issued earlier this year and have resulted in significantly slower processing for many immigration benefits.

My goal today is to explain, with clarity and calm, what these new procedures involve, how they may affect your case, and what steps you can take to stay informed.

Earlier this year, the federal government established stricter entry and vetting requirements for nationals of 19 countries identified as having limited identity-verification and security-cooperation capabilities. More recently, USCIS announced that officers must consider new country-specific security factors when adjudicating applications. As agencies integrate these directives into their workflow, many cases involving applicants from these countries are undergoing deeper background screening.

Based on official statements and reports from reputable news outlets, some individuals may experience significant delays in the adjudication of their immigration benefits. In certain instances, interviews or document requests may continue as planned, but final decisions may be held while additional verification is completed. This may happen with asylum-related adjustments, certain residency petitions, or even naturalization files—always depending on the individual case and the evidence required for security review.

I understand how unsettling it can be to face uncertainty after years of waiting. These circumstances call for patience, but also preparation. If your case is from one of the affected countries, this may be an appropriate moment to review your file, verify that your documentation is complete, and address any unresolved issues. Ensuring the strength and clarity of your evidence may help your case proceed more smoothly once the agency completes the expanded screening.

Even during challenging moments like this, I remain hopeful. U.S. immigration procedures have passed through periods of intense review before, and over time, the system stabilizes. My commitment is to guide you with honesty and care so you may face these developments with greater confidence.

If you believe your case may be impacted, I encourage you to seek individualized legal guidance. If you would like to speak with me or schedule a consultation, my office number is (305) 671-0018. I will continue to monitor these changes closely and share any updates that could affect your case.

USCIS Announcement (Late 2025): The agency implemented heightened national-security screening and instructed officers to consider country-specific risk factors for applicants from 19 nations.
Presidential Proclamation 10949 (June 4, 2025): Establishes enhanced entry restrictions and new vetting standards for nationals of the 19 countries identified for elevated security review.
State Department Implementation: Visa operations for these countries have been subject to limitations under the proclamation’s framework.
Media Reports on Processing Delays: Major news outlets including Reuters and New York Post report that many immigration applications for nationals of the 19 countries are undergoing extended background checks, resulting in slower decisions.

DISCLAIMER:
This post is intended solely for informational and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice, nor does it substitute for personalized guidance from a licensed attorney. Immigration law is complex and subject to frequent changes, and the measures described here may affect individuals differently depending on their personal circumstances, history, and documentation. No attorney–client relationship is created by viewing this content, leaving comments, or contacting our office. Before making decisions that may affect your legal status, please consult directly with a qualified immigration attorney to receive advice tailored to your situation.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

ORIAN BRITO:
Hola amigos, ayer cuando terminábamos un tema ya surgió otro, y es que la incertidumbre migratoria vuelve a sacudir a miles de familias. La administración Trump suspendió los procesamientos de residencias y ciudadanías para inmigrantes de 19 países, entre ellos Venezuela, Cuba y Haití.
Según el memorándum oficial, esta paralización afecta a trámites que ya estaban en curso y deja a muchos solicitantes en un verdadero limbo legal, justo en un momento de máxima tensión entre Venezuela y Washington.
Hoy vamos a explicar qué significa esta decisión, a quiénes afecta y qué opciones quedan sobre la mesa. Para eso me acompaña la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias, quien nos va a ayudar a entender el impacto real para los venezolanos y para miles de inmigrantes aquí en Estados Unidos.
Agradezco sus comentarios, que sean parte de la conversación, y su suscripción, por supuesto, al canal.

Abogada, esto es de intriga. Anoche yo terminaba de tocar un tema con el tema de los asilos y salía este memorándum del Departamento de Inmigración. ¿Cómo lo interpretamos y qué le llama la atención de ese documento?

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
A ver, ¿cómo lo interpretamos? Pues yo creo que ya no tenemos… en cuanto a palabras para describir este tipo de acciones recientes, pues bueno, se me acaba, yo creo, el vocabulario, los adjetivos.
Lo que le puedo decir es lo siguiente: las peticiones de asilo van a pausarse en cuanto a la toma de decisión.

¿Qué quiere decir esto? Que si una persona tiene un asilo pendiente, posiblemente todavía lo pueden llamar a una cita o a una entrevista para ese asilo.
Lo que no va a pasar es que le vayan a dar una decisión: no va a haber ni aprobación ni negatoria de ese caso hasta que se haga una investigación exhaustiva del background penal o del récord penal o criminal de la persona en su país o incluso aquí en los Estados Unidos.

Esta… pues, no sabemos cuánto tiempo se va a demorar. La demora puede ser mucha porque usted se podrá imaginar: son miles de personas, y de todos estos países pues no es tan fácil lograr que el gobierno provea la información penal. Así que el tiempo de espera va a ser indeterminado. No sabemos cuánto podría tomar eso.

ORIAN BRITO:
Eso me lo dice respecto a los asilos, pero, por ejemplo, hay personas que ya tenían un asilo aprobado y al año y un día pueden aplicar a su residencia. Entonces, ahora, ¿cómo queda esa petición de residencia?
O ya yo tengo los cinco años de residente y quiero aplicar a la ciudadanía. ¿Cómo quedan esos procesos tras esta decisión?

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Bueno, aquí esa pregunta es importante, porque lo que es claro en esta política es que los asilos pendientes quedan pausados de decisión.
Pero, además de los asilos pendientes, las peticiones de residencia pendientes con base en asilos aprobados recientemente también van a ser revisadas, también van a ser pausadas para revisión.

También dice que las peticiones de residencia ya otorgadas a través de asilo aprobado también van a ser revisitadas o revisadas nuevamente. Eso es lo que queda claro.

Ahora, la pregunta suya sobre los que apenas les aprobaron el asilo y apenas van a aplicar para la residencia: estas residencias también van a quedar pausadas.

De hecho, no solamente esas residencias, sino todas las peticiones de residencia de personas que hayan entrado con parole humanitario de alguno de estos países.

Le doy un ejemplo: ayer yo tuve una clienta que tenía su petición de residencia pendiente a través de matrimonio, pero esa persona entró con un parole humanitario. Esa persona era de Venezuela. Esa persona entró con parole humanitario de Venezuela.

Su petición I-130, la petición I-485, quedaron pausadas. Según la información que me dio el oficial, ellos tienen instrucciones de parar las peticiones I-130 (que es la que un familiar hace a otro), la petición I-485 (que es la petición de residencia), la I-601 (que es la petición de perdones que pide alguna de estas personas) o la I-602 (que es el perdón para quienes tienen un caso de asilo, que están ajustando estatus a través de asilo y tienen alguna inadmisibilidad).

Entonces, esos cuatro tipos de peticiones van a quedar paralizados y van a ser pausados. Ni siquiera la I-130, yo le comentaba, ¿pero por qué la I-130? Ni siquiera va a ser aprobada. Tampoco la I-130. Van a pausar todos ese tipo de peticiones.

Así que, Orian, no solamente es en estas decisiones de asilo, es también en peticiones de residencia.

ORIAN BRITO:
Yo conozco casos, por ejemplo, de gente que tiene residencia por matrimonio y ya se les va a vencer esa residencia, porque usted sabe que primero dan una de dos años y luego tienen que renovarla, otra sin condiciones, para retirar las condiciones, etcétera.

¿Cómo quedan si estos procesos están pausados? ¿Uno quedaría sin estatus migratorio o con qué figura?

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Esas no creo que se vayan a ver afectadas; por lo menos no hay nada en lo que se notificó que diga que ese tipo de peticiones puedan quedar afectadas.

Recuérdese que las peticiones de remoción de condiciones, que es la aplicación I-751, es para quitar las condiciones de una residencia que ya fue otorgada. Entonces, por ahora no hay ninguna notificación que diga que esas se van a pausar; esas van a continuar su trámite normal.

Las que van a ser pausadas son las peticiones de residencia inicial, pero ya la residencia condicional es una residencia.

ORIAN BRITO:
Ok, ok, eso estaría claro.
Esta decisión que ha tomado la administración, que se conoce a través de este memorándum, ¿podría ser apelada en cortes, por ejemplo, para que ellos agilicen?

Porque a mí me preocupa también, por otro lado, el cuello de botella. Entiendo, ojo, la labor del gobierno, que quiere revisar los casos. Es su potestad y me parece bien todo lo que brinde seguridad.

Pero también, al mismo tiempo, poniéndome en la posición de los afectados, esto genera más incertidumbre y puede generar mayor prolongación del tiempo para tomar decisiones que ya de por sí… ya de por sí muchos casos tienen años sin ningún tipo de respuesta.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Efectivamente. A ver, lo que usted dice es exactamente una de las preocupaciones de todo el mundo: la demora y el tiempo que esto va a tomar.

Pero no solamente eso, sino en qué estatus va a quedar la persona en cuanto, por ejemplo, al permiso de trabajo.

Si tiene un asilo pendiente, la persona tiene derecho a no incurrir en presencia ilegal. Pero si a esa persona no le renuevan su permiso de trabajo y tiene que quedarse aquí en los Estados Unidos esperando tres o cuatro años una decisión y su permiso de trabajo no es renovado, pues entonces va a ocasionar caos para esa persona y, en general, para todas las personas que están vacilando en esa situación.

A ver, recuérdese que el gobierno había anunciado este año que iba a parar las renovaciones automáticas de permisos de trabajo a través de asilo, o sea, que ya no iban a tener esa renovación automática, número uno.

Número dos, también el gobierno anunció que no a todas las personas que tienen un proceso de asilo se les va a otorgar su permiso de trabajo; que va a ser analizado caso por caso.

¿Qué quiere decir eso? Que puede haber la posibilidad de que a muchas de esas personas a las que les pausan la decisión de su caso de asilo no les renueven tampoco su permiso de trabajo, si vemos que estamos aplicando las dos políticas juntas, porque la otra política fue anunciada algunos meses atrás.

Entonces, ¿cómo va a quedar esa persona? ¿Cuántos años está dispuesta esa persona a estar en los Estados Unidos sin permiso de trabajo? Puede, definitivamente, al final, desistir por voluntad propia e irse. Yo pienso que la presión viene de esa parte.

ORIAN BRITO:
Yo asumo también que hay como una estrategia de llevarte a un punto donde tú digas: “¿Qué hago yo aquí, cuando nunca voy a tener…? Si el permiso se me vence, no me lo van a renovar. Si someto el asilo, no me van a responder. Y mientras estoy en esa situación, los operativos migratorios continúan. Entonces estoy a merced de que, en una situación compleja, Dios no lo quiera, pues me puedan llevar”.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
O sea, está en un limbo migratorio y, pues, obviamente, para una familia entera, por ejemplo, que tenga hijos, padre, hijos, pues es demasiado apremiante no poder trabajar y, pues, definitivamente, por un término indefinido.

Entonces sí, Orian, esa es la situación que estamos viviendo. Es complicada. Yo, la verdad, uno como abogado de inmigración trata de darle la mayor esperanza a los clientes.

Sí, yo tengo esperanza en que podamos resolver muchas cuestiones migratorias, pero me preocupa esta situación de esta pausa y, sobre todo, lo que respecta al permiso de trabajo.

ORIAN BRITO:
Claro, porque sin permiso de trabajo no hay nada que hacer.

¿Cuál sería la recomendación que le puede dar a estas personas que puedan verse afectadas por esto?

Por ejemplo, aquellos que sometieron su petición de asilo recientemente, tras la finalización del Estatus de Protección Temporal, y que ahora, aunque los llamen a una entrevista, no les van a decir ni sí ni no.

Aquellos que están esperando para aplicar a su ciudadanía, que contaban, por ejemplo, ya con cinco años de residencia y que querían aplicar para hacerse ciudadanos, y que ahora también eso está paralizado.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Puede paralizarse la notificación. No necesariamente dice que la petición de ciudadanía de esas personas se va a paralizar, y no tengo yo tampoco ningún documento oficial que diga que la petición de ciudadanía se vaya a paralizar.

Sin embargo, sí sabemos que ciertas peticiones de ajuste de estatus de las personas de esos 19 países pueden ser revisitadas o revisadas.

Entonces, puede ser que para ciertas personas de Venezuela, de Cuba, de Haití y del resto de esos países que pidan una ciudadanía, pueda haber ciertas demoras en el procesamiento de esa petición de ciudadanía. Pueden pasar perfectamente.

ORIAN BRITO:
Bueno, yo estoy leyendo el comunicado, que lo tengo aquí, el memorándum que salió anoche, y dice que, bueno, se paralizan las I-589 y otras, pero se incluyen —dice el comunicado— las ciudadanías también.

Sí implicaría, de acuerdo con lo que estoy leyendo aquí, en el propio texto de oficiales de inmigración.

Entonces, al final, yo creo que la clave en este momento es tener paciencia y, reitero la pregunta, ¿existe la posibilidad de que, de repente, una coalición proinmigrante decida apelar esto en corte para buscar una vía de que el gobierno procese esto, sobre todo para aquellos que tienen tanto tiempo esperando?

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Puede haber una posibilidad —sí, se me olvidó llegar a ese punto—. Puede haber una posibilidad, pero yo la veo que se va a demorar un poco.

Se va a demorar un poco, ¿por qué? Porque para presentar una demanda de acción en la Corte Federal no basta simplemente con tener el memorándum. También hay que crear un grupo de personas que se vean perjudicadas o afectadas por esa medida.

Mientras se reúne o se acumula ese grupo de personas, o ese class action, se va a demorar un poquito, se va a demorar un tiempo. Entonces, inmediatamente, inmediatamente no sé si vamos a tener una demanda. Es posible, pero yo pienso que se va a demorar un poquito mientras se presenta una demanda para atacar este tipo de medida.

El hecho de que se argumente que es por razones de seguridad nacional hace que se creen ciertos beneficios procesales para el gobierno por esa misma razón. Pues claro, nadie dice que no revisen el estatus de las personas; todos queremos eso.

ORIAN BRITO:
Ayer me decía una persona que me sigue por el canal que tenía una ciudadanía que le fue aprobada en el 2021 y sentía temor, porque, claro, todo esto también genera en la población una situación de angustia.

Por eso es que la idea de este espacio es brindar información certera para no caer en el caos, ¿no?

Esas personas que, por ejemplo, han obtenido la residencia con menos de dos años, un año, o ciudadanía, o le hayan otorgado el asilo y que les vayan a revisar, ¿cuál sería el mensaje que se les puede dar a esas personas?

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Lo que puedo decirle a todo el mundo es que lo primero que debemos tener es la calma y la fe.

Calma, en esperar que se sigan procesando estos casos y esperar a ver cuál va a ser el resultado; y fe, en que eventualmente esto se elimine y podamos volver a un procesamiento normal de casos, donde no estemos sujetos a demoras muy largas.

Porque, eventualmente, en vez de arreglar un problema, se está creando otro.

Porque estamos tratando de “arreglar” el problema de todas esas personas que entraron por la frontera, que tenemos años sin autorización o con parole. Pero, efectivamente, también estamos creando un problema al no resolver casos de personas y dejar personas en el limbo y dejar personas sin permiso de trabajo.

Entonces, estamos creando una subcategoría de inmigrantes que pueden, eventualmente, quedarse en los Estados Unidos sin ningún estatus o en un limbo jurídico.

Entonces, pienso que a veces el remedio puede ser más complicado que la enfermedad. En este caso lo veo de esa forma.

ORIAN BRITO:
Amigos, a tener paciencia, a buscar información lo más pronto posible y, sobre todo, asesorarse con un abogado, que en este momento es la única persona que puede revisar su file, su carpeta de inmigración, y determinar si hay alguna situación que usted deba arreglar para evitar sufrir parte de estos contratiempos.

Es la política que hay en este momento por parte de la administración y, por el momento, solo queda tener paciencia y calma.

Me gustaría que la abogada Martha Arias dé su número de contacto a cualquier persona que esté aquí en la ciudad de Miami. No sé si atienda a personas de otros estados, pero que deseen contactarla, porque en este momento es fundamental tener esa asesoría.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Sí, nosotros estamos localizados en Miami, pero vemos clientes en cualquier parte de los Estados Unidos, porque la ley de inmigración es federal.

Obviamente, no tomamos todos los casos; requerimos una consulta para revisar el caso de la persona y también para ver si amerita poder representarla desde Miami, aunque la persona esté en otro estado.

El teléfono de mi oficina es el (305) 671-0018, repito: (305) 671-0018.

Pueden ir a mi página web; allá están también todos los teléfonos. La dirección de la página web es ariasvilla.com.

Y el Instagram, que a la gente hoy en día le encanta Instagram y nos pueden seguir allí, es @marta_arias98.

ORIAN BRITO:
Perfecto. Y a usted la invito a que, si tiene algún tipo de interrogante, la deje en la sección de comentarios, y que cualquier persona que conozca que esté en una situación de este tipo, pues comparta la información que hemos brindado acá sobre quiénes se verán afectados tras esta decisión.

Porque son varias cosas: por un lado, es la paralización de los procesos migratorios; y por el otro, los vetos a viajes que está impulsando el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional: un veto total que está pidiendo el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional, lo que está complicando un poquito más y generando incertidumbre en este momento en tanta gente.

Les agradezco su confianza y que estén con nosotros. Dejen sus preguntas y comentarios, que a lo largo de esta semana, por supuesto, vamos a estar ampliando este tema y las repercusiones que vamos a ir conociendo con el transcurso de los días.

Gracias, abogada, por el tiempo.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Gracias a ustedes por invitarme.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION

ORIAN BRITO:
Hello friends, yesterday when we were finishing one topic, another one already came up, and it is that immigration uncertainty once again shakes thousands of families. The Trump administration suspended the processing of residencies and citizenships for immigrants from 19 countries, among them Venezuela, Cuba, and Haiti.

According to the official memorandum, this pause affects procedures that were already in progress and leaves many applicants in a real legal limbo, right at a moment of maximum tension between Venezuela and Washington.

Today we are going to explain what this decision means, whom it affects, and what options remain on the table. For that, immigration attorney Martha Arias is with me, who is going to help us understand the real impact for Venezuelans and for thousands of immigrants here in the United States.

I appreciate your comments, that you are part of the conversation, and your subscription, of course, to the channel.

Attorney, this is intriguing. Last night I was finishing touching on a topic about asylum matters and this memorandum from the immigration department came out. How do we interpret it, and what stands out to you from that document?

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Let’s see, how do we interpret it? Well, I think that we no longer have… in terms of words to describe this type of recent actions, well, I think my vocabulary, the adjectives, are running out.

What I can tell you is the following: asylum petitions are going to be paused with respect to decision-making.

What does this mean? That if a person has a pending asylum, they can still possibly be called to an appointment or to an interview for that asylum.
What is not going to happen is that they are going to be given a decision. There is not going to be either an approval or a denial of that case until an exhaustive investigation is done of the person’s criminal background or criminal record in their country or even here in the United States.

This… well, we do not know how long it is going to take. The delay can be a lot because you can imagine: they are thousands of people, and from all these countries it is not so easy to obtain the criminal information from their governments. So the waiting time will be indeterminate. We do not know how long that could take.

ORIAN BRITO:
You tell me this with respect to asylums, but, for example, there are people who already had an approved asylum and after one year and one day they can apply for their residency. So now, how does that residency petition end up?

Or I already have the five years as a resident and I want to apply for citizenship. How do those processes end up after this decision?

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Well, here that question is important because what is clear in this policy is that pending asylums are paused from decision-making.

But in addition to pending asylums, residency petitions that are pending and based on recently approved asylums are also going to be reviewed; they are also going to be paused for review.

It also says that residency petitions already granted through an approved asylum are also going to be revisited or reviewed again. That is what is clear.

Now, your question, about those who just had their asylum approved and are just going to apply for residency: those residencies are also going to be paused.

In fact, not only those residencies, but all residency petitions of people who entered with humanitarian parole from any of these countries.

I will give you an example: yesterday I had a client who had her residency petition pending through marriage, but that person entered with humanitarian parole. That person was from Venezuela. That person entered with humanitarian parole from Venezuela.

Her I-130 petition, the I-485 petition, were paused. According to the information the officer gave me, they have instructions to stop I-130 petitions (the one that a family member files for another), the I-485 petition (which is the residency petition), the I-601 (which is the waiver petition requested by some of these people) or the I-602 (which is the waiver for those who have an asylum case, who are adjusting status through asylum and have some inadmissibility).

So those four types of petitions are going to be paralyzed and paused. Not even the I-130 — I was commenting to you — but why the I-130? Not even that one is going to be approved. They are going to pause all those types of petitions.

So, Orian, it is not only in these asylum decisions, it is also in residency petitions.

ORIAN BRITO:
I know cases, for example, of people who have residency through marriage and their residency is about to expire, because you know that first they give a two-year one and then they have to renew it, another one without conditions, to remove the conditions, etc.

How do they end up if these processes are paused? Would one end up without immigration status, or under what figure?

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Those, I don’t think they are going to be affected; at least there is nothing in what was notified that says that those types of petitions may be affected.

Remember that removal of conditions petitions, which is the I-751 application, is to remove the conditions of a residency that has already been granted. So, for now, there is no notification saying that those are going to be paused; those are going to continue their normal process.

The ones that are going to be paused are the initial residency petitions, but conditional residency is already a residency.

ORIAN BRITO:
Ok, ok, that would be clear.
This decision that the administration has made, which is known through this memorandum, could it be appealed in court, for example, so that they speed things up?

Because I am also worried, on the other hand, about the bottleneck. I understand — careful — the work of the government, which wants to review the cases. It is its authority, and I think it is great, everything that provides security.

But also at the same time, putting myself in the affected persons’ position, this creates more uncertainty and can generate longer delays to make decisions, which already, many cases already have years without any type of response.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Indeed. Let’s see, what you say is exactly one of the concerns of everyone: the delay and the time this is going to take.

But not only that, but also what status the person will be in, for example, concerning the work permit.

If they have a pending asylum, the person has the right to not incur unlawful presence. But if that person does not get their work permit renewed and they have to stay here in the United States waiting three or four years for a decision and their work permit is not renewed, well then this is going to cause chaos for that person and, in general, for all the people who are wavering in that situation.

Let’s see, remember that the government had announced this year that it was going to stop automatic renewals of work permits through asylum — meaning that they were no longer going to have that automatic renewal, number one.

Number two, the government also announced that not all people who have an asylum process are going to be granted their work permit; that it is going to be analyzed case by case.

What does that mean? That there may be the possibility that many of those people whose asylum case decision is paused also may not get their work permit renewed, if we see that both policies are being applied together, because the other policy was announced a few months ago.

So how is that person going to end up? How many years is that person willing to stay in the United States without a work permit? They can, definitely, in the end, give up voluntarily and leave. I think the pressure comes from that part.

ORIAN BRITO:
I also assume that there is like a strategy of taking you to a point where you say, “What am I doing here when I am never going to have…? If the permit expires, they are not going to renew it. If I submit the asylum, they are not going to respond. And while I am in that situation, immigration operations continue. So I am at the mercy of — in a complex situation, God forbid — they could take me.”

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
In other words, you are in an immigration limbo and obviously for an entire family, for example, who has children, parents, children — well, it is extremely pressing to not be able to work and definitely for an indefinite period of time.

So yes, Orian, that is the situation we are living. It is complicated. Truly, one as an immigration attorney tries to give as much hope as possible to clients.

Yes, I have hope that we can resolve many immigration matters, but I am concerned about this situation of this pause and especially regarding the work permit.

ORIAN BRITO:
Of course, because without a work permit there is nothing to do.

What would be the recommendation you can give to those people who may be affected by this?

For example, those who submitted their asylum petition recently after the end of Temporary Protected Status, and now, even if they are called to an interview, they are not going to be told yes or no.

Those who are waiting to apply for citizenship, who already had, for example, five years of residency and wanted to apply to become citizens, and now that is also paralyzed.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
The notification may be paralyzed. It does not necessarily say that the citizenship petition of those people is going to be paralyzed, and I also do not have any official document that says that the citizenship petition is going to be paralyzed.

However, we do know that certain adjustment-of-status petitions of people from those 19 countries may be revisited or reviewed.

So, it may be that for certain people from Venezuela, Cuba, Haiti, and the rest of those countries who request citizenship, there may be certain delays in the processing of that citizenship petition. It can perfectly happen.

ORIAN BRITO:
Well, I am reading the communiqué — I have it here — the memorandum that came out last night, and it says that, well, the I-589s are paused and others, but it includes — the communiqué says — the citizenships too.

It would imply, according to what I am reading here, in the very text from immigration officers.

So, in the end, I think the key at this moment is to have patience and I repeat the question: is there the possibility that suddenly a pro-immigrant coalition decides to appeal this in court to seek a path for the government to process this, especially for those who have been waiting so long?

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
There could be a possibility — yes, I forgot to get to that point — there could be a possibility, but I see that it is going to take a little while.

It is going to take a little while, why? Because to file a lawsuit in Federal Court it is not enough simply to have the memorandum. A group of people who are harmed or affected by that measure must also be assembled.

While that group of people — that class action — is gathered or accumulated, it is going to take a little bit, it is going to take some time.

So, immediately, immediately I do not know if we are going to have a lawsuit. It is possible, but I think it is going to take a little while until a lawsuit is filed to challenge this type of measure.

The fact that it is argued that it is for reasons of national security creates certain procedural benefits for the government for that same reason.
Well of course, no one says that they should not review the status of people; we all want that.

ORIAN BRITO:
Yesterday a person who follows me on the channel told me that they had a citizenship that was approved in 2021, and they felt fear. Because of course, all this also generates in the population a situation of anxiety.

That is why the idea of this space is to provide accurate information to not fall into chaos, right?

Those people who, for example, have obtained residency with less than two years, one year, or citizenship, or have been granted asylum and are going to be reviewed — what would be the message that can be given to those people?

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
What I can tell everyone is that the first thing we must have is calm and faith.

Calm, in waiting for these cases to continue being processed and waiting to see what the result will be; and faith, that eventually this will be eliminated and we will be able to return to normal case processing, where we are not subject to very long delays.

Because eventually, instead of fixing a problem, another is being created.

Because we are trying to “fix” the problem of all those people who entered through the border, who have had years without authorization or with parole. But indeed, we are also creating a problem by not resolving people’s cases and leaving people in limbo and leaving people without a work permit.

So, we are creating a subclass of immigrants who can eventually remain in the United States without any status or in a legal limbo.

So I think that sometimes the remedy can be more complicated than the illness. In this case, I see it that way.

ORIAN BRITO:
Friends, patience, seek information as soon as possible and, above all, get advice from an attorney, who at this moment is the only person who can review your file, your immigration folder, and determine if there is any situation you must fix to avoid experiencing some of these setbacks.

It is the policy that exists at this moment from the administration, and for now we can only have patience and calm.

I would like immigration attorney Martha Arias to give her contact number to any person who is here in the city of Miami. I don’t know if she assists people from other states, but those who wish to contact her — because at this moment it is fundamental to have that advice.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Yes, we are located in Miami, but we see clients anywhere in the United States, because immigration law is federal.

Obviously, we do not take all cases; we require a consultation to review the person’s case and also to see if it is appropriate to represent the person from Miami even if the person is in another state.

My office phone number is (305) 671-0018, I repeat: (305) 671-0018.

You can go to my website; all the phone numbers are also there. The website address is ariasvilla.com.

And Instagram — which people nowadays love Instagram — and you can follow us there, is @marta_arias98.

ORIAN BRITO:
Perfect. And I invite you, if you have any type of question, leave it in the comments section, and that anyone you know who is in a situation of this type, please share the information we have provided here about who will be affected by this decision.

Because there are several things: on one side, it is the paralization of immigration processes; and on the other, the travel bans that the Department of Homeland Security is pushing — a total ban that the Department of Homeland Security is requesting, which is complicating things a little more and generating uncertainty at this moment for so many people.

I appreciate your trust and that you are with us. Leave your questions and comments, and throughout this week, of course, we will be expanding this topic and the repercussions that we will get to know as the days go by.

Thank you, attorney, for your time.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Thank you for inviting me.

The post How New Security Screening Measures for 19 Countries Affect Immigration Process? appeared first on Arias Villa Law.

What the New USCIS Suspensions Mean for Asylum Seekers

Martha Arias — Wed, 03 Dec 2025 23:51:40 +0000

This morning I joined journalist Lourdes Ubieta on Radio Libre to discuss a development that is generating deep uncertainty among many immigrant communities: the federal government’s announcement that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will pause the adjudication of immigration applications from nationals of nineteen countries that have also been targeted by a recent presidential proclamation on travel restrictions.

This policy was announced in the wake of a tragic shooting in Washington, D.C., allegedly committed by an Afghan national, and the government has explicitly framed these changes as additional “national security” measures. Its consequences, however, reach far beyond that single event.

What This Means in Practice

Under this new framework, USCIS has instructed officers to pause decisions on many immigration applications— including affirmative asylum cases—that are filed by people from these nineteen countries, while the agency conducts additional background review or “vetting.”

In practical terms, this means:

Many cases will remain pending without approval or denial while the additional screening is completed.
This can apply even if the applicant already had an interview scheduled or completed. The interview may still be held, but a final decision can be held back until the new review is finished.

Multiple federal, local, and sometimes foreign agencies may become involved in these security checks, which makes it very difficult to predict how long the process will actually take. We know from experience that multi-agency vetting tends to move slowly, and we must be realistic in expecting longer processing times and growing backlogs.

What Happens If Your Asylum Case Is Pending?

If you have a pending affirmative asylum case with USCIS, it is very important to understand one key point:

A paused asylum case does not, by itself, make you undocumented.
While your asylum application is properly filed and remains pending, you generally do not accrue unlawful presence under existing immigration law, even if your interview or decision is delayed, unless some separate negative event happens in your case.

However, the fact that you may not be accruing unlawful presence does not mean everything else stays the same. The area where most people will feel the impact is work authorization.

Impact on Work Permits (EADs)

The question I am hearing most often is:

“Will I keep my work permit while my asylum remains pending?”

At this time, there is no USCIS policy that guarantees that all asylum applicants from these nineteen countries will keep uninterrupted eligibility for work authorization during prolonged delays. The situation is changing and depends on several overlapping rules:

New 19-Country Policies
Recent policy guidance indicates that being from one of the nineteen countries can be treated as a negative factor in discretionary decisions, including some immigration benefits. Advocacy organizations monitoring these changes report that USCIS has paused processing of several types of applications from these countries, including asylum, green cards, and in some cases work permits.
End of Broad Automatic EAD Extensions for Many Categories
Separately, in late October 2025, the Department of Homeland Security issued an interim final rule ending the practice of granting broad automatic extensions of many categories of Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) for people who file renewal applications on or after October 30, 2025.
- Automatic extensions of up to 540 days continue to apply to eligible renewal applicants who filed before that effective date.
- For new renewal filings after that date, many workers will no longer receive an automatic extension while their EAD is pending.
Asylum-Based Work Permits Are Discretionary and Case-Specific
Even before these changes, asylum-based work permits (category C-08) were not automatic. Applicants had to meet the required waiting period and eligibility criteria, and USCIS always retained discretion to grant or deny. With the new national-security-focused policies and the 19-country framework, there is even more uncertainty for applicants whose cases fall under these rules.

In practical terms, this means that some people could experience gaps in work authorization—especially if their EAD renewal is filed after October 30, 2025, or if their case is flagged for additional vetting under the 19-country policies.

That is why I remain especially concerned about asylum seekers who may be forced to wait years for a final asylum decision without clear assurances that their work authorization will be renewed smoothly during that entire period.

We are entering a period in which patience, documentation, and accurate information will be essential. As more official guidance becomes available, I will continue to explain these updates to help the community understand their options and their rights.

If you or a loved one is affected by:

The June 4, 2025 Presidential Proclamation imposing new travel restrictions on nationals of 19 countries,
The more recent USCIS directives pausing decisions on asylum and other applications from those same countries, or
The new rules on work permit extensions,

I strongly encourage you to seek individualized legal advice. These policies are complex, evolving, and heavily dependent on the details of each person’s case.

For information about scheduling a consultation, you may visit my website, follow me on social media, or call my office at (305) 671-0018.

Disclaimer:
This article is intended solely to provide general information on recent immigration developments. It should not be interpreted as legal advice or a substitute for individualized consultation. Immigration regulations, agency policies, and federal directives change rapidly, and their application varies depending on the facts of each case. No attorney–client relationship is formed by accessing this content. Individuals should seek personalized legal counsel before making decisions related to their immigration status, work authorization, or any other matter discussed herein.

WATCH IT ON YOUTUBE

LISTEN ON SPOTIFY

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT

LOURDES UBIETA:

Bueno, avanzando con los temas, queridos oyentes, el gobierno de Estados Unidos, la administración del presidente Trump anunció ya formalmente lo que nos habían advertido que iba a suceder tras el tiroteo ocurrido en Washington el día antes de Thanksgiving, el jueves de la semana pasada, donde un afgano le disparó a dos guardias nacionales. Bueno, pocas horas después falleció una de ellas, una joven de 20 años. Eso desató, por supuesto, la furia del presidente Trump y de la administración. Y bueno, anunciaban que lo que es el USCIS, la Oficina de Servicios de Ciudadanía e Inmigración, iba a implementar nuevas medidas de seguridad nacional a raíz de este tiroteo, ¿no?

Pero ya es un hecho que todas las solicitudes de inmigración provenientes de diecinueve países considerados de alto riesgo según el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional, citando ese caso de ese tiroteo, pues van a ser suspendidas todas las solicitudes de inmigración. Estamos hablando, amigos oyentes, de países como Afganistán, Myanmar, Chad, la República del Congo, Haití, Irán, Libia, Cuba y Venezuela.

Y esa lista se basa en esta proclamación presidencial de junio que impuso restricciones parciales o totales a la entrada de ciudadanos de estos países, y ahora queda totalmente suspendido. Uno se pregunta: ¿cómo quedan entonces las solicitudes, por ejemplo, de asilo de estas personas que están en los Estados Unidos? De Cuba y de Venezuela puntualmente, ¿no? Porque son los más cercanos que vemos. La doctora Martha Arias está con nosotros a esta hora, abogada de inmigración. Abogada, qué bueno saludarla. Bienvenida a su casa, Radio Libre.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Muchísimas gracias, Lourdes. Un placer para mí estar con usted. También un saludo para todos y gracias por invitarme de nuevo a su programa.

LOURDES UBIETA:

Yo feliz de tenerla por aquí, doctora, para que nos ayude a entender qué va a pasar ahora. Porque en el documento se especifica que quienes se ajusten a esos criterios que estábamos mencionando deberán someterse a un proceso de revisión exhaustivo que puede incluir una entrevista o una nueva entrevista para evaluar todas las amenazas contra la seguridad nacional y la seguridad pública. ¿Cómo le parece y cómo va a operar esto, doctora?

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Esta es una de esas situaciones donde teóricamente todos estaríamos de acuerdo con un procedimiento de revisión de antecedentes penales de las personas, ¿cierto? O sea, yo pienso que como ciudadanos de los Estados Unidos, habitantes de esta comunidad, queremos que el gobierno sepa y nos ayude con esa seguridad de vigilar quién entra a nuestro país y quién está aplicando para asilo, para que no vaya a ser un terrorista o una persona de cualquier organización delictiva. Obviamente que todos queremos eso, ¿cierto? O sea, teóricamente es algo que creo que todos los ciudadanos quisieran.

En la práctica, me parece a mí que lo difícil es la aplicación de esto. Porque, como usted bien lo dijo, Lourdes, se van a paralizar o pausar la toma de decisiones de todos esos casos de asilo, particularmente los que entraron en los últimos años, y sobre todo los que entraron por la frontera sin inspección o los que entraron con parole y pertenezcan a alguno de estos 19 países.

Entonces, ¿qué quiere decir pausar la toma de decisiones? Que no van ni a aprobar ni a negar ninguno de estos casos hasta que no se haga una revisión de ellos. Obviamente son casos que o ya tuvieron entrevista, o están a punto, o van a tener entrevista, y después de la entrevista pues no va a pasar nada. Las entrevistas se van a seguir dando; o sea, al que no haya tenido entrevista le van a dar entrevista. El punto es que no se va a tomar ninguna decisión hasta que no le revisen exhaustivamente esos récords penales a las personas.

Entonces la pregunta siguiente es: ¿cuánto va a tardar esto? No sabemos. Usted sabe que todo lo que viene del gobierno puede tomar un poquito más de tiempo. Sobre todo cuando hay varias agencias envueltas en esto, pues seguramente tendremos al FBI, algunas otras agencias locales de policía, también tal vez agencias extranjeras de otros países que tengan que ver con los antecedentes penales de las personas de esos países. Obviamente me imagino que lo harán a través del Departamento de Estado, que son los que manejan los consulados, ¿no?

No me imagino que, por ejemplo, para una persona que viene de Venezuela, el Departamento de Estado notificará al consulado que le corresponde ahora (el consulado de Estados Unidos en Colombia) que averigüe los antecedentes penales de esa persona en Venezuela o en cualquier otro país. Y eso puede tomar tiempo. Como digo, usted sabe, la burocracia es mucha y el gobierno trabaja de pronto un poquito menos rápido que el sector privado. Entonces pienso que esto puede crear una tardanza. ¿Cuánto? Pues no sabemos. Ese es el interrogante para todos: ¿cuánto va a demorar este vetting, que es como lo llama el gobierno —la revisión de antecedentes—? Eso es lo que no sabemos.

Entonces, vuelvo y repito: en términos teóricos es una medida buena que todos queremos, pero en términos prácticos no sé si se nos va a salir de las manos o cuánto tiempo va a tardar. Como dice el cuento: amanecerá y veremos. Nos vamos a quedar sentados.

LOURDES UBIETA:

Básicamente aquí lo que está pasando entonces, doctora, es que ahora al gobierno federal y al Departamento de Ciudadanía e Inmigración le toca hacer lo que no se hizo durante la administración de Biden con estos inmigrantes que entraron ilegalmente a los Estados Unidos sin el proceso de verificación de datos: quién es esta persona, de dónde viene, cuál es su origen… es decir, tener que hacer un proceso que ha debido hacerse antes de que llegaran a los Estados Unidos. ¿Correcto?

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Eh… es correcto, pero yo no diría que solamente fue algo que ocurrió en la administración de Biden, porque en la administración de Biden sí hubo una entrada de personas —vamos a decir— desbordante por esa frontera, que obviamente nadie quiso eso, nadie lo quiere tampoco. Pero antes de Biden la gente ha entrado por la frontera de los Estados Unidos y México, y hasta ahora entran muchos por la de Canadá, de la misma forma. O sea, que esto no es la primera vez que nosotros tenemos inmigrantes que entran por la frontera y que nunca han sido revisados sus antecedentes.

LOURDES UBIETA:

Por supuesto. Lo que pasa es que los últimos casos han sido precisamente personas que entraron, por ejemplo, el caso del afgano que mató a las dos guardias nacionales, que fueron producto de esa situación que se presentó caótica con la salida de los Estados Unidos de Afganistán —que no es que no salieran, sino cómo salieron— y las consecuencias que eso ha traído. Puntualmente en este caso me refiero a este afgano.

Ahora, yo me pregunto: ¿cómo quedan las solicitudes de asilo? Por ejemplo, las peticiones de asilo que están en curso, porque eso es algo que entiendo está preocupando mucho a la comunidad, en el caso de los cubanos, por ejemplo.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Esas peticiones de asilo, por lo menos lo que son asilos afirmativos —que son los que están con USCIS, con Citizenship and Immigration Services— esos asilos van a quedar pausados. No hay decisión.

Los que están con la Corte de Inmigración, que ya es otra agencia, se llama EOIR —Executive Office for Immigration Review— esos, que se llaman asilos defensivos porque están en una corte defendiéndose de una deportación, esos van a continuar.

El mayor problema que tenemos ahora son esos que quedan pausados.

LOURDES UBIETA:

…quiere decir que quedan ilegales. No, no es que quedan ilegales, sencillamente está pausado el proceso. Pero pueden seguir haciendo su vida dentro de Estados Unidos.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Sí, pero ahí viene el punto que quería tocar. Vamos un paso adelante: no van a quedar ilegales porque el asilo está pendiente. Mientras el asilo esté pendiente, están protegidos de acumular presencia ilegal; o sea, no van a tener presencia ilegal en los Estados Unidos.

Pero ahora vamos al punto del permiso de trabajo. ¿Van a tener permiso de trabajo?

Y eso es lo que más me preocupa, Lourdes, porque no hay claridad —o por lo menos yo no la he visto— y no tengo ningún documento oficial que yo pueda usar para decirle a un cliente: “Sí, señor, usted va a tener su permiso de trabajo mientras su asilo continúe pendiente.” No. No tengo ese documento.

Lo que tengo son, por ejemplo, informaciones del gobierno que ha dicho que ya no va a haber prórrogas automáticas de los permisos de trabajo de personas que tienen asilo pendiente. Acuérdense que había una prórroga automática donde a la persona se le extendía automáticamente por 180 días, creo que era, después de que aplicaba para la renovación. Ya no hay prórrogas automáticas, uno.

Dos: otra comunicación —un policy alert, una alerta de política del gobierno— donde explicaron que ahora todo el mundo que tenga un asilo pendiente no va a tener derecho al permiso de trabajo solo porque tiene el asilo pendiente. Que van a hacer una revisión y a determinar a quiénes, caso por caso, les van a dar derecho a ese permiso de trabajo.

Eso es lo que tenemos oficialmente.

¿Qué quiere decir?

Que quién sabe si todos esos que van a tener ese asilo pendiente por quién sabe cuánto tiempo, quién sabe si van a tener ese permiso de trabajo.

Esa es mi mayor preocupación, Lourdes, porque es que la gente que está pendiente de un asilo, lo que más le interesa —probablemente, según lo que yo escucho— es obtener ese permiso de trabajo. ¿Por qué? Porque les permite seguir trabajando y asegurando su sustento. Pero si no lo tienen, y se tienen que esperar tres, cuatro, cinco, diez años sin permiso de trabajo, ahí es donde está la situación preocupante.

LOURDES UBIETA:

Por supuesto. Estamos conversando con la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias. Así lo veo yo también, ¿no? Porque en ese proceso… además son miles de solicitudes, cientos de miles de solicitudes. No cien ni doscientos. Es decir, humanamente, ¿cuántas personas hacen falta en esta oficina para atender y revisar exhaustivamente y hacer entrevistas exhaustivas de cada una de estas personas a las que su proceso de asilo queda suspendido temporalmente?

Imaginen ustedes… esto puede tardar años, doctora Martha. Años.

Y mientras tanto, la gente tiene que comer, tiene que pagar la luz, tiene que pagar el agua, tienen que vivir.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

No… aquí en la Florida el agua y la luz… y si eso va para arriba, va para arriba. Así es. No, aquí sí vamos a tener que afinar todo, decir: “Venga un momentico, bájele a la burocracia local, bájele a todo eso para poder pagar”, porque mire… nada más estaba viendo estos días que la recolección de basura ya no son quinientos y pico… serán trescientos y pico…

LOURDES UBIETA:

Y la electricidad también para el año que viene… Así es. Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración, gracias por acompañarme.

ABOGADA MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:

Gracias. Un gran abrazo para usted.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION

LOURDES UBIETA:
Well, moving forward with the topics, dear listeners, the United States government, the administration of President Trump has already formally announced what they had warned us was going to happen after the shooting that occurred in Washington the day before Thanksgiving, last week’s Thursday, where an Afghan shot two National Guard members. Well, a few hours later one of them died, a young 20-year-old woman. That unleashed, of course, the fury of President Trump and of the administration. And well, they were announcing that what is USCIS, the Office of Citizenship and Immigration Services, was going to implement new national security measures. Because of this shooting, right?

But it is now a fact that all immigration applications coming from nineteen countries considered high-risk according to the Department of Homeland Security, citing that case of that shooting, well, all immigration applications are going to be suspended. We are talking, dear listeners, about countries such as Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Cuba, and Venezuela.

And that list is based on this presidential proclamation from June that imposed partial or total restrictions on the entry of citizens from these countries, and now it is completely suspended. One wonders: how do the applications, for example, of asylum of these people who are in the United States end up? From Cuba and Venezuela specifically, right? Because they are the ones we see closer. Attorney Martha Arias is with us at this hour, immigration attorney. Attorney, how good to greet you. Welcome to your home, Radio Libre.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Thank you very much, Lourdes. A pleasure for me to be with you. Also greetings to everyone and thank you for inviting me once again to your program.

LOURDES UBIETA:
I am happy to have you here, attorney, so that you can help us understand what is going to happen now. Because in the document it specifies that those who fall under those criteria that we were mentioning will have to undergo an exhaustive review process that may include an interview or a new interview to evaluate all threats against national security and public safety. How does it seem to you and how is this going to operate, attorney?

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
This is—this is one of those situations where theoretically we would all agree with a procedure of review of the criminal background of people, right? I mean, I think that as citizens of the United States, inhabitants of this community, we want the government to know and help us with that security of monitoring who enters our country and who is applying for asylum, so that the person is not a terrorist, a person from any criminal organization. Obviously, we all want that, right? I mean, theoretically, it is something that I think all citizens would want.

In practical terms, it seems to me that the difficult thing is the application of this in practical form, because as you correctly said, Lourdes, the decision-making on all of those asylum cases is going to be paralyzed or paused, particularly those who entered in recent years and those who entered especially through the border without inspection or those who entered with parole, right, and who belong to one of these 19 countries or belong, well, to any of these countries.

So, what does pausing the decision-making mean? That they are not going to approve nor deny any of these cases until a review of them is done. Obviously, these are cases that either already had an interview or are about to or are going to have an interview, and after the interview nothing is going to happen. The interviews will continue being given; that is, the one who has not had an interview will be given an interview. The point is that no decision is going to be made until their criminal records are reviewed exhaustively.

So the next question is: how long is this going to take? We do not know. You know that everything that, especially what comes from the government, can take a little more time. Especially when there are several agencies involved in this; surely we would have the FBI, some other local police agencies, also maybe foreign agencies of other countries that have to do with the police or criminal background of the people from those countries. Obviously, I imagine they will do it through the Department of State, which is the one that manages the consulates, right?

I do not imagine that, for example, for a person who comes from Venezuela, the Department of State, well, will notify the consulate that corresponds now—that is the U.S. consulate in Colombia—to investigate the criminal records of that person in Venezuela or in any other country. And that can take time, as I say. You know, the bureaucracy is a lot and the government works maybe a little less fast, I would say, than the private sector. So I think this can create a delay. How much? Well, we do not know. That is the question for everyone. How long this vetting—which is how the government calls it, the review of background—how long is that going to take? That is what we do not know.

So, I repeat again: in theoretical terms it is a good measure that we all want, I mean in theoretical terms, but in practical terms I think that I do not know if this is going to get out of our hands or how long. Here, as the saying goes, well, dawn will tell. We will stay seated.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Basically what is happening here then, attorney, is that now the federal government and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration have to do what was not done during the Biden administration with these immigrants who entered illegally into the United States without the process of data verification, of who is this person who is entering the country, what is coming, what is it, where does it come from, what is its origin… That is, having to do a process that should have been done before they arrived in the United States, correct?

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Eh… that is correct, but I would not say that it was only something that occurred in the Biden administration, because the Biden administration did have an entry of people, let’s say, overflowing through that border. Which, obviously, nobody wanted that; nobody wants that either. But before Biden, people have entered through the border of the United States and Mexico, and even now many enter through the one with Canada, in the same way. So this is not the first time that we have immigrants who enter through the border and whose backgrounds have never been reviewed.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Of course. What happens is that the latest cases have been precisely people who entered—for example, the case of the Afghan who killed the two National Guard members—that were the product of that chaotic situation with the departure of the United States from Afghanistan, which is not that they should not have left, but how they left, and the consequences that this has brought. Specifically in this case I refer to this Afghan.

Now, I wonder how the asylum applications end up, for example the asylum petitions that are underway, because that is something that I understand is worrying the community a lot, in the case of Cubans, for example.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Those asylum petitions, at least what are affirmative asylums—which are those that are with USCIS, with Citizenship and Immigration Services—those asylums are going to be paused. There is no decision.

Those that are with the Immigration Court, which is already another agency, is called EOIR—Executive Office for Immigration Review—those that are called defensive asylums because they are in a court defending themselves from a deportation, those are going to continue.

The biggest problem that we have now are those that remain paused.

LOURDES UBIETA:
…you mean they remain illegal? No, it is not that they remain illegal, it is simply that the process is paused. They can continue doing their life within the United States.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Yes, but there comes the point I wanted to touch. There comes—we are going one step forward. They are not going to remain illegal because the asylum is pending. As long as the asylum is pending, they are protected from accumulating unlawful presence. Or rather, they are not going to have unlawful presence in the United States.

But now we go to the point of the work permit. Are they going to have a work permit?
And that is what worries me the most, Lourdes, because there is no clarity—or at least I have not seen it—and I do not have any official document that I can use to tell a client: “Yes, sir, you are going to have your work permit while your asylum continues pending.” No. I do not have that document.

What I do have are, for example, government communications that have said that there will no longer be automatic extensions of work permits for people who have pending asylum. Remember that there used to be an automatic extension where the person would have it automatically extended for 180 days, I think it was, after applying for the renewal. There are no longer automatic extensions, number one.

Number two: another communication—a policy alert, a political alert from the government—where they explained that now everyone who has a pending asylum is not going to have the right to a work permit just because they have the pending asylum. That they are going to do a review and determine who, case by case, is going to have the right to that work permit.

That is what we have officially.

What does that mean?
That who knows if all those who are going to have that pending asylum for who knows how long—who knows if they are going to have that work permit.

That is my biggest concern, Lourdes, because people who are waiting for an asylum, what interests them the most—probably, according to what I hear—is to have that work permit. Why? Because it allows them to continue working and earning their living. But if they do not have it, and they have to wait three, four, five, ten years without a work permit, that is where the concerning situation is.

LOURDES UBIETA:
Of course. We are speaking with immigration attorney Martha Arias. That is how I see it too, right? Because in that process… because it is also thousands of applications, hundreds of thousands of applications. Not one hundred nor two hundred. I mean, humanly, how many people are needed in this office to attend to and review exhaustively and do exhaustive interviews for each one of these people whose asylum process is temporarily suspended?

Imagine that… it can take years, attorney Martha. Years. And meanwhile, people have to eat, have to pay electricity, have to pay water, they have to live.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
No… here in Florida the water and electricity… And if that goes up, it goes up. That’s right. No, here we are going to have to refine everything, to say: “Come here for a moment, lower the local bureaucracy, lower all of that so we can pay,” because look… I was just seeing the other day that the garbage collection is no longer five-hundred-and-some… it will be three-hundred-and-some…

LOURDES UBIETA:
And electricity too for next year… That’s right. Martha Arias, immigration attorney, thank you for joining me.

ATTORNEY MARTHA L. ARIAS, ESQ.:
Thank you. A big hug for you.

The post What the New USCIS Suspensions Mean for Asylum Seekers appeared first on Arias Villa Law.

Understanding the Latest TPS Developments

Martha Arias — Wed, 19 Nov 2025 13:19:28 +0000

Last Thursday, I joined journalist Orian Brito to discuss an issue that continues to touch thousands of Venezuelan families in the United States: the end of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and the new legal actions that emerged after November 7. I appreciate every opportunity to help our community understand what these changes truly mean, especially during moments of uncertainty.

During the interview, we talked about the document submitted by more than 125 Democratic legislators to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Although this filing has received significant attention, it is important to approach it with clarity and realism. Legally, it is an amicus brief, a supporting document that expresses political and humanitarian concern, but it does not have the power to reverse the termination of TPS on its own. At this stage, the decision ending TPS remains fully in effect.

For many Venezuelans, especially those who relied solely on TPS and did not have another pending immigration process, this creates a difficult reality. Individuals without asylum applications, family petitions, or another form of relief are now without legal status as of November 7. This change carries serious consequences, including the accumulation of unlawful presence.

I also addressed the confusion surrounding the $100 asylum filing fee. USCIS has now clarified publicly that individuals with pending asylum cases do not need to pay this fee, even if a payment notice was previously issued. That clarification, however, came a few days after the court’s order, and many people understandably felt lost in the process.

We ended our conversation by discussing labor certification cases, travel permits, and the complexities created when TPS, asylum, and employment-based processes intersect. These situations must be evaluated carefully, because each case has its own risks, timelines, and legal implications. For some, a viable path may exist. For others, certain steps—like international travel—can jeopardize everything.

My goal is to keep our community informed with honesty and compassion. These are not easy times, but staying vigilant, asking questions, and seeking reliable legal guidance can make a meaningful difference. I thank Orian for opening this space for clarity and for the respect he always shows toward the immigrant community.

If you need guidance about TPS, asylum, family petitions, labor certification, or your specific situation, you are welcome to contact my office at 305-671-0018. We will continue sharing updates as soon as new information becomes available.

Disclaimer:
The information provided in this article is for general educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration laws and policies change frequently, and the details of each case are unique. Reading this material does not create an attorney-client relationship with my office. If you need guidance about your personal situation, please schedule a consultation so we can review your case individually.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

Orian Brito:
Hola amigos, feliz jueves. Un abrazo para todos ustedes. Gracias por conectarse, por ser parte de esta comunidad. Hay varias informaciones. Una tiene que ver con inmigración, otra tiene que ver con Venezuela, que aunque no es de inmigración propiamente, lo voy a decir porque está en desarrollo. Pero escuchen esto.

Surge un nuevo intento por parte de congresistas de Estados Unidos para revertir la decisión que puso fin al TPS para los venezolanos. Hoy sabemos que más de 125 legisladores demócratas presentaron un documento ante la Corte de Apelaciones del Noveno Circuito el día de hoy para que se anule la medida que terminó con este beneficio migratorio, incluso después de que la Corte Suprema, como ustedes saben, respaldara al Gobierno para poner fin al TPS.

¿Qué impacto real puede tener esta acción? ¿Podría significar una nueva esperanza para los venezolanos que perdieron su TPS? Hoy converso con una abogada muy querida, una mujer muy profesional que siempre me da su tiempo para hablar del tema: es la abogada de inmigración Martha Arias, que nos va a ayudar a entender el alcance legal de esta decisión.

Abogada, ¿cómo está?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Buenas tardes, o buenos días, o… o noche ya. Ya es la noche, más bien.

Orian Brito:
¿Cómo le va?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Muchas gracias por su invitación. Es un placer para mí estar con ustedes y con su audiencia. Estoy bien, bien, con mucho trabajo, muchas cosas que hacer, pero para eso estamos, con salud.

Orian Brito:
Es que es lo más importante, abogada. Quiero preguntarle: ¿qué implica esta acción de los legisladores? Se conoce hoy, 12 de noviembre, pero bueno, ya el TPS el 7 de noviembre prácticamente podemos decir que finalizó. ¿Qué impacto podría tener esta decisión en el Noveno Circuito?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Yo sinceramente creo que no va a tener ningún impacto desde el punto de vista legal. Lo que estos 120 congresistas presentaron —incluyendo una senadora demócrata de la Florida, Debbie Wasserman Schultz— es lo que se llama en inglés un “amicus brief”.

Un “amicus brief” es como un memorial de alegatos que se conoce como amigo de la corte. Es decir, este grupo de congresistas presenta este documento a la corte pidiendo que se reconsidere esa decisión de terminar el TPS de Venezuela.

Ellos aducen, dentro de este memorial de alegatos o dentro de este “amicus brief”, lo siguiente:

Que la ley no le otorga al Ejecutivo —en este caso al Departamento de Homeland Security— la libertad de tomar la decisión de terminar el TPS por razones políticas.
Que la ley le da la libertad de hacerlo por razones humanitarias, pero no políticas.

Entonces consideran estos senadores que, al terminar el Ejecutivo el TPS y los argumentos que presentó, es como que volvieron a escribir la ley —“rewrite the law”—, quiere decir, como que la interpretaron a su manera, pero que el Congreso no tuvo la intención de interpretar la ley de esta forma para ser aplicada al TPS.

En otras palabras, como quien dice que los senadores están diciendo: “Nosotros, el Congreso, interpretamos la ley del TPS de una forma distinta a la que la está interpretando el Ejecutivo, y por lo tanto no debe terminarse este TPS”.

Pero fíjese: esto es un “amicus brief” que se está presentando apenas ahora, cuando ya esta decisión está en firme. Claro, hay ciertas peticiones que se presentan post–decision. Eso es lo que se llama post-decision petitions, peticiones que se presentan después de que hay una decisión. Obviamente, legalmente se pueden hacer, pero bueno…

No sé qué impacto legal tenga. Pienso que tiene más un soporte, un reconocimiento político de los demócratas al pueblo venezolano y al TPS, como un gesto, como un: “Vamos a actuar en beneficio de estos venezolanos”.

Pero pienso yo que es tarde, uno. Y dos: que de pronto esta medida no va a ser tan fuerte, por lo menos en esta etapa, porque no lo hicieron antes… porque no pasó antes… porque no estuvieron antes. Eso es lo que…

Orian Brito:
Por cierto, sobre la tensión en Venezuela, quiero aprovechar este momento —que era lo que iba a decir, que no tiene que ver con inmigración— pero usted sabe que hemos visto un despliegue de Estados Unidos en el Caribe. Hay una tensión entre Estados Unidos y Venezuela. Estados Unidos ha atacado unas narco–lanchas y, solamente a manera de información, hoy lo acaba de informar hace instantes el Secretario de Guerra.

Dice que el presidente Trump —lo voy a leer textual— ordenó actuar, y el Departamento de Guerra está cumpliendo. “Hoy anuncio”, dice, “el operativo Lanza del Sur, dirigido por las Fuerzas de Tarea Conjunta del Comando Sur. Esta misión defiende nuestra nación, elimina a los narcoterroristas de nuestro hemisferio y protege a nuestro país de las drogas que están matando a nuestra gente. El hemisferio occidental es el vecindario de América y lo vamos a proteger.”

Es el anuncio. Anuncian a partir de hoy esta operación Lanza del Sur. ¿Cuál es el alcance? ¿A dónde va o cómo va? No lo podemos decir. Yo no soy astrólogo, ni tampoco experto militar, pero ya la operación tiene un nombre, un objetivo: erradicar el narcoterrorismo.

Así que vamos a estar pendientes con lo que ocurra en las próximas horas.

Fíjese que… quiero preguntarle a la abogada: mientras los venezolanos siguen en esta diatriba, ¿qué hacer? Lo recomendable, en todo caso, sería no esperar qué pueda decidir el Noveno Circuito de Apelaciones, sino buscar otra vía, como se ha hablado anteriormente.

Porque esto… primero, ya estamos a 12 de noviembre, ya se acerca una fecha donde Estados Unidos —o todo el mundo— empieza a salir de vacaciones, etcétera. No tenemos, digamos, una fecha tentativa en la que se podría decidir esto.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Es correcto. No tenemos una fecha tentativa. Y posiblemente —o sea rápido o sea para el año entrante— pero los venezolanos definitivamente…

Hay unos que pueden tener todavía un estatus legal a través del asilo que tengan pendiente, si es que tienen un asilo pendiente.
Otros, pues, que tienen el beneficio de una petición familiar —sea de cónyuge, o de padres, o de hijos— pues también van a tener ese privilegio.

Pero está el gran número de venezolanos que solamente estaban protegidos por el TPS, que no presentaron asilo, y que definitivamente, en este momento —en noviembre 13— están totalmente desprotegidos y sin un estatus legal.

Entonces, la decisión tendría que venir muy rápido para ser positiva para ese grupo de venezolanos que están totalmente desprotegidos. Yo espero que una decisión venga del Congreso, pero directamente del Congreso, no a través de las cortes, porque estos litigios —usted sabe— van y vienen, van y vienen.

Si alguna parte ganara aquí, seguramente el Gobierno va a volver a apelar, y vuelve y apela, y volvemos a este círculo vicioso.

Orian Brito:
Pero es que es un círculo que termina en lo mismo, donde la Corte Suprema le dice al Gobierno: “Usted tiene derecho de quitarlo”, y entonces la gente se queda en el aire.
Yo, siendo venezolano, y trato de brindar servicio a través de este espacio, condeno —y lo digo públicamente— que se brinde una esperanza que siento que es una esperanza delicada. Es decir, que no brinda solidez a la gente.

Sí, vamos a ir al Noveno Circuito… y la gente se sienta y espera al Noveno Circuito.
No. Usted está acumulando, si usted no tiene ningún otro trámite, está acumulando presencia ilegal en Estados Unidos, y eso es gravísimo.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Es así mismo. Es correcto.
La gente que se juega el chance o la oportunidad de quedarse aquí en Estados Unidos sin estatus sabe que eso la va a afectar a futuro, que ya en el futuro tendría que ser una petición de familiar inmediato —que es de cónyuge, padres o hijos ciudadanos americanos— si ellos son menores de edad o…

Van a tener que tener hijos ciudadanos americanos que les vayan a hacer una petición. Y esto, obviamente, es incierto, porque si en este momento no tienen una petición de esta naturaleza, pues no se ve, a corto plazo, esa posibilidad de petición.

Orian Brito:
Quiero preguntarle también sobre el tema del pago de los 100 dólares para el asilo. ¿Cómo se está viviendo esto? Porque al principio el Gobierno lo anunció, después un juez lo frenó. Por ejemplo, en las últimas peticiones que usted ha manejado en su oficina, ¿cómo se está viviendo el proceso?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, como se está viviendo el proceso… la gente está confundida. Obviamente, no es para menos: está confundida porque el Servicio de Inmigración envió notificaciones de pago a las personas que tenían el asilo pendiente.

Entonces, la notificación —o la decisión de la corte— salió el 30 de octubre, y pues muchas personas no pagaron y estaban sin saber si tenían que pagar o no.

Y no fue hasta el 7 de noviembre cuando Inmigración (USCIS) publicó en su página que iban a acatar esta orden, y que las personas que no habían pagado no tenían que pagar, aunque les hubiera llegado la notificación de pago.

Claro, entonces por lo menos esos siete días después de la orden del juez hubo incertidumbre: no se sabía si se tenía que pagar, si no se tenía que pagar… hasta que publican oficialmente y USCIS lo reconoce.

Ahora, en este momento, como está la notificación escrita y publicada por USCIS, la gente ya sabe que no lo tiene que pagar porque pueden leer esa notificación oficial.

Pero yo diría que el periodo de incertidumbre fue más que todo esos siete días después de la decisión del juez. Personas que pagaron la tarifa saben, con esa misma publicación oficial, que no les van a devolver su dinero.

En este momento yo creo que ya la gente está más tranquila y entiende más. Pero aun así creo que todavía hay gente preguntando —en nuestra oficina también—:
“¿Tengo que pagar la tarifa? ¿No la tengo que pagar?”.

Incluso, en las cortes a veces la gente dice: “Bueno, eso fue con Inmigración, ¿pero qué está pasando con la corte?”.

Entonces sí, todavía hay confusión en algunas personas, pero ya es oficial que no tenían —o que no tienen— que hacer ese pago de esos 100 dólares.

Orian Brito:
Claro. Ya para ir cerrando, abogada… Ayer estuve hablando —conversábamos con la abogada de inmigración, Martha Arias— sobre el tema de la certificación laboral, un mecanismo que para algunos puede ser una vía para permanecer en Estados Unidos.

Y hay un caso particular que me ha escrito —y me ha hecho mucho énfasis en esto— porque él tiene su propia firma, ha construido su propia empresa. Él dice… él me comenta que es autodidacta, que en el área del diseño arquitectónico tiene su propia firma y que él siente que no necesitaría un sponsor para aplicar por esa certificación, ya que él presta su servicio de diseño a través de su firma.

Y él tiene como esas dudas porque, claro, el punto está aquí… Ayer me decía un colega suyo que cuando tú acumulas… estás ilegal, aplicar a un trámite es muy difícil porque tendrías que salir.

Entonces, ¿qué se le puede recomendar a las personas que están viendo esta opción? Especialmente para aquellos que tenían TPS, ya no lo tienen, y están sin estatus.

Abogada Martha Arias:
A ver, lo que es el proceso de certificación laboral es un proceso viable. Pero como usted bien lo dice, si la persona ya está fuera de estatus, incluso los que tuvieron TPS por mucho tiempo y les aprobaron la certificación laboral, muchos de ellos igual tenían que salir del país, porque el TPS no es un estatus legal para poder recibir la residencia en esa categoría de empleo.

Entonces, a esas personas yo les recomiendo que consulten bien con un abogado, porque es posible obtener la residencia a través de esa certificación laboral, pero deben analizar bien el caso:

si van a salir del país,
si van a tener que pedir un perdón por presencia ilegal,
si van a requerir un waiver,
si van a tener un familiar que los califique para ese perdón.

Entonces esos son los análisis que se deben hacer antes de empezar o iniciar el proceso de certificado laboral, porque es costoso: puede costar más de 15.000 dólares para una persona este proceso.

Antes de empezar y pagar todo ese dinero, hay que mirar primero hacia adelante:

si la persona va a poder recibir la residencia cuando salga del país a recibirla en el consulado,
si podrá recibirla porque tiene un familiar que califica para presentar el perdón,
o si definitivamente no tiene quien lo califique para el perdón.

Si no tiene quien lo califique, no podrá presentar ese perdón. Entonces, ¿para qué va a invertir 15.000 dólares —o quién sabe cuánto— para llegar a un punto cero? Un punto muerto.

Esos son los análisis que deben hacer las personas antes de iniciar.

Pero hay muchos venezolanos que están haciendo procesos de certificación laboral porque han trabajado para compañías por mucho tiempo y tienen ese patrocinio de esa compañía. Yo los animo a que lo hagan porque, si lo pueden hacer y no van a ser inadmisibles, obviamente es una gran oportunidad para ellos —aunque tengan que salir del país—.

Son muchas cosas, muchos factores los que se deben analizar. Cada caso se analiza bajo tres hechos. Ese análisis requiere, yo diría, no una, sino dos o hasta tres consultas u opiniones de distintos abogados.

Orian Brito:
Hay un tema… Yo conozco el caso de una chica que se le fue aprobada, pero estaba esperando un permiso de viaje, y el permiso de viaje nunca le llegó. Y claro, tiene su asilo porque tenía un asilo pendiente, tenía TPS y ahora todo…

Claro, ¿cómo queda ese permiso de viaje que todavía está esperando, donde además tiene su asilo pendiente y ya tenía esa certificación aprobada?

Es bastante compleja esa situación, sobre todo cuando la última…

Abogada Martha Arias:
Si no recibió ese permiso de viaje, aunque se lo aprueben ahora, no va a tener efecto porque ya el TPS no existe. Porque ha quedado terminado.

Entonces, ahí no va a tener una forma de regresar y que la dejen entrar a continuar con estatus de TPS.

Ahora, si tiene un asilo pendiente, tiene que pedir también un permiso de viaje, que se llama “Refugee Travel Document”, que es un permiso de viaje para aquellas personas que tienen el asilo pendiente.

Porque si ella sale con el permiso del TPS de viaje, realmente no va a regresar con el TPS. Y si no presenta el permiso de viaje a través del asilo, no va a poder regresar a continuar con ese asilo tampoco, porque se va a considerar abandonado.

Una persona que presenta un asilo y sale sin permiso… ese asilo se considera abandonado. Hay que pedir un permiso de viaje con el asilo, con el asilo.

En conclusión: muchas personas que estaban en esta situación tenían que pedir los dos permisos:

el permiso de viaje con el TPS, y
el permiso de viaje con el asilo.

Muy complicado, porque eso es casi incomprensible para las personas que no son abogadas. Y, incluso, para nosotros los abogados nos quedamos confundidos… porque uno se pregunta: “¿Por qué tengo que hacer esto?”, pero es que la ley lo requiere.

Porque son dos figuras distintas que requieren dos peticiones distintas de viaje para poder regresar y retomar sus trámites.

Orian Brito:
Perfecto. Gracias a la abogada Martha Arias. Me gustaría que dé su número de teléfono para cualquier persona que quiera sentarse… Si usted quiere explorar el tema de la certificación laboral, si desea —como en el caso de la chica que estoy comentando— pedir ese permiso de viaje adicional, sentarse con ella, tramitar su asilo, ajustar estatus, petición familiar… bueno, ya sabe: de todo, de todo esto.

Entonces, ¿dónde la pueden contactar?

Abogada Martha Arias:
El teléfono de mi oficina es 305-671-0018. Lo repito: 305-671-0018.

Mi página web es ariasvilla.com. Ahí pueden encontrar la dirección, teléfono, mis redes sociales, Instagram… todo está allí en esa página: ariasvilla.com.

Orian Brito:
Ariasvilla.com, perfecto. Seguimos pendientes del tema migratorio y también del caso de Venezuela. Cierro rapidito con estas dos cosas.

El senador Lindsey Graham ha escrito en los últimos minutos —a quienes se preguntan qué está pasando en Venezuela— que deben entender que el presidente Trump habla muy en serio cuando se trata de detener al narcoestado venezolano, que continúa envenenando a estadounidenses con droga.

“El presidente Trump también considera que Maduro es un líder ilegítimo, cuyos días están contados. Coincido con la evaluación del presidente sobre la situación de Venezuela. No considero a Maduro un líder legítimo, sino un narcotraficante acusado en tribunales.”

Esas son declaraciones que se están dando al margen del anuncio que ha hecho el Secretario de Guerra sobre la operación Lanza del Sur.

¿Qué más? Repito lo que aquí dice un colega de la agencia —no de la agencia, del diario El País— David Alandete, que está en Washington:

“Estados Unidos acelera hacia un escenario inédito en dos décadas. Estudia golpear objetivos en Venezuela mientras convierte su ofensiva antidrogas en una operación militar de largo recorrido. Trump estudia ataques selectivos dentro de Venezuela. La campaña antidrogas pasa a llamarse Operación Lanza del Sur. Como lo dije: despliegan cerca de 12.000 efectivos y una docena de buques en el Caribe, y la Casa Blanca identifica pistas, campamentos y nudos logísticos del chavismo como posibles blancos.”

Eso está en desarrollo. Abogada, estaremos pendientes de este otro tema.

Le agradezco el tiempo. Repito el número de la abogada Martha Arias: 305-671-0018. Repito: 305-671-0018. Le mando un fuerte abrazo y me alegra que esté de vuelta.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Gracias a usted. Gracias por invitarme. Estaré con ustedes aquí con mucho gusto.

Orian Brito:
Y pendiente de lo que pase porque estamos en la región. Colombia y Venezuela son países hermanos que viven una realidad particular, y bueno, esperamos que todo el mundo esté lo mejor posible pronto.

Un abrazo para todos. Dejen sus comentarios y preguntas y nos conectamos próximamente, amigos. Gracias.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

Orian Brito:
Hello friends, happy Thursday. A hug for all of you. Thank you for connecting, for being part of this community. There is various information. One has to do with immigration, another has to do with Venezuela, which although it is not immigration itself, I am going to say it because it is developing. But listen to this.

A new attempt arises from United States congressmembers to reverse the decision that put an end to TPS for Venezuelans. Today we know that more than 125 Democratic legislators presented a document before the Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit today so that the measure that ended this immigration benefit is annulled, even after the Supreme Court, as you know, backed the government to end TPS.

What real impact can this action have? Could it mean new hope for Venezuelans who lost their TPS? Today I am speaking with a very dear attorney, a very professional woman who always gives me her time to talk about the topic. It is the immigration attorney Martha Arias, who is going to help us understand the legal scope of this decision.

Attorney, how are you?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Good afternoon, or good morning, or… or night already. It is night now, rather.

Orian Brito:
How are you doing?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you very much for your invitation. It is a pleasure for me to be here with you, with your audience. I am well, well, a lot of work, many things to do, but that is what we are here for, with health.

Orian Brito:
That is what is most important, attorney. I want to ask you: what does this action by the legislators imply? It became known today, November 12, but well, the TPS on November 7 we can practically say ended. What impact could this decision have in the Ninth Circuit?

Attorney Martha Arias:
I honestly believe it will not have any impact from a legal point of view. What these 120 congressmembers presented —including a Democratic congresswoman from Florida, Debbie Wasserman Schultz— is what is called in English an “amicus brief.”

An “amicus brief” is like a memorandum of arguments known as “friend of the court.” That is, this group of congressmembers presents this document to the court asking that this petition to end TPS for Venezuela be reconsidered.

They argue, inside this memorandum of arguments or inside this “amicus brief,” the following:

That the law does not grant the Executive —in this case the Department of Homeland Security— the freedom to make the decision to end TPS for political reasons.

That the law gives the freedom to do so for humanitarian reasons, but not political ones.

So these senators consider that, when the Executive ended the TPS and the arguments it presented, it is as if they rewrote the law —“rewrite the law”— meaning, as if they interpreted it in their own way, but that Congress did not have the intention of interpreting the law in this way for it to be applied to TPS.

In other words, as if to say that the senators are saying: “We, Congress, interpret the TPS law in a different way than the Executive is interpreting it, and therefore this TPS should not be ended.”

But look, this is an “amicus brief” that is being presented just now, when this decision is already final. Of course, there are certain petitions that are presented post-decision. That is what is called post-decision petitions, petitions that are presented after there is a decision. Legally they can be done, obviously, but well…

I do not know what legal impact it will have. I think it has more of a political support or recognition from the Democrats to the Venezuelan people and to TPS, like a gesture, like a “we are going to act for the benefit of these Venezuelans.”

But I think it is late —first— and second, that maybe this measure will not be so strong, at least at this stage, because they did not do it before… because it did not happen before… because they were not there before. That is what…

Orian Brito:
By the way, about the tension in Venezuela, I want to take advantage of this moment —which was what I was going to say, that it does not have to do with immigration— but you know that we have seen a deployment from the United States in the Caribbean. There is tension between the United States and Venezuela. The United States has attacked some narco-boats, and only as information, today the Secretary of War just informed it moments ago.

He says that President Trump —I am going to read it verbatim— ordered action, and the Department of War is complying. “Today I announce,” he says, “Operation Spear of the South, directed by the Joint Task Forces of the Southern Command. This mission defends our nation, eliminates the narco-terrorists of our hemisphere, and protects our country from the drugs that are killing our people. The Western Hemisphere is America’s neighborhood and we are going to protect it.”

That is the announcement. They announce as of today this operation “Spear of the South.” What is the scope, where is it going, or how is it going? We cannot say. I am not an astrologer, nor a military expert, but the operation already has a name, an objective: to eradicate narco-terrorism.

So we will be watching what happens in the coming hours.

Notice that… I want to ask the attorney: while Venezuelans continue in this dilemma, what to do? The advisable thing, in any case, would be not to wait for what the Ninth Circuit of Appeals may decide, but to look for another path, as has been discussed previously.

Because this… first, we are already on November 12, we are approaching a date when the United States —or the entire world— begins to go on vacation, etc. We do not have, let’s say, a tentative date when this could be decided.

Attorney Martha Arias:
That is correct. We do not have a tentative date. And possibly —whether it is fast or for next year— but Venezuelans definitely…

There are some who may still have a legal status through the asylum they have pending, if they indeed have a pending asylum.
Others who have the benefit of a family petition —whether from a spouse, parents, or children— will also have that privilege.

But there is the large number of Venezuelans who were only protected by TPS, who did not file asylum, and who definitely at this moment —on November 13— are totally unprotected and without legal status.

So the decision would have to come very quickly to be positive for that group of Venezuelans who are totally unprotected. I hope that a decision comes from Congress, but directly from Congress, not through the courts, because these litigations —you know— go and come, go and come.

If one part were to win here, surely the government is going to appeal again, and appeal again, and we return to this vicious circle.

Orian Brito:
But it is a circle that ends in the same place, where the Supreme Court tells the government: “You have the right to remove it,” and then people are left in limbo.

I, being Venezuelan, and I try to provide service through this platform, I condemn —and I say it publicly— giving people a hope that I feel is a delicate hope. That is, it does not give solidity to people.

Yes, “we are going to go to the Ninth Circuit,” and people sit and wait for the Ninth Circuit.
No. If you have no other process, you are accumulating unlawful presence in the United States, and that is very serious.

Attorney Martha Arias:
It is exactly that. It is correct.
People who take the chance or the opportunity to stay here in the United States without status know that it will affect them in the future; that in the future it would have to be through an immediate relative petition —which is for spouse, parents, or U.S. citizen children— if they are minors or…

They would have to have U.S. citizen children who will file a petition for them. And this is obviously uncertain, because if at this moment they do not have a petition of that nature, well, that possibility is not seen in the short term.

Orian Brito:
I also want to ask you about the topic of the 100-dollar payment for asylum. How is this being experienced? Because at first the government announced it, then a judge stopped it. For example, in the most recent petitions you have handled in your office, how is the process being experienced?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, how the process is being experienced… people are confused. Obviously, it is not for less: they are confused because the immigration service sent payment notices to people who had pending asylum.

So the notice —or the court’s decision— came out on October 30, and many people did not pay and were not sure if they had to pay or not.

And it was not until November 7 when Immigration (USCIS) published on its website that they were going to comply with this order and that people who had not paid did not have to pay, even if they had received the payment notice.

Of course, during those seven days after the judge’s order there was uncertainty: they did not know if they had to pay, if they did not have to pay… until they published it and officially USCIS recognized it.

Now, at this moment, because the written and published notice exists from USCIS, people now know they do not have to pay because they can read that official notice.

But I would say that the period of uncertainty was mainly those seven days after the judge’s decision.People who paid the fee know, with that same official publication, that they are not going to get their money back.

At this moment, I believe people are already calmer and understand more. But I still think there are people asking —in our office too—:
“Do I have to pay the fee? Do I not have to pay it?”

Even in the courts sometimes people say: “Well, that was with Immigration, but what is happening with the court?”

So yes, there is still confusion among some people, but it is already official that they did not have to —or do not have to— make that payment of those hundred dollars.

Orian Brito:
Of course. Now, to close, attorney… Yesterday I was talking —we were talking with immigration attorney Martha Arias— about the topic of labor certification, a mechanism that for some can be a way to remain in the United States.

And there is a particular case that wrote to me —and has emphasized this a lot— because he has his own firm, has built his own company. He says… He tells me that he is self-taught, that in the area of architectural design he has his own firm, and that he feels he wouldn’t need a sponsor to apply for that certification since he provides his design services through his firm.

And he has those doubts because, of course, here is the point… Yesterday a colleague of yours told me that when you accumulate… when you are illegal, applying for a process is very difficult because you would have to leave.

So what can be recommended to people who are looking at this option? Especially those who had TPS, no longer have it, and are without status.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Let’s see, what is the labor certification process is a viable process. But as you correctly say, if the person is already out of status —even those who had TPS for a long time and had the labor certification approved— many of them also had to leave the country, because TPS is not a lawful status that allows you to receive permanent residence in that employment category.

So, to those people, I recommend that they consult well with an attorney, because it is possible to obtain residence through that labor certification, but they must analyze the case carefully:

if they are going to leave the country,
if they are going to have to request a waiver for unlawful presence,
if they are going to need a waiver,
if they have a relative who qualifies them for that waiver.

Those are the analyses that must be done before starting or initiating the labor certification process, because it is costly: it can cost more than $15,000 for a person.

Before starting and paying all that money, you must first look ahead:

whether the person will be able to receive residence when leaving the country to receive it at the consulate,
whether they will be able to receive it because they have a qualifying relative to file the waiver,
or whether they absolutely do not have anyone who qualifies them for the waiver.

If they have no one who qualifies them, they will not be able to submit that waiver. So why invest $15,000 —or who knows how much— to reach a zero point? A dead end.

Those are the analyses people must undertake before beginning.

But there are many Venezuelans doing labor certification processes because they have worked for companies for a long time and have the sponsorship from that company. I encourage them to do it because, if they can do it and they are not going to be inadmissible, then obviously that is a big opportunity for them —even if they have to leave the country.

There are many things, many factors that must be analyzed. Each case is analyzed under three facts. That analysis requires, I would say, not only one, but two or even three consultations or opinions from different attorneys.

Orian Brito:
There is a topic… I know the case of a girl whose labor certification was approved, but she was waiting for a travel permit, and the travel permit never arrived. And of course, she has her asylum because she had a pending asylum, she had TPS, and now everything…

Of course, how does that travel permit stand —that she is still waiting for— where she also has a pending asylum and already had that certification approved?

It is quite complex, especially when the last…

Attorney Martha Arias:
If she did not receive that travel permit, even if it arrives now and is approved, it will have no effect because TPS no longer exists. Because it has ended.

So there will not be a way for her to return and be allowed to enter to continue with TPS status.

Now, if she has a pending asylum, she also has to request a travel permit called the “Refugee Travel Document,” which is a travel permit for people who have asylum pending.

Because if she leaves with the TPS travel permit, she is not really going to return with TPS. And if she does not submit the travel permit through the asylum, she will not be able to return to continue with that asylum either, because it will be considered abandoned.

A person who has filed asylum and leaves without permission… that asylum is considered abandoned. You have to request a travel permit with the asylum, with the asylum.

In conclusion, many people who were in this situation had to request both permits:

the travel permit with TPS, and

the travel permit with the asylum.

Very complicated, because that is almost incomprehensible for people who are not attorneys. And even for us, the attorneys, we are left confused… because one asks: “Why do I have to do this?” But that is what the law requires.

Because they are two different categories that require two different petitions for travel to be able to return and resume their processes.

Orian Brito:
Perfect. Thanks to attorney Martha Arias. I would like you to give your phone number for anyone who wants to sit down… If you want to explore the topic of labor certification, if you want —as in the case of the girl I am mentioning— to request that additional travel permit, to sit with her, process your asylum, adjust status, family petition… well, you already know, all of this.

So, where can they contact you?

Attorney Martha Arias:
The phone number of my office is 305-671-0018. I repeat: 305-671-0018.

My website is ariasvilla.com. There you can find the address, phone number, my social media, Instagram… everything is there on that page: ariasvilla.com.

Orian Brito:
Ariasvilla.com, perfect. We continue to monitor the immigration issue and also the case of Venezuela. I’ll close quickly with these two things.

Senator Lindsey Graham has written in the last few minutes —to those who wonder what is happening in Venezuela— that they must understand that President Trump speaks very seriously when it comes to stopping the Venezuelan narco-state, which continues poisoning Americans with drugs.

“President Trump also considers Maduro an illegitimate leader whose days are numbered. I agree with the president’s assessment of the situation in Venezuela. I do not consider Maduro a legitimate leader, but rather a narcotrafficker indicted in courts.”

Those are statements being made on the sidelines of the announcement made by the Secretary of War about the Spear of the South operation.

What else? I repeat what a colleague from the agency —not the agency, the El País newspaper— David Alandete, who is in Washington, says:

“The United States accelerates toward an unprecedented scenario in two decades. It is studying striking targets in Venezuela while turning its anti-drug offensive into a long-term military operation. Trump is studying selective strikes inside Venezuela. The anti-drug campaign is now called Operation Spear of the South. As I said, they are deploying about 12,000 personnel and a dozen ships in the Caribbean, and the White House identifies airstrips, camps, and logistical hubs of chavismo as possible targets.”

That is developing. Attorney, we will be attentive to this other issue.

I thank you for your time. I repeat the number of attorney Martha Arias: 305-671-0018. I repeat: 305-671-0018. I send you a big hug and I’m glad you’re back.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you. Thank you for inviting me. I will be here with you with great pleasure.

Orian Brito:
And attentive to what happens because we are in the region. Colombia and Venezuela are brother countries that live a particular reality, and well, we hope everyone will be as well as possible soon.

A hug for everyone. Leave your comments and questions, and we will connect again soon, friends. Thank you.

The post Understanding the Latest TPS Developments appeared first on Arias Villa Law.

After TPS: The Hard Truth Facing Venezuelans in the U.S.

Martha Arias — Wed, 12 Nov 2025 19:16:25 +0000

In my recent interview on Unión Radio, with Eduardo Rodríguez and Saúl Noriega, I spoke about the complex reality that many Venezuelans are facing today after the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for their community.

This is not only a legal matter but also a deeply human one. Each person’s story is different, and each case requires individual attention. Yet there are certain common threads among all: uncertainty, fear of losing protection, and the pressure to make difficult decisions amid changing immigration policies and false expectations.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

The Human Impact Behind the Numbers

When people hear that “250,000 Venezuelans will be affected”, it sounds abstract — but behind that number are families, jobs, and futures built over years of hard work. Some Venezuelans have found legal pathways through marriage to U.S. citizens or residents, others through their U.S.-born or recently naturalized children who can now file petitions on their behalf.

For these individuals, there are solutions available through family-based petitions and adjustment of status.

However, many others remain in more fragile circumstances. Some have pending asylum cases, others have received denials, and others never filed any petition at all. The latter are now in what I would call an “immigration limbo” — a vulnerable space where there is no protection and no immediate path forward.

Those who still have an asylum application pending can continue with their process and maintain their work permit through asylum. But as I explained in the interview, asylum is one of the most difficult protections to win in U.S. immigration law. It requires extensive evidence, time, and preparation. When denied, the person can be referred to Immigration Court and placed in removal proceedings. This means that while asylum provides temporary protection, it is an unstable safeguard.

The Responsibility of Staying Without Legal Status

One question I was asked was whether it is “responsible” for someone without papers to remain in the U.S., waiting for a potential change in administration or court decision that could reverse the end of TPS.

As an attorney, I must say: staying in the country without status is not responsible from a legal standpoint. It places the individual — and their family — in a constant state of risk. Detention or deportation can occur at any moment, and without prior preparation, it can leave loved ones unprotected.

If someone decides to remain despite the risks, it is essential to make contingency plans: designate guardianship for children, clarify financial and property management, and ensure that family members are informed and prepared. These are difficult conversations, but they are acts of responsibility toward one’s family.

I understand, however, that many people feel they cannot return. Venezuela’s political and humanitarian crisis has pushed countless families to make impossible choices. My role as an immigration attorney is not to judge these decisions but to provide honest guidance and realistic options.

A Historical Perspective: TPS Has Always Been Temporary

Many people believe that because TPS has been renewed in the past, it will always continue. Historically, it has indeed been extended multiple times. For example, TPS for Nicaragua and Honduras has lasted for over 27 years since 1998. Those beneficiaries built entire lives in the U.S. under that protection.

However, TPS — as its name says — is temporary. It can end when the government determines that conditions in the designated country have improved or for policy reasons.

In the current case of Venezuela, the government did not specifically claim that the conditions in the country had changed; rather, it based the termination on broader administrative arguments, including recent security concerns. Unfortunately, those isolated cases have overshadowed the reality that the vast majority of Venezuelans in the U.S. are law-abiding individuals who came seeking safety and opportunity.

As of now, there is at least one pending lawsuit in California challenging the termination of TPS, but until a court issues a new ruling, affected individuals must prepare for all possible outcomes.

The Rise of Misleading Visa Offers: The EB-2 “National Interest Waiver”

Another subject I addressed during the interview is the growing number of misleading offers surrounding the EB-2 National Interest Waiver — often referred to as “EB-2 NIW.”

This type of petition is legitimate and valuable for qualified individuals. It allows certain professionals with advanced degrees or exceptional abilities to apply for residency without employer sponsorship if they can show that their work benefits the national interest of the United States.

However, the problem lies in how this visa is being promoted. Recently, it has been heavily commercialized on social media and by unqualified agents as if it were available to anyone with a university degree and five years of experience. Some people are being charged $15,000 to $20,000 for these applications, with the false promise of guaranteed approval.

That is simply not true. The EB-2 NIW requires a strong academic, professional, and salary profile — not just a diploma. It demands detailed evidence of national impact, publications, achievements, or unique expertise. Unfortunately, I have seen many cases denied because individuals were misled into believing they qualified when they did not.

Before investing large amounts of money in any immigration process, always verify the attorney’s credentials, review the requirements with a licensed immigration lawyer, and ensure that the petition is legally sound.

The end of TPS for Venezuelans has caused understandable concern and confusion. Yet, despite the uncertainty, there are still lawful paths available for those who qualify. It’s essential to act wisely, avoid misinformation, and stay informed through credible sources and licensed professionals.

If you or someone you know is affected by the end of TPS or has been approached with offers that sound “too good to be true,” seek proper legal advice before taking any step.

You may contact my office at 305-671-0018 or follow me on social media for updates and educational content. Staying informed and guided by reliable information is the best protection you can have in uncertain times.

Disclaimer:
This publication is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this article does not create an attorney-client relationship. For personalized advice, please schedule a consultation with an immigration attorney.

SPANISH TRANSCRIPT:

HOST:
Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración, gran colaboradora de este espacio, está en Miami, Estados Unidos, y la tenemos vía telefónica. Martha, como siempre, muy gentil, un gusto tenerte por acá.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Buenos días, Eduardo y Saúl. Un saludo para ustedes, muchísimas gracias por invitarme. Es un placer para mí estar con ustedes.

HOST:
¡Caramba! Pero qué bella eres, qué buena energía, qué educación. Con esa entrada, imagínate tú, Martha, eso no lo hace todo el mundo. Gracias, gracias, gracias en la distancia.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Gracias, gracias a ustedes. Eres una dama.

HOST:
Mira, Martha, primero: ¿son realmente 250.000 las personas que están afectadas directamente por esta decisión del TPS? Y un poco de manera redundante, pero para ir al detalle posible, ¿cuál es la perspectiva para ellos en medio de lo que está pasando?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, es un poco complicada la perspectiva para la mayoría. Y digo la mayoría porque, como usted podrá entender, muchos van a tener una suerte distinta. Cada uno va a tener su propia suerte.
Aquellas personas que se casaron con ciudadanos americanos —que yo tengo varios de ellos, incluso con residentes— pueden tener una forma de resolver su estatus migratorio. También tengo venezolanos que tenían el TPS y cuyos hijos son ciudadanos americanos o se hicieron recientemente ciudadanos americanos. Ellos también pueden hacer un ajuste de estatus y pedir su residencia.

Pero hay otras personas que tienen el asilo, todavía con una solicitud pendiente. Esas personas deben continuar con su petición de asilo y el permiso de trabajo a través del mismo. Obviamente, es una situación muy inestable, porque el asilo —como usted bien sabrá— es una aplicación que se presenta, hay que probar demasiado, y es muy difícil ganarlo. Si se lo niegan, eventualmente pueden ser enviados a una corte de inmigración para una posible deportación. Entonces, esos que tienen el asilo están protegidos, pero de una forma inestable, diría yo.

Y finalmente, están los que ya no tienen nada que hacer: los que no presentaron petición de asilo, no tienen asilo pendiente, no tienen familia que los pida… esos están prácticamente en un limbo migratorio. Esos son los que más nos preocupan.

HOST:
Ahora, doctora, fíjese: el tema político que tanto influye en este tipo de decisiones —pendiente también de lo que veníamos conversando— el tema de la perspectiva y del futuro, sobre todo para los que dicen “yo no tengo papeles, pero si sale una decisión del tribunal tal o incluso la administración Trump cambia esto, yo me quedo y me aguanto”. ¿Es una decisión responsable, sobre todo para quien piensa así con su familia al lado?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, yo pienso que obviamente responsable no es, porque uno, pues, está en los Estados Unidos en violación de la ley; y dos, vive en una incertidumbre total, en la que en cualquier momento lo pueden detener, arrestar, llevar a detención, y su familia, sus bienes, sus pertenencias, quedan sometidos a un drama o a una situación complicada.

Las personas deben prepararse si van a quedarse en esas circunstancias: cómo manejar la tutela o la potestad de sus hijos, cómo sus bienes van a ser administrados. Todo esto, porque sería muy complicado que una persona sea arrestada, no tenga papeles y, de un momento a otro, no pueda responder por su familia.

Lo otro que considero es que, sí, hay personas que se juegan ese chance —vamos a llamarlo así— o toman ese riesgo, y en el futuro resuelven de alguna manera. Claro que hay muchas personas que lo hacen así, pero desde el punto de vista legal, obviamente, como abogada, no puedo decir que es responsable. Sin embargo, entiendo a muchas personas que no quieren regresar o que definitivamente no pueden regresar a su país y tienen que jugarse esta carta de esa manera.

HOST:
Amigos, estamos conversando con Martha Arias desde Miami, vía telefónica, abogada de inmigración. Tomando en cuenta tu especialidad y conocimiento histórico, una situación así —vista más allá del TPS para venezolanos, observando el todo del tema migratorio en Estados Unidos— ¿tiene precedentes? Porque, al final, uno se pregunta: si decido quedarme en ese limbo, ¿hasta qué punto puedo sobrevivir en medio de ese laberinto?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Desde el punto de vista histórico, el TPS siempre se ha extendido, se ha vuelto a otorgar. De hecho, sabemos que el TPS de Nicaragua y Honduras estaba vigente desde 1998 y duró prácticamente 27 años siendo extendido. Las personas tenían derecho al permiso de trabajo y vivían aquí por casi tres décadas.

Pero sí, bajo la ley, el TPS, como lo dice su propio nombre, es una protección temporal. Puede ser eliminado si hay cambios en las condiciones del país o ciertas circunstancias. En este caso, el gobierno no adujo realmente cambios en las condiciones del país; más bien, argumentó una situación de protección y sostuvo que muchas de las personas que habían entrado recientemente y aplicaron para el TPS pertenecían al “Tren de Aragua”.

Obviamente, todos sabemos que esas son pocas personas, y la gran mayoría son trabajadores honestos, incluso muchos que entraron con visa. Pero, aun así, el gobierno ha terminado el TPS en otras ocasiones. En este caso, las demandas que se presentaron ganaron ciertas batallas, pero no la guerra. Llegaron hasta la Corte Suprema, donde la Corte claramente apoyó al Ejecutivo en la terminación del TPS.

Aparentemente, tengo conocimiento de que hay una demanda pendiente en California sobre esto, pero no tengo mucha información porque aún no se ha hecho pública. En su debido momento, cuando ya se anuncie y tengamos claridad de lo que están pidiendo las partes demandantes, podremos conversar al respecto.

Por ahora, las personas deben protegerse: o salir del país, o continuar con su asilo, o tomar sus riesgos.

HOST:
Doctora, ya nos queda un minuto y medio. En su práctica cotidiana, ¿qué tipo de peticiones predominan entre los venezolanos que acuden a su oficina? ¿Le piden ayuda para quedarse o para mantener sus papeles en regla y poder viajar hacia otro país?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Mire, sinceramente, la mayoría —yo diría un 40 o 45 por ciento— se están inclinando por peticiones laborales a través de empleadores, lo cual es correcto; hay ciertas peticiones que se pueden hacer. Pero la mayoría debe salir del país, no pueden ajustar estatus ni recibir su residencia aquí con esas peticiones de empleo.

Sin embargo, hay mucha desinformación, porque a veces la gente no entiende que debe salir del país. Inician estos procesos costosos sin saber que deberán salir a recibir la residencia fuera de Estados Unidos. Me da mucha pena por ellos, porque invierten dinero y tiempo para luego enterarse de eso.

Otros están aplicando para lo que se ha promocionado —o mercadeado, porque realmente es mercadeo— como la “EB-2 National Interest Waiver”, o EB-2 con interés nacional. Es una petición de residencia para personas con habilidades extraordinarias, que pueden demostrar estar en el top de su profesión o carrera. Pero se requiere probar bastante.

Últimamente la están comercializando, como digo yo, como pan diario. Y eso no es así. No es una visa para todo el mundo. Requiere calificaciones, un perfil profesional, académico, laboral y de salario muy alto. Pero se la venden por 15 o 20 mil dólares. Es costosa. Le hacen creer que con tener un título universitario y cinco años de experiencia ya califican, y no es cierto. Me da mucha pena ver personas con esas visas denegadas después de invertir tanto dinero.

Así que, sí, mucha gente está recurriendo a la EB-2 de Interés Nacional con esperanza, gastando dinero, y no siempre es la opción adecuada. El resto de las personas —la mayoría— siguen afianzadas en el asilo. Yo diría otro 40 por ciento. Y un pequeño grupo ha decidido hacer su petición a través del matrimonio, obviamente de buena fe, con intención genuina de vida en pareja. Algunos no se habían casado por ser jóvenes o por esperar alguna situación familiar, pero ante las circunstancias, han decidido hacerlo.

HOST:
Muchísimas gracias, Martha. Qué gentil y qué interesante aporte en medio de este tema tan delicado para tantos venezolanos. Un gran abrazo.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Muchísimas gracias. Un abrazo para ustedes y feliz resto de semana.

HOST:
Igualmente, Martha Arias, abogada de inmigración. Qué buena vocera, qué respuestas tan técnicas. Muchos están aprovechando la preocupación de los venezolanos y les están vendiendo cosas que no son. Y ese es otro punto al que hay que prestarle atención.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

HOST:
Martha Arias, immigration attorney and great collaborator of this program, is in Miami, United States, and we have her on the phone line. Martha, as always, very kind—such a pleasure to have you with us.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Good morning, Eduardo and Saúl. A greeting to both of you, and thank you very much for inviting me. It’s a pleasure for me to be with you.

HOST:
Goodness! You are so lovely, what good energy, what manners. With that introduction—imagine! Martha, not everyone does that. Thank you, thank you, thank you, from afar.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you, thank you to you. You are very kind.

HOST:
Look, Martha, first—are there really 250,000 people directly affected by this TPS decision? And, to be a little redundant but go into detail if possible—what is the outlook for them in the midst of what is happening?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, the outlook is a little complicated for the majority. And I say “the majority” because, as you can understand, many will have a different fate. Each one will have their own fate.
Those who married U.S. citizens — and I have several of them, even with residents — may have a way to resolve their immigration status. I also have Venezuelans who had TPS and whose children are U.S. citizens or recently became citizens. They too can adjust status and apply for residency.

But there are other people who have asylum, still with a pending application. Those individuals must continue with their asylum case and their work permit through asylum. Obviously, it is also a very unstable situation because, as you well know, asylum is an application that must be proven extensively. It is very difficult to win, and if denied, they can eventually be sent to immigration court for possible deportation. So those who have asylum are protected, but in an unstable way, I would say.

And finally, there are those who have nothing left to do — those who did not file for asylum, do not have a pending case, and do not have family members to petition for them. Those are practically in an immigration limbo. They are the ones we worry about the most.

HOST:
Now, attorney, consider this—the political factor that so strongly influences these types of decisions. Regarding what we were talking about—the outlook and the future—especially for those who say, “I don’t have papers, but if a certain court decision comes out, or if the Trump administration changes this, I’ll stay and hold on.” Is that a responsible decision, especially for someone thinking that way with their family beside them?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, I think that, obviously, it is not responsible because, first, one is in the United States in violation of the law; and second, one is living in complete uncertainty, where at any moment they can be detained, arrested, taken into custody, and their family, their belongings, their possessions are left facing a drama or a complicated situation.

People must prepare themselves if they plan to remain under such circumstances: how to handle guardianship or custody of their children, how their assets will be managed. All of this, because it would be very difficult for a person to be arrested, have no documents, and from one moment to the next be unable to respond for their family.

Another thing I consider is that, yes, there are people who take that chance — let’s call it that — or take that risk, and in the future, they somehow manage to resolve. Of course, many people do that. But from a legal standpoint, obviously, as an attorney, I cannot say it’s responsible. However, I understand many who do not want to return or who simply cannot return to their country and must play this card this way.

HOST:
Friends, we’re speaking with Martha Arias from Miami, by phone, immigration attorney. Considering your specialty and even historical knowledge, a situation like this — not only from the perspective of the temporary protection system for Venezuelans but from the broader historical view of immigration in the United States — does it have precedent? Because, as Saúl was suggesting, in the end one wonders: if I decide to remain in that limbo, to what extent can I survive in that maze?

Attorney Martha Arias:
From a historical point of view, TPS has always been extended; it has always been renewed. In fact, we know that the TPS for Nicaragua and Honduras began in 1998 and lasted practically 27 years being extended. Those people had the right to work permits and lived here for almost three decades.

But yes, under the TPS law, as its name says, is temporary protection. It can be terminated if conditions in the country change or under certain circumstances. In this case, the government did not really claim that the conditions in Venezuela had changed; rather, it argued a situation of national protection, stating that many of the people who had recently entered and applied for TPS were members of the “Tren de Aragua.”

Obviously, we all know those are very few individuals, and the great majority are honest workers — many of them even entered with visas. But still, the government has terminated TPS in other cases. In this case, the lawsuits that were filed won some battles but not the war. They reached the Supreme Court, which clearly supported the executive branch in the termination of TPS.

Apparently, I have knowledge of a pending lawsuit in California on this issue, but I don’t have much information because it hasn’t yet been made public. At the right time, when it’s announced and we have clarity about what the plaintiffs are demanding and what arguments are being made, we can talk about it.

For now, people must protect themselves—either leave the country, continue with asylum, or take their risks.

HOST:
Attorney, we have about a minute and a half left. In your day-to-day legal practice, what trend are you seeing among Venezuelan clients? Do they ask you for help to stay in the U.S., or to maintain their papers properly to perhaps travel to another country?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, I’ll tell you honestly, the majority — I would say around 40 or 45 percent — are leaning toward employment-based petitions through employers, which is valid; there are certain petitions that can be done. But most of them must leave the country; they cannot adjust status or obtain residency here through those petitions.

However, there is a lot of misinformation about this because people often don’t understand they must leave the country. They begin these processes, which are very costly, without realizing that they’ll have to depart to obtain the residency abroad. I feel bad for them because they invest money only to later learn that they’ll need to leave anyway.

Others are applying for what has been promoted — or marketed, because it really is marketing — as the “EB-2 National Interest Waiver.” It’s a residence petition for people with extraordinary abilities who can show that they are at the top of their profession or occupation. But that requires significant proof.

Lately, it’s being commercialized, as I say, like daily bread. And it shouldn’t be. It is not a visa for everyone. It requires qualifications and a very high professional, academic, employment, and salary profile. Yet it’s being sold for $15,000 to $20,000. It’s extremely expensive. They tell people that if you have a university degree and more than five years of experience, you qualify. No—that’s not true. I feel sorry to see people with those visas denied after investing so much money.

So yes, many are turning to the EB-2 National Interest Waiver with hope, spending a lot of money, and it’s not always the right option. The rest — most — are still relying on asylum. I’d say another 40 percent. And a smaller group has decided to file petitions through marriage, obviously real marriages made in good faith. Some hadn’t married yet because they were young or waiting for family situations, but seeing the current circumstances, they’ve decided to take that step.

HOST:
Thank you very much, Martha. How kind, and what an insightful contribution amid this distressing issue for so many Venezuelans. A big hug.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you very much. A hug to all of you, and have a wonderful rest of the week.

HOST:
Likewise, Martha Arias, immigration attorney. What a fine spokesperson—such direct, technical answers. As Eduardo was saying, many are taking advantage of Venezuelans’ worry, selling them things that aren’t true. And that’s another point we must pay attention to.

The post After TPS: The Hard Truth Facing Venezuelans in the U.S. appeared first on Arias Villa Law.

Federal Court Ruling on Humanitarian Parole and What It Means for Immigrants

Martha Arias — Sat, 20 Sep 2025 01:52:07 +0000

This week, I joined Andreina Gandica on Buenos Días América to discuss a very important topic: the recent federal court ruling that allows the Trump administration to end the humanitarian parole program. This program has been vital for immigrants from Cuba, Venezuela, Haiti, and Nicaragua, benefiting more than 400,000 people.

The concern is not only for future applicants but also for those who already entered the United States under humanitarian parole. The government is attempting to treat them as if they had never entered legally, which could undermine rights they already acquired.

My message to the community is this: do not lose hope. If you entered the U.S. with parole, that fact is still critical for your case. Many courts have recognized that entering legally with parole qualifies individuals for adjustment of status in certain cases, such as marriage to a U.S. citizen or having a U.S. citizen parent.

I strongly encourage everyone affected to stay informed, consult with their attorneys, and defend their cases. Immigration law is constantly evolving, and persistence is key.

During the program, I also addressed a caller’s question about passport renewals. My advice is to renew your passport about 4–5 months before it expires to avoid any delays. Additionally, U.S. citizens can apply for a passport card if they want a smaller document to carry alongside the passport booklet.

If you need assistance with your immigration process or want to discuss your legal options, please contact me at (305) 671-0018 or visit my website at ariasvilla.com. Let’s continue standing together for immigrant rights.

DISCLAIMER:
This is general information and not legal advice. For advice specific to your case, please consult directly with an attorney.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Spanish Transcript

Andreina Gandica:
Bien, y ya está con nosotros Martha Arias, abogada experta en inmigración. ¿Cómo estás, Martha? Buenos días.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Buenos días. Un saludo para usted y toda la audiencia. Feliz mitad de semana.

Andreina Gandica:
Bueno, vamos a recordar a la audiencia que puede hacerle preguntas a la abogada Arias al 1-833-867-2346. El momento es ahora. Abogada, una corte federal dictaminó que la administración de Donald Trump podrá poner fin al programa de “parole humanitario” que beneficia a unos 430 mil inmigrantes aproximadamente entre los países de Cuba, Venezuela, Haití y Nicaragua. ¿Qué debemos saber de esto?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Bueno, pienso que esto va a tener la misma suerte que está teniendo el TPS de Venezuela, que hoy escuchamos una decisión y posiblemente mañana sea otra. Las cortes, tanto el gobierno como las organizaciones pro bono en defensa de los inmigrantes, están constantemente presentando apelaciones.

¿Qué es lo que pasa? Es cierto que el gobierno puede terminar el programa de “parole” para nuevos aplicantes. Lo delicado de estas decisiones es que el gobierno intenta terminar el “parole humanitario” para aquellos que ya entraron, y que esas personas queden como si nunca hubieran entrado con “parole”, como si hubieran entrado ilegalmente. Esa es la parte delicada.

Mi consejo para las personas es el siguiente: ya saben que el “parole” con el que entraron se terminó, ya saben que en este momento no hay una extensión; deben buscar una forma de resolver su estatus migratorio. Para aquellos que entraron con “parole” y pidieron residencia o están a punto de pedirla, comuníquense con sus abogados, traten de defender el caso, escuchen las últimas decisiones de la Corte, porque muchos de nosotros estamos argumentando —y ya ha habido algunas sentencias— que dicen que ese “parole” cuenta, por lo menos el hecho de que cuando entraron tenían el “parole”. Está bien que lo quiten después, pero el hecho de que cuando entraron lo hicieron legalmente con un “parole”, los califica para un ajuste de estatus, sea porque se casaron con un ciudadano americano o porque son menores de edad y tienen un padre ciudadano americano que los está pidiendo.

Entonces, el consejo es: por favor, no se den por vencidos, porque tenemos que seguir luchando para que no se desvirtúe ese derecho que la persona ya adquirió por haber entrado legalmente con su “parole”.

Andreina Gandica:
Bueno abogada, tenemos llamadas al 1-833-867-2346. Eugenio Cabral quiere hacerle una pregunta desde Nueva York. Adelante Eugenio, buenos días.

Eugenio Cabral (oyente):
Quiero preguntar, abogada, buenos días para todos. Yo soy ciudadano americano, con pasaporte estadounidense. En junio del año que viene, 2026, quiero renovarlo. Estoy pensando en renovarlo lo más pronto posible, porque una vez solicite la renovación, quiero también la tarjeta que verifica que soy ciudadano americano, para no andar siempre con el pasaporte. ¿Qué me recomienda? ¿Que lo haga temprano para tener esa tarjeta? ¿O espero dos meses antes de que caduque el pasaporte?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Mi recomendación es que usted puede renovar el pasaporte incluso unos cuatro meses antes de que venza. No lo haga dos meses antes porque podría tardar en llegar, y como está la situación, usted quiere asegurarse de tener su pasaporte. Entonces, unos cuatro, incluso hasta cinco meses antes lo puede hacer sin problema.

Eso es uno. Dos, en cuanto a la tarjeta: si usted ya tiene el pasaporte físico, el librito como lo llaman, puede pedir la tarjeta sin necesidad de hacer la renovación. Desde ahora la puede solicitar, solo que le van a pedir prueba de que tiene el librito. Entonces, si lo quiere hacer desde ahora, lo puede hacer; si no, hágalo unos cuatro o cinco meses antes y pida su tarjeta de una vez, como usted prefiera.

Andreina Gandica:
Abogada, muchas gracias. Gracias a usted también, Eugenio. Gracias por conectar con nosotros. Abogada, ¿dónde podemos encontrarla?

Abogada Martha Arias:
En mi oficina, al (305) 671-0018, o más fácil para aquellos que estén conduciendo o no tengan a mano un lápiz: mi página web ariasvilla.com. Disculpe que tuve que tomar la llamada en la vía precisamente hacia la Junta de Abogados de Inmigración a la que pertenezco. El tráfico aquí está terrible, pero no podía perder la oportunidad de conversar con ustedes, así que lo hacemos de esta forma.

Andreina Gandica:
Se lo agradecemos enormemente, abogada. Muchas gracias por estar aquí con nosotros, y nuestra audiencia también se lo agradece.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Gracias a ustedes.

Andreina Gandica:
Un abrazo. Este fue nuestro segmento de miércoles de migración con la abogada Martha Arias en la mañana de hoy.

English Translation

Andreina Gandica:
Well, and now we have with us Martha Arias, an attorney expert in immigration. How are you, Martha? Good morning.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Good morning. A greeting to you and all the audience. Happy midweek.

Andreina Gandica:
Well, let’s remind the audience that they can ask questions to attorney Arias at 1-833-867-2346. The moment is now. Attorney, a federal court ruled that Donald Trump’s administration may end the humanitarian parole program that benefits about 430,000 immigrants from Cuba, Venezuela, Haiti, and Nicaragua. What should we know about this?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Well, I think this will have the same fate as Venezuelan TPS, where today we hear one decision and possibly tomorrow another. The courts, both the government and pro bono organizations defending immigrants, are constantly filing appeals.

What happens? It is true that the government can end the parole program for new applicants. The delicate part of these decisions is that the government tries to end humanitarian parole for those who already entered, leaving them as if they had never entered with parole, as if they had entered illegally. And that is the delicate part.

My advice to people is the following: you already know that the parole with which you entered has ended, you already know that right now there is no extension; you must look for a way to resolve your immigration status. For those who entered with parole and applied for residency or are about to apply, contact your attorneys, try to defend your case, listen to the latest Court decisions, because many of us are arguing —and there have already been rulings— that say that parole counts, at least the fact that when they entered, they had parole. It is fine if they remove it later, but the fact that when they entered they did so legally with parole qualifies them for adjustment of status, whether because they married a U.S. citizen or because they are minors with a U.S. citizen parent petitioning for them.

So the advice is: please, do not give up, because we must continue fighting so that this right that the person already acquired is not distorted, since they already entered legally with their parole.

Andreina Gandica:
Well attorney, we have calls at 1-833-867-2346. Eugenio Cabral wants to ask you a question from New York. Go ahead Eugenio, good morning.

Eugenio Cabral (caller):
I want to ask, attorney, good morning to everyone. I am a U.S. citizen, with a U.S. passport. In June of next year, 2026, I want to renew it. I am thinking of renewing it as soon as possible, because once I apply for renewal, I also want the card that verifies I am a U.S. citizen, so I don’t always have to carry my passport. What do you recommend? Should I do it early to have that card, or wait until two months before the passport expires?

Attorney Martha Arias:
My recommendation is that you can renew your passport even four months before it expires. Don’t do it just two months before because it might take time to arrive, and given the situation, you want to make sure you have your passport. So about four, even up to five months before, you can do it without problem.

That’s one. Two, regarding the card: if you already have the physical passport, the booklet as they call it, you can request the card without needing to do the renewal. You can apply for it now, only they may ask you for proof that you have the booklet. So if you want to do it now, you can; if not, do it four or five months before and request your card at the same time, whichever way you prefer.

Andreina Gandica:
Attorney, thank you very much. Thanks to you too, Eugenio. Thank you for connecting with us. Attorney, where can we find you?

Attorney Martha Arias:
At my office, at 305-671-0018, or easier for those who are driving or don’t have a pen handy: my website ariasvilla.com. Excuse me, I had to take the call while on the way precisely to the Immigration Lawyers’ Association meeting that I belong to. The traffic here is terrible, but I couldn’t miss the opportunity to talk with you, so we’re doing it this way.

Andreina Gandica:
We greatly appreciate it, attorney. Thank you very much for being here with us, and our audience thanks you as well.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Thank you, thank you.

Andreina Gandica:
A hug. This was our Wednesday immigration segment with attorney Martha Arias this morning.

The post Federal Court Ruling on Humanitarian Parole and What It Means for Immigrants appeared first on Arias Villa Law.

Venezuelan TPS: After the Government’s Appeal

Martha Arias — Thu, 11 Sep 2025 22:14:16 +0000

During my conversation with journalist Orian Brito on September 9, I explained where things stand for Venezuelan nationals under Temporary Protected Status (TPS). Judge Edward Chen’s recent order keeps TPS in place for now, but the Department of Homeland Security has already appealed in the Ninth Circuit. As we have seen in prior TPS litigation, the legal fight can eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

For those whose TPS (2021 designation) shows an expiration of September 10, there is an automatic 60‑day extension through November 10, 2025. In practice, that means your Employment Authorization Document (EAD) tied to TPS is also considered valid through that date, even if the card itself shows an earlier expiration. You may print the relevant USCIS notice and present it to your employer if asked for proof.

Because the litigation is fluid, I recommend re‑registering for TPS within the 60‑day window. If the courts later allow TPS to continue, your timely re‑registration helps keep you protected. If you also have other options—such as a family‑based petition, employment sponsorship, or a pending asylum case—these may offer more stability in the long run. Every situation is different; professional guidance matters.

If you need help evaluating your options or completing your TPS re‑registration, my office is here to assist at (305) 671‑0018 or ariasvilla.com. Stay informed, stay proactive, and please seek qualified legal advice before making important decisions.

Disclaimer: This post is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney‑client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, please consult a licensed attorney.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Spanish Transcript

ORIAN BRITO:
Amigos, 9 de septiembre. Más de medio millón de venezolanos con TPS en Estados Unidos están a la espera de la decisión del juez Edward Chen respecto a la apelación presentada por el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional, que busca poner fin a este beneficio migratorio. La incertidumbre es grande. Las preguntas son muchas. Ustedes me las dejan en esta red social, no solo por las licencias, sino también por qué va a pasar con el permiso de trabajo. Es una de las que leí.

Por eso, en este espacio vamos a conversar con la abogada de inmigración del sur de la Florida, Martha Arias, que nos va a ayudar a responder algunas dudas sobre lo que puede pasar con este programa, cuáles son los escenarios legales y qué significa este proceso para los venezolanos amparados bajo este estatus. Como siempre, los invito a que se queden, a que dejen sus preguntas y les agradezco que se suscriban y sean parte de esta comunidad.

Abogada, buenas tardes. El gobierno no tardó en apelar: el viernes celebramos la decisión del juez Chen y el sábado apeló. Estamos a la expectativa de lo que pueda decidirse. La apelación del gobierno pide que el juez, como que, desestime su propia decisión, algo que yo veo casi imposible, ¿no? ¿Cómo lo ve usted?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Yo lo veo poco probable, pero tampoco imposible porque, fíjese, la apelación se hace en el Noveno Circuito, que es el circuito que le corresponde a California. El Noveno Circuito se caracteriza por ser más bien demócrata o, como la gente lo llama, liberal. Entonces, sabemos que el juez Chen tiene una tendencia más demócrata. Por eso, no veo imposible que se mantenga esa decisión del juez. Pero, igual, el gobierno está presionando fuerte porque la intención del gobierno es terminar el TPS.

ORIAN BRITO:
¿Terminarlo, terminarlo…?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí. Lo mismo que pasó con el TPS del 2023 fue algo similar: ese TPS fue terminado, después el juez dijo que no; se apeló, se mantuvo esa decisión del juez; y el gobierno después fue a la Corte Suprema y la Corte Suprema fue la que finalmente dijo: “Sí, el gobierno lo puede terminar.” O sea, no fue el Noveno Circuito, la sala de apelaciones, la que dio la decisión final de terminar el TPS; la dio la misma Corte Suprema. Entonces, aquí puede pasar lo mismo.

ORIAN BRITO:
Cuando hablamos de que puede pasar lo mismo, quiere decir que, independientemente de que el juez tomó una decisión a favor, el gobierno podría —y esta pregunta me la han hecho ya esta semana— recurrir a esa vía de la Corte Suprema para decir: “Bueno, si esto lo pongo yo, ¿no tengo el derecho de quitarlo?”

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
No, pero lo que pasa es que no es, técnicamente, que él tenga el derecho de quitarlo, porque acuérdense que lo que él hizo fue una medida cautelar, que dijo: “No voy a permitir que se termine mientras el litigio continúa.” Entonces, lo que se apela es esa decisión de esa medida cautelar. Esa es la parte que puede subir a la Corte Suprema.

ORIAN BRITO:
Entre tanto, aquí hay un grupo de personas que se mantienen en un limbo. Hay dos situaciones evidentes, a juzgar por los comentarios que me hacen. Una tiene que ver con los permisos de trabajo. Algunos de estos permisos de trabajo tienen fecha de vencimiento tan pronto como mañana, 10 de septiembre, ¿no? Hay gente que me dice: “Ya sometí una extensión.” Hay gente que me dice: “Tengo dudas si es que esto automáticamente está extendido, aunque la fecha diga que vence mañana.” ¿Dónde estamos y qué se les puede decir a esas personas que tienen la incertidumbre y, por supuesto, el temor de perder su trabajo?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Claro. Bueno, no es fácil, es complicado, pero a ver: cuando la Secretaría de Seguridad Nacional terminó el TPS del 2021 —que vence mañana—, al terminarlo, dio una prórroga automática, vamos a decir, como un periodo de prueba de 60 días. Esto quiere decir que hasta el 10 de noviembre de 2025 esos venezolanos que tenían el TPS que vence mañana, 10 de septiembre, tendrían esa prórroga automática hasta el 10 de noviembre. Eso quiere decir que su permiso de trabajo también sigue siendo válido hasta esa fecha, aunque la tarjeta diga que venció el 10 de septiembre. Es una prórroga automática.

La persona puede imprimir de la página web de inmigración la información de esa prórroga para presentársela a su empleador, si el empleador le pide esa prueba o no sabe cuál es el estatus migratorio ni la validez de ese trabajo.

Ahora, yo también les estoy recomendando a las personas que hagan una re-registración del TPS a partir de mañana, dentro de este periodo de 60 días. ¿Por qué? Porque no sabemos cómo va a continuar el litigio y, vamos a decir, que tengan la suerte de que en alguna parte de este litigio se extienda otra vez el TPS; entonces, la persona va a quedar protegida por esa re-registración que ya haya hecho.

Entonces, la situación es: la validez sería hasta el 10 de noviembre de este año, a no ser que algo, en alguna de estas cortes, autorice otra vez que se continúe con el TPS.

ORIAN BRITO:
Bueno, registrarse y entender que esa extensión podría ser, por lo pronto, para los del TPS 2021, válida por 60 días. Ahora, la gran incertidumbre es qué puede pasar después, porque los días pasan.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
La incertidumbre es qué puede pasar después. Si hay, de pronto, alguna demanda o algo que permita que estos venezolanos puedan continuar con el TPS, pues veremos qué va a pasar. Por ahora, seguimos con el vaivén de las cosas. Todos los días es algo distinto: hay una decisión que lo termina, después una apelación dice que no, y en esas vamos. Pero, por ahora, hoy que estamos hablando, 9 de septiembre, este TPS está extendido, sigue extendido.

O sea, el gobierno apeló el sábado; esa decisión de apelación no va a salir todavía. Entonces, hoy tenemos en firme la decisión del juez Chen, del viernes, que dijo que el TPS debería continuar.

ORIAN BRITO:
OK. Aunque, en el sistema, los comentarios son variados. Hay personas que se han podido registrar, pero no les dan recibo. Otros sí lo tienen. Hay gente que no puede sacar una licencia; ha sido todo un tema…

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Los de la licencia: sí deberían permitirles sacar licencia porque el mismo boletín, o el mismo documento, dice que tiene 60 días de validez.

ORIAN BRITO:
De hecho, el propio recaudador de impuestos de Miami-Dade nos envió un comunicado donde decía que, a esas personas con ese TPS —más el permiso de trabajo—, esos eran los documentos que les permitían a la gente obtener la licencia, y lo iban a recibir hasta el 7 de noviembre de este año. Por cuánto lo van a extender o por cuánto les van a dar la licencia no me queda claro.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Yo me imagino que si van antes, se la van a dar hasta los 60 días, hasta el vencimiento de esos 60 días, que en este caso sería el 10 de noviembre de 2025. No se la pueden dar por más tiempo, porque hasta allí es que van a tener el estatus.

ORIAN BRITO:
Claro. Bueno, quiero leer algunos de los comentarios porque, abogada, estoy contento además porque la he perseguido durante varios días; está muy full y hoy nos puede acompañar. Siempre me gusta porque —como lo digo—, abogada, hay mucha gente que entiendo que, en medio del nerviosismo, se irrita. A veces el abogado no dice lo que la gente quiere escuchar, pero yo creo que, en este momento, la preparación y escuchar, sobre todo, lo que no te gusta, es lo que te puede brindar la verdadera luz del camino a seguir, para que busques una forma y te estabilices en el país.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Exacto. El problema es que hay personas que sí tienen una forma de resolver su estatus migratorio porque tienen un esposo ciudadano americano o residente, o tienen una petición familiar de un padre o un hermano.

ORIAN BRITO:
O un empleador.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
O un empleador. Otros, pues, que tienen el asilo pendiente, que les puede continuar dando una protección. Pero muchas personas que no tienen ninguna otra forma de resolver su estatus migratorio —no tienen ninguna petición familiar, ninguna petición de empleador—, realmente lo que tienen que hacer es tratar de resolver su situación; si no lo pueden hacer, entonces pensar en la posibilidad de irse. Porque veo difícil que una persona se pueda quedar indocumentada en Estados Unidos, como estamos viendo las cosas: están aumentando los procesos de deportación rápida y estas deportaciones masivas que estamos viendo en esta administración.

Entonces, yo creo que sería demasiado tenso y presionante para una persona quedarse definitivamente sin estatus migratorio.

ORIAN BRITO:
Sí, sí. Y hay que estar pendiente, porque esta batalla es judicial. Aunque el juez pueda rechazar la apelación del gobierno, el gobierno va a buscar otros mecanismos para llevar esto adonde consiga lo que pretende, que es poner fin al programa.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Correcto.

ORIAN BRITO:
Gracias. Bueno, Douglas Rodríguez, un gran abrazo. Dice: “Eres uno de los pocos que da información tal cual, sin falsas expectativas. Siempre veo tu programa y me parece excelente porque dices las cosas con claridad y sin adornos. Quien quiere escuchar la verdad sabe que aquí la consigue. No existe otro espacio igual.” Muchísimas gracias, Douglas, y un fuerte abrazo. Ese es el compromiso. Yo, insisto, abogada, yo no quería hacer de este espacio algo dedicado a la inmigración, porque hay tantos temas en el mundo: temas políticos, temas de interés, destinos que uno visita y conoce y quisiera compartir. Pero la vida y la gente me han llevado a este camino, y es el compromiso de seguir, ¿no? Para ayudarlos en la medida de lo posible.

Otra persona me pide que demos su nombre. Saludos desde Columbus, Ohio. Pudo renovar su licencia en el DMV de la zona norte. No le preguntaron nada; solo se presentó como si fuera a sacarse una cédula, con buena presencia, con buena actitud y una sonrisa. Con todo en la mano, la renovación se la dieron —escuchen— hasta 28 de marzo de 2026. Solo le pidieron la licencia que está por vencer, prueba de residencia; mostró su TPS 2021, su permiso de trabajo —este permiso de trabajo vencido en 2022— con el papel de recibido: ya está aprobado, solo tiene que esperar la carta de aprobación y los documentos. Este es por asilo. Todo fluyó bien, más de lo que pensaba. ¡Qué bueno, qué bueno! Porque tener la licencia —y sabía que ese era uno de los sitios donde más se registraban problemas—…

La pregunta es: ¿qué pasa si hay retrasos en la renovación de mi permiso de trabajo? —pregunta María Gómez.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, pero ¿el permiso de trabajo a través de TPS?

ORIAN BRITO:
De TPS, sí.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Bueno, si hay retrasos porque la persona vaya a hacer una re-registración y su caso está en trámite, lo que habrá es que esperar el retraso. No creo que el gobierno vaya a apurarse a aprobar un permiso de trabajo cuando el mismo gobierno está pretendiendo terminar el TPS. Entonces, hacer esa re-registración y volver a pedir el permiso es como una protección, y tener ese recibo que muestra que la persona lo hizo. Pero, la verdad, no creo que esa petición de permiso de trabajo vaya a llegar muy rápido.

ORIAN BRITO:
OK. Liliana Torres: “Hoy fui a sacar la licencia —ayer, lunes— y no me la dieron porque dicen que no tienen autorización.” Es el verdadero drama. Hola, Orian: todavía no se ha publicado la decisión del juez Chen para registrarse en el TPS. ¿Debo esperar que se publique en inmigración esa decisión y si acatará la sentencia del juez Chen? ¿Cuándo podremos registrarnos o hago la registración de mi TPS 2023 sin esperar más?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
El del 2023, no. Yo haría las re-registraciones del TPS 2021, que es el que vence mañana. El TPS del 2023 realmente está —vamos a decir— casi que muerto; pues todavía hay un litigio que continúa, pero no veo la posibilidad allí. Sí es cierto que el gobierno no ha publicado la decisión del juez Chen del viernes. Y no creo que la vaya a publicar tampoco. Yo no creo que el gobierno esté asumiendo la posición de publicar esto, y más que apelaron el sábado. Entonces, sí, es un reto porque la persona que vaya a pedir la re-registración puede que el mismo gobierno se la devuelva; puede que se la acepte y le emita el recibo. La verdad, todos estamos aquí —vamos a decir— inventando.

ORIAN BRITO:
Un día a la vez, a la buena de Dios.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Exacto, a la buena de Dios. Esa es la palabra.

ORIAN BRITO:
Sí, es así, porque entonces usted va a intentar; si no viene, entonces no viene. Uno trata, pero esto es un sorteo. Esto es como cuando uno va a sacar la visa: uno llega a esa taquilla con buena actitud, con la mejor de las ganas, y puede ser que te reboten, que te digan que no, aunque tengas todos los documentos. Yo recuerdo que, antes de venir a este país, me la negaron dos veces. Abogada, eso para mí fue —la primera vez— un poco traumático porque, además, no pude hacer nada: estaba muy pequeño; mi mamá dijo que era madre soltera —no sé por qué dijo eso porque, aunque mi mamá estaba divorciada, yo tengo a mi papá y él se quedó—. Y la segunda vez, mi mamá había fallecido y, cuando llegué, me preguntaron —tenía 20 años, recuerdo— qué propiedad tenía. Y yo dije: “Bueno, ¿qué propiedad con 20 años podía tener?” Y me la negaron. Pero fue traumático, porque uno sale desmoralizado de ahí.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Claro. Cualquier negatoria de un proceso migratorio afecta a las personas, sea una simple visa de turista o…

ORIAN BRITO:
Eso es horrible, horrible. Perfecto. Dos preguntas más para concluir. Alba Alcalá: “Del TPS 2021 salí del asilo de mi mamá por matrimonio con ciudadano. Permiso de trabajo por asilo. ¿Debo pedirlo por TPS? No he hecho ajuste todavía.”

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Uy, pero esas preguntas están como enredadas, porque lo que entendí es…

ORIAN BRITO:
Salió del asilo.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
…salió del asilo porque se casó con ciudadano americano. Pero tiene TPS; vuelve y desisto. Pero, para que haya TPS, está casada con ciudadano americano…

ORIAN BRITO:
Ahora, si yo tuviese asilo y TPS, preferiría —en mi caso— pedir mi permiso de trabajo por el asilo más que por el TPS. Usted me corrige.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Claro, claro, por el asilo, porque le va a dar más tiempo, y, pues, el asilo, en este momento, no tiene la persona la cita. En cambio, el TPS sí; ya vemos que lo están terminando.

ORIAN BRITO:
Perfecto. Otra persona dice: “Me registré, pero no he pedido el permiso de trabajo.” Bueno, tienes que pedirlo, porque lo peor es que no te lo den; pero hay que trabajar, a menos que no lo necesites, ¿no?

Bueno, abogada, me gustaría que quede su número de contacto. Gracias por dedicarnos estos minutos. Por supuesto, vamos a estar muy pendientes a la decisión, a la respuesta que pueda dar —por supuesto— el gobierno, para ampliarla a todos ustedes. Y me gustaría que cualquier persona que desee tener la asesoría de la abogada Martha Arias, que, además, tiene un espacio a las siete en América Radio 1260 AM, siempre lo utilizamos en los diversos espacios para la red de temas de inmigración… Me gusta que hoy me haya acompañado. ¿Dónde la pueden contactar?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, muchas gracias, Orian. Muchas gracias por invitarme. Efectivamente, los martes a las 7:00 p. m., en América Radio, tenemos el programa donde contestamos preguntas a los oyentes. Mi teléfono de oficina es el 305-671-0018. Pueden buscarme en mi página web ariasvilla.com.

ORIAN BRITO:
¿Cuántos años, abogada, tiene usted ejerciendo aquí en el sur de la Florida?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí, como abogada de inmigración ejerciendo aquí, en el sur de la Florida, llevo 22 años, desde el 2003. Bastante tiempo. Exitosamente y con mucho orgullo he ejercido este derecho migratorio por 22 años. Me apasiona el tema, me encanta. Sí tengo que reconocer que este año ha sido uno de los años más retadores de la práctica migratoria, y en este sentido comparte la mayoría de los abogados de inmigración. Es muy difícil porque hay muchos cambios; hay unas políticas muy fuertes, agresivas, y, pues, esto hace que la práctica sea mucho más complicada y menos motivante, vamos a decir, pero, pues, tenemos que seguir en esa lucha.

ORIAN BRITO:
Además, hemos hecho un trabajo bonito porque los abogados, por un lado, explican, interpretan la ley, nos ponen al día de lo que está pasando; pero ya hemos hecho una relación entre abogados y periodistas donde drenamos, discutimos, nos reímos de las cosas de las que nos podemos reír, nos molestamos cuando hay que molestarse, pero vamos haciendo como una especie de soporte emocional, ¿no?

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Sí; o sea, en realidad es, precisamente, mostrar esa noticia diaria, mostrar esa política administrativa que, pues, lo más que uno puede es tratar de abogar porque se haga validez a la ley y a la Constitución, a los principios del derecho; pero, pues, tampoco nosotros los abogados podemos más que hacer eso. Obviamente, las políticas administrativas las establece cada nuevo presidente. Y estamos viendo que, aunque la ley no ha cambiado mucho, las políticas administrativas sí; y tenemos una cantidad de nuevas políticas administrativas en adición a una, pues, que es la más impactante en este momento, que es uno de los procesos de desnaturalización —es decir, tratar de quitarle la ciudadanía a las personas que adquirieron en algún momento su residencia o la ciudadanía misma con fraude, con mentiras—.

Entonces, estamos en un proceso de cambios muy constantes y, aparte de los cambios constantes, una política migratoria muy estricta. Por ejemplo, personas que tenían una orden de deportación y podían reabrir sus casos: uno les presentaba una petición familiar si estaban casados con ciudadano americano —por ejemplo—, o un hijo ciudadano americano, adulto, que los pedía; uno presentaba la petición y rara vez les daban una cita. Ahora les están dando cita y los están deteniendo en esa cita si tienen orden de deportación. Quiere decir que le importa la posibilidad de hacer una reapertura para esa persona para poder ajustar su estatus. Y importa muchos otros beneficios, como esos perdones que uno presentaba —la persona estando aquí— para poder ir fuera de los Estados Unidos a recibir la residencia. Si esa persona tiene una orden final, pues uno ya no va a querer presentar esa I‑130 o esa petición, porque hay una gran probabilidad de que los detengan, los arresten, al entrevistarlos.

Entonces, estos son esos cambios y esto es lo que está pasando en este momento.

ORIAN BRITO:
Gracias, abogada, por agregar esta realidad que se está viviendo, y es importante, por eso, que usted se asesore bien antes de asistir a alguna cita o someter alguna planilla. Eso es fundamental. Una asesoría en este momento puede hacer la diferencia en medio de estos cambios que se están viviendo —como lo describe la abogada Martha Arias—. Usted ya tiene aquí información precisa; hemos respondido a algunas de sus preguntas, las recurrentes. Le invito a que comparta esta información con algún familiar o conocido que esté en esta situación y, por supuesto, mañana nos volvemos a conectar con otra cosa que pueda ocurrir en el tema migratorio aquí en Estados Unidos.

Gracias, abogada, y muy buenas tardes —o buenas noches ya para todos—.

ABOGADA MARTHA ARIAS:
Gracias, Orian. Felicidades para todos. Hasta la próxima.

ORIAN BRITO:
Hasta la próxima.

English Translation

ORIAN BRITO:
Friends, September 9. More than half a million Venezuelans with TPS in the United States are awaiting Judge Edward Chen’s decision regarding the appeal filed by the Department of Homeland Security, which seeks to end this immigration benefit. The uncertainty is great. The questions are many. You leave them for me on this social network—not only about driver’s licenses, but also about what will happen with the work permit. That is one of the questions I read.

That is why, in this space, we are going to talk with the immigration attorney from South Florida, Martha Arias, who is going to help us answer some doubts about what could happen with this program, what the legal scenarios are, and what this process means for Venezuelans protected under this status. As always, I invite you to stay, to leave your questions, and I thank you for subscribing and being part of this community.

Attorney, good afternoon. The government did not take long to appeal: on Friday we celebrated Judge Chen’s decision, and on Saturday it appealed. We are waiting to see what might be decided. The government’s appeal asks the judge to, sort of, dismiss his own decision—something I see as almost impossible, right? How do you see it?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
I see it as unlikely, but not impossible either, because, look, the appeal is being made in the Ninth Circuit, which is the circuit that corresponds to California. The Ninth Circuit is known for being more Democratic or, as people call it, liberal. So we know that Judge Chen has a more Democratic tendency. Therefore, I do not see it as impossible that the judge’s decision will be maintained. But still, the government is pressing hard because the government’s intention is to end TPS.

ORIAN BRITO:
End it, end it…?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes. The same thing that happened with TPS in 2023 was something similar: that TPS was ended; then the judge said no; it was appealed; that judge’s decision was maintained; and the government later went to the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court was the one that finally said: “Yes, the government can end it.” In other words, it was not the Ninth Circuit, the court of appeals, that gave the final decision to end TPS; it was the Supreme Court itself. So, the same thing could happen here.

ORIAN BRITO:
When we say the same thing could happen, it means that, regardless of the judge having made a decision in favor, the government could—and this question has already been asked to me this week—resort to that path to the Supreme Court to say: “Well, if I granted this, don’t I have the right to take it away?”

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
No, but what happens is that it is not, technically, that he has the right to take it away, because remember that what he issued was a preliminary injunction, which said: “I will not allow it to end while the litigation continues.” So what is being appealed is that injunction. That is the part that could go up to the Supreme Court.

ORIAN BRITO:
Meanwhile, there is a group of people who remain in limbo. There are two evident situations, judging by the comments I receive. One has to do with work permits. Some of these work permits have an expiration date as soon as tomorrow, September 10. Some people tell me, “I already submitted an extension.” Others tell me, “I have doubts whether this is automatically extended, even though the date says it expires tomorrow.” Where do we stand, and what can be said to those people who have the uncertainty and, of course, the fear of losing their jobs?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Of course. Well, it is not easy; it is complicated, but let’s see: when the Department of Homeland Security ended TPS from 2021—which expires tomorrow—upon ending it, they granted an automatic extension, let’s say, like a 60-day grace period. This means that until November 10, 2025, those Venezuelans whose TPS says it expires tomorrow, September 10, would have that automatic extension until November 10. That means their work permit also continues to be valid until that date, even if the card says it expired on September 10. It is an automatic extension.

The person can print the information about that extension from the immigration website to present it to their employer, if the employer asks for that proof or does not know the immigration status or the validity of that work authorization.

Now, I am also recommending that people re-register for TPS starting tomorrow, within this 60-day period. Why? Because we do not know how the litigation will continue, and—let’s say—they get lucky that at some point during this litigation TPS is extended again; then, the person will be protected by that re-registration already done.

So, the situation is: the validity would be until November 10 of this year, unless something, in any of these courts, authorizes once again that TPS continue.

ORIAN BRITO:
Well, re-register and understand that this extension could be, for now, for those from TPS 2021, valid for 60 days. Now, the big uncertainty is what could happen after, because the days go by.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
The uncertainty is what could happen after. If there is, suddenly, some lawsuit or something that allows these Venezuelans to continue with TPS, then we will see what will happen. For now, we continue with the back-and-forth of things. Every day it is something different: there is a decision that ends it; then an appeal says no; and that is where we are. But for now, today as we speak, September 9, this TPS is extended; it remains extended.

That is, the government appealed on Saturday; that appeal decision will not come out yet. So today we have in force Judge Chen’s decision from Friday, which said that TPS should continue.

ORIAN BRITO:
OK. Although, in the system, the comments are varied. There are people who have been able to register but are not given a receipt. Others do have it. There are people who cannot get a driver’s license; it has been a whole issue…

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
As for licenses: they should allow them to get a license because the same bulletin, or the same document, says it has 60 days of validity.

ORIAN BRITO:
In fact, the Miami-Dade tax collector himself sent us a statement saying that for those people with that TPS, plus the work permit, those were the documents that allowed people to obtain the license, and they were going to accept them until November 7 of this year. For how long they will extend it, or for how long they will issue the license, is not clear to me.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
I imagine that if they go before, they will issue it up to the 60 days, up to the expiration of those 60 days, which in this case would be November 10, 2025. They cannot issue the license for longer, because that is how long they will have status.

ORIAN BRITO:
Of course. Well, I want to read some of the comments because—attorney—I am happy; I have been trying to reach you for several days. You are very busy, and today you can join us. I always like it because—as I say—there are many people who, in the midst of nervousness, get irritated. Sometimes the attorney does not say what people want to hear, but I think that, at this moment, preparation and listening, especially to what you do not want to hear, is what can shed the true light on the path to follow, so that you can find a way and stabilize yourself in the country.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactly. The problem is that there are people who do have a way to resolve their immigration status because they have a U.S. citizen or resident spouse, or they have a family petition from a parent or a sibling.

ORIAN BRITO:
Or an employer.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Or an employer. Others have asylum pending, which can continue providing protection. But many people who have no other way to resolve their immigration status—no family petition, no employer petition—really what they have to do is try to resolve their situation; if they cannot, then think about the possibility of leaving. Because I find it difficult for someone to remain undocumented in the United States, as we are seeing things: the processes of expedited removal are increasing and these mass deportations we are seeing in this administration.

So I think it would be too tense and stressful for a person to remain definitively without immigration status.

ORIAN BRITO:
Yes, yes. And you have to be attentive because this battle is judicial. Even if the judge can reject the government’s appeal, the government will look for other mechanisms to take this to where it gets what it intends, which is to end the program.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Correct.

ORIAN BRITO:
Thank you. Well, Douglas Rodríguez, a big hug. He says: “You are one of the few who gives information as it is, without false expectations. I always watch your program, and I think it is excellent because you say things clearly and without embellishment. Whoever wants to hear the truth knows they can find it here. There is no other space like it.” Thank you very much, Douglas, and a big hug. That is the commitment. I insist, attorney, I did not want to make this space something dedicated to immigration because there are so many topics in the world—political topics, topics of interest, destinations one visits and knows and would like to share. But life and people have led me down this path, and it is the commitment to continue, right? To help you as much as possible.

Another person asks me to give their name. Greetings from Columbus, Ohio. They were able to renew their license at the DMV in the north area. They were not asked anything; they just showed up as if to get an ID card—with good presence, good attitude, and a smile. With everything in hand, the renewal was granted—listen—until March 28, 2026. They were only asked for the license that was about to expire, proof of residence; they showed their TPS 2021, their work permit—this work permit expired in 2022—with the receipt; it is already approved; they just have to wait for the approval notice and the documents. This one is through asylum. Everything flowed well—better than expected. How good, how good, because having the license, and I knew that this was one of the places where more problems were reported…

The question is: “What happens if there are delays in the renewal of my work permit?” asks María Gómez.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, but the work permit through TPS?

ORIAN BRITO:
Through TPS, yes.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Well, if there are delays because the person is going to do a re-registration and it will be processed, what they will have to do is wait; there will be delay. I do not think the government is going to hurry to approve a work permit when the same government is intending to end TPS. So doing that re-registration and requesting the work permit again is like a protection, and having that receipt that shows the person did it. But honestly, I do not think that work permit request will be approved very quickly.

ORIAN BRITO:
OK. Liliana Torres: “Today I went to get the license—yesterday, Monday—and they did not give it to me because they say they do not have authorization.” That is the real drama. Hello, Orian: the judge Chen’s decision has not yet been published to register for TPS. Should I wait for that decision to be published on immigration and whether they will comply with Judge Chen’s ruling? When will we be able to register, or do I do my TPS 2023 registration without waiting any longer?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Not the one from 2023. I would do the re-registrations of TPS 2021, which is the one that expires tomorrow. TPS 2023 is really, let’s say, almost dead; there is still litigation that continues, but I do not see the possibility there. It is true that the government has not published Judge Chen’s decision from Friday. And I do not think they are going to publish it either. I do not think the government is taking the position to publish this, especially since they appealed on Saturday. So yes, it is a challenge because the person who goes to request the re-registration may have it returned by the government; or they may accept it and issue the receipt. Honestly, we are all here, let’s say, figuring it out.

ORIAN BRITO:
One day at a time, God willing.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Exactly—God willing. That is the word.

ORIAN BRITO:
Yes, that is how it is, because then you will try; if it does not come, then it does not come. One tries, but this is a lottery. It is like when one goes to get a visa: you arrive at the window with a good attitude, with the best disposition, and you may be rejected, told no, even if you have all the documents. I remember that, before coming to this country, I was denied twice. Attorney, that was— the first time— a bit traumatic for me because, in addition, I could not do anything: I was very young; my mother said that she was a single mother—I do not know why she said that because, although my mother was divorced, I have my father and he stayed. And the second time, my mother had passed away and, when I arrived, they asked me— I was 20 years old, I remember— what property I had. And I said, “Well, what property could I have at 20 years old?” And they denied me. But it was traumatic, because one leaves there demoralized.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Of course. Any denial of an immigration process affects people—be it a simple tourist visa or…

ORIAN BRITO:
It is horrible, horrible. Perfect. Two more questions to conclude. Alba Alcalá: “From TPS 2021 I left my mother’s asylum due to marriage to a citizen. Work permit through asylum. Should I request it through TPS? I have not done adjustment yet.”

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Wow, but those questions are a bit tangled, because what I understood is…

ORIAN BRITO:
She left asylum.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
…she left asylum because she married a U.S. citizen. But she has TPS; I go back and desist. But for there to be TPS, she is married to a U.S. citizen…

ORIAN BRITO:
Now, if I had asylum and TPS, I would prefer—in my case— to request my work permit through asylum rather than through TPS. You correct me.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Of course, of course—through asylum—because it will give more time, and, well, with asylum, at this moment, the person does not have the interview scheduled. In contrast, TPS—as we can see— they are ending it.

ORIAN BRITO:
Perfect. Another person says: “I registered but I have not requested the work permit.” Well, you have to request it, because the worst thing is that they do not grant it; but you need to work, unless you do not need it, right?

Well, attorney, I would like your contact number to remain on record. Thank you for giving us these minutes. Of course, we are going to be very attentive to the decision, to the response that the government may give, to share it with all of you. And I would like that any person who wishes to have the advice of attorney Martha Arias, who also has a segment at seven on América Radio 1260 AM, which we always use in various spaces for the network on immigration topics… I am glad you joined me today. Where can they contact you?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes, thank you very much, Orian. Thank you very much for inviting me. Indeed, on Tuesdays at 7:00 p.m., on América Radio, we have the program where we answer listeners’ questions. My office phone number is 305-671-0018. You can find me on my website ariasvilla.com.

ORIAN BRITO:
How many years, attorney, have you been practicing here in South Florida?

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes—as an immigration attorney practicing here in South Florida— I have been practicing for 22 years, since 2003. Quite a long time. I have practiced this field of immigration law successfully and with great pride for 22 years. I am passionate about the topic; I love it. I do have to acknowledge that this year has been one of the most challenging years in immigration practice, and most immigration attorneys share this sentiment. It is very difficult because there are many changes; there are very strong, aggressive policies, and this makes practice much more complicated and less motivating, so to speak; but we have to keep fighting.

ORIAN BRITO:
Moreover, we have done a nice job because attorneys, on the one hand, explain—interpret the law—and keep us up to date on what is happening; and we have already formed a relationship between attorneys and journalists where we vent, discuss, laugh about the things we can laugh about, get upset when we have to, but we are building a sort of emotional support.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Yes; that is, in reality, it is precisely to show that daily news, to show that administrative policy; the most we can do is try to advocate for upholding the law and the Constitution, the principles of law; but, well, we attorneys cannot do more than that. Obviously, administrative policies are established by each new president. And we are seeing that, although the law has not changed much, the administrative policies have; and we have a number of new administrative policies in addition to one that is the most impactful at this moment, which is one of the processes of denaturalization—that is, trying to take away citizenship from people who, at some point, obtained their residence or citizenship itself through fraud, through lies.

So, we are in a process of very constant changes and, apart from the constant changes, a very strict immigration policy. For example, people who had an order of removal and could reopen their cases: one used to file a family petition if they were married to a U.S. citizen— for example— or if an adult U.S. citizen child was petitioning for them; one would file the petition and rarely would they get an interview. Now they are being given interviews and they are being detained at that interview if they have an order of removal. That means it affects the possibility of getting a reopening for that person to be able to adjust status. And it affects many other benefits, such as those waivers that one used to file—while the person was here—to be able to go outside the United States to receive the residency. If that person has a final order, then one will no longer want to file that I‑130 or that petition, because there is a high probability that they will be detained or arrested when interviewed.

So, these are the changes, and this is what is happening at this moment.

ORIAN BRITO:
Thank you, attorney, for adding this reality that is being experienced; and that is why it is important that you seek proper legal advice before attending any interview or filing any form. That is essential. Legal advice at this moment can make the difference amid these changes that are being experienced— as attorney Martha Arias describes it. You already have precise information here; we have answered some of your questions, the recurring ones. I invite you to share this information with any family member or acquaintance who is in this situation, and, of course, tomorrow we will reconnect with something else that may occur in immigration matters here in the United States.

Thank you, attorney, and good afternoon—or good evening now to everyone.

ATTORNEY MARTHA ARIAS:
Thank you, Orian. Best wishes to everyone. Until next time.

ORIAN BRITO:
Until next time.

The post Venezuelan TPS: After the Government’s Appeal appeared first on Arias Villa Law.

TPS for Venezuelans: What the Latest Federal Court Decision Means

Martha Arias — Tue, 09 Sep 2025 17:49:56 +0000

This morning I joined journalist Saúl Noriega on Unión Radio to discuss the uncertain future of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Venezuelans in the United States.

Just last week, the Department of Homeland Security announced the termination of the 2021 TPS designation for Venezuela, which was set to end in 60 days. However, on September 5, a federal judge in California temporarily paused this termination due to ongoing litigation. For now, Venezuelan TPS remains active.

This back-and-forth is not new—we saw it before with the 2023 TPS designation—and it leaves many families confused and anxious. My advice to those currently holding TPS is to explore permanent legal options where possible. For example, if you have an asylum case pending, apply for a work permit. If you are eligible through a U.S. citizen or resident family member, begin the petition process. Even employment-based petitions may serve as a long-term plan B.

Remaining in the U.S. without valid status has become increasingly risky. Rapid deportations are happening, and detention centers in Florida are expanding, often without sufficient infrastructure to ensure fair representation. It is far safer to resolve your legal status now than to risk losing TPS without another protection in place.

If you or your loved ones need guidance, I encourage you to reach out to my office. Together, we can explore your best options under U.S. immigration law.

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Linked Sources

USCIS news release (Sept 3, 2025): “DHS Terminates 2021 Designation of Venezuela for Temporary Protected Status.” USCIS
USCIS alert (Sept 5–9 window): “DHS Terminates 2021 Designation…” (beneficiary guidance and timing). USCIS
Federal Register (Sept 8, 2025): “Termination of the 2021 Designation of Venezuela for TPS” (effective Nov 7, 2025). Federal Register
Reuters (Sept 3, 2025): Coverage of DHS announcement ending 2021 TPS. Reuters
El País (Sept 5, 2025): Report on Judge Edward Chen blocking the government’s TPS revocation and restoring protections. El País
ACLU of Northern California (Sept 5, 2025): Case update noting restoration of Venezuela TPS (2021 & 2023 cohorts) and re-registration window guidance. The ACLU of Northern California
Fragomen (Sept 8, 2025): Client alert on district court rulings regarding Haiti and 2023 Venezuela TPS termination litigation and government stay request. Fragomen
Littler (Sept 4, 2025): Analysis of 9th Cir. action upholding ruling that termination for Venezuelans was unlawful (procedural posture context). Littler Mendelson P.C.
Ninth Circuit opinion PDF (Aug 29, 2025): References to status through Sept 10, 2025 and litigation posture. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
US CBP app directory: CBP Home page (features incl. ‘Intent to Depart’). U.S. Customs and Border Protection
DHS news (Mar 10, 2025): Launch of CBP Home; migration from CBP One. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Congressional Research Service (Jun 12, 2025): “The CBP Home Mobile Application and ‘Self-Departure’.” Congress.gov
American Immigration Council: Fact sheet noting CBP One functions shifting to CBP Home in 2025. American Immigration Council

Spanish Transcript

Saúl Noriega:
Amigos, 7:06 minutos. Seguimos a través de Unión Radio, también a través de IBC. Un temazo sin duda. El tema del TPS, el Estatus de Protección Temporal, este llamado TPS por sus siglas en inglés, que por supuesto genera muchísima atención no solamente para los venezolanos que están en Estados Unidos, sino para tantas y muchísimas familias en todo el mundo, pendientes precisamente de su condición, de su estatus migratorio. Vamos a conversar con Martha Arias. Ella es abogada de inmigración venezolana, para entender un poquito cómo va avanzando la figura del TPS en Estados Unidos a propósito de distintas acciones por parte de la administración e incluso del sistema de justicia de Estados Unidos.
Señora Arias, muchísimas gracias por acompañarnos directamente desde Miami, allá en Estados Unidos, para entender a qué se están enfrentando los venezolanos el día de hoy, más cuando se habla de una posible eliminación, más cuando se habla de distintos cambios en la figura del TPS para venezolanos. Muy buenos días.

Abogada Martha L. Arias:
Buenos días a usted, un saludo para usted y toda su audiencia.

Saúl Noriega:
Doctora, ¿cómo entender estas últimas decisiones? Más cuando muchos dicen: este TPS en algún momento era como que un gran salvavidas para muchos venezolanos. Pero luego de la llegada de Trump al poder, han cambiado esas condiciones y todos apuntan, o por lo menos en el análisis, a que esto terminará eliminándose para tantos venezolanos que llevan el TPS como estatus de protección.

Abogada Martha L. Arias:
Bueno, efectivamente, el TPS se ha vuelto un dolor de cabeza. No creo que sea solo para los venezolanos, también para nosotros los abogados de inmigración entenderlo y aconsejar a las personas. Fíjese que la semana pasada la directora del Departamento de Seguridad Nacional terminó el TPS para los venezolanos, y estoy hablando del TPS del 2021.
Estaba supuesto a terminar en 60 días, o sea, más o menos el 8 de noviembre de este año. Sin embargo, el juez Chen del Distrito Federal del Norte de California, el 5 de septiembre, hace apenas unos días, dijo que pausó o canceló la terminación de ese TPS. Ver, esto es una pausa. Esto es una pausa porque hay un litigio pendiente. Entonces, por ahora, por ahora, el TPS no va a terminar. Está pausado. Esto ha venido pasando y pasó incluso con el TPS del 2023.
En este momento, pese a que el TPS fue anunciado como terminado la semana pasada, este juez pausó esa terminación. O sea, que a hoy lunes amanecemos con la noticia de que el TPS venezolano está pausado, es decir, continúa activo. Y ahí es donde viene el dolor de cabeza para nosotros, porque en este momento pues básicamente está activo, no debería terminarse, pero si analizamos cómo pasó con el del 2023, que ya está terminado en forma total, podemos pensar que vamos a seguir con este vaivén: lo continúan, lo pausan, lo terminan, lo pausan. No sabemos. Por ahora, el TPS de Venezuela continúa, y esta decisión salió el 5 de septiembre.

Saúl Noriega:
Ahora, doctora, ¿qué hacer sobre todo para los que están allá en EE. UU.? Porque como usted bien dice, es un vaivén: a lo mejor la alegría se convierte en tristeza, y luego de la pausa se dice: bueno, ya va, por ahora estoy aquí tranquilo, pero ¿qué hago? A todos los que están relativamente protegidos por este TPS.

Abogada Martha L. Arias:
Yo pienso que las personas tienen que buscar una forma de resolver su estatus legal si pueden. Por ejemplo, muchos de los ciudadanos tenían asilo pendiente y algunos de ellos no tenían permiso de trabajo con el asilo. Entonces, mi consejo es que saquen el permiso de trabajo con el asilo para que puedan continuar por lo menos con esa protección del asilo y un permiso de trabajo.
Si no tenían asilo, pero están con un americano o con un residente y no se han animado a hacer la petición porque con los residentes la petición también se está demorando, tratar de hacerlo. Hay otras opciones, por ejemplo, personas de Venezuela con TPS que tienen empleadores dispuestos a hacerles una petición laboral, también mirar si esa es una avenida, si es un recurso, que puede que no les dé una residencia inmediata, pero por lo menos un plan B a largo plazo.
De lo contrario, si no tienen un beneficio bajo la ley migratoria, se verán en la obligación de estar aquí hasta que esté el TPS. Pero después tendrían que salir, porque si no se formarían ilegales en este país, que ya todos sabemos está en una política de deportaciones rápidas y masivas. Entonces sería delicado quedarse sin estatus en este momento.

Saúl Noriega:
Fíjese en ese punto, doctora: desde las autoridades estadounidenses han acuñado un término, la autodeportación. Y fíjese que usted decía algo importante: la recomendación es resolver el estatus legal los que puedan. El que no, básicamente, debería pensar en hacer sus maletas y salir de Estados Unidos, doctora.

Abogada Martha L. Arias:
Yo pienso que sí, yo pienso que sí, porque las condiciones de quedarse aquí sin estatus no son como lo fueron muchos años atrás. Muchos años atrás las personas se quedaban sin estatus y por lo menos les daban una licencia de conducir. Podían vivir en los Estados Unidos. Hoy en día, con esta administración, ellos tienen los datos de las personas, de los datos del TPS, pueden coger estas personas y someterlas a deportaciones rápidas.
Las deportaciones rápidas las están deteniendo en sitios muy improvisados de la Florida. Inmigración siempre ha tenido centros de detención que son del gobierno federal o por lo menos contratistas del gobierno federal. Aquí en el sur de la Florida crearon uno, Alcatraz, y están creando justamente otro más hacia el norte del estado de la Florida, que son centros manejados por el estado y, por lo tanto, no tienen toda la infraestructura necesaria para proveer un buen servicio y sobre todo la posibilidad de que la persona detenida allí tenga una buena representación legal.
Entonces, en ese orden de ideas yo pienso que las personas arriesgarían mucho. Por lo menos yo no quisiera arriesgarme en una situación de esas, y más bien tratar de salir con el mismo app CBP One, CBP Home, es el mismo que usaron al entrar. Ahora se llama CBP Home. Tratar de usar ese o salir por su propia cuenta. El punto es tratar de… porque no creo que vaya a ser tan fácil estar en este país sin estatus, por lo menos por los próximos años.

Saúl Noriega:
Correcto. Doctora, muchísimas gracias por darnos mayores luces y por supuesto muchísima gente en Estados Unidos escuchándola para precisamente tomar una decisión, porque usted hablaba de la claridad al momento: ¿Tengo estatus legal? No. ¿Qué hago? Preferiblemente para que no pasen mayores cosas. Doctora, muchísimas gracias. Buenos días.

Abogada Martha L. Arias:
Gracias a ustedes. Feliz día.

Saúl Noriega:
Martha Arias es abogada de inmigración, especialista en el tema venezolano. 7:14, vamos a la pausa y regresamos.

English Translation

Saúl Noriega:
Friends, 7:06 minutes. We continue through Unión Radio, also through IBC. A big topic without a doubt. The issue of TPS, Temporary Protected Status, this so-called TPS by its initials in English, which of course generates a lot of attention not only for Venezuelans who are in the United States, but for so many families around the world who are precisely concerned about their condition, about their immigration status. We are going to talk with Martha Arias. She is a Venezuelan immigration attorney, to understand a little how the figure of TPS is progressing in the United States, given different actions by the administration and even the U.S. justice system.
Mrs. Arias, thank you very much for joining us directly from Miami, there in the United States, to understand what Venezuelans are facing today, especially when there is talk of a possible elimination, especially when there is talk of different changes in the TPS figure for Venezuelans. Very good morning.

Attorney Martha L. Arias:
Good morning to you, greetings to you and all your audience.

Saúl Noriega:
Attorney, how to understand these latest decisions? Especially when many say: this TPS at some point was like a great lifeline for many Venezuelans. But after Trump came to power, those conditions changed, and everyone points out, or at least in the analysis, that this will end up being eliminated for so many Venezuelans who have TPS as protection status.

Attorney Martha L. Arias:
Well, indeed, TPS has become a headache. I don’t think it’s just for Venezuelans, but also for us immigration attorneys to understand it and to advise people. Notice that last week the director of the Department of Homeland Security ended TPS for Venezuelans, and I am speaking about the TPS of 2021.
It was supposed to end in 60 days, that is, around November 8 of this year. However, Judge Chen of the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California, on September 5, just a few days ago, said that he paused or canceled the termination of that TPS. See, this is a pause. This is a pause because there is pending litigation. So, for now, for now, TPS is not going to end. It is paused. This has been happening and even happened with the TPS of 2023.
At this moment, despite the fact that TPS was announced as ending last week, this judge paused that termination. That is, today Monday we woke up with the news that Venezuelan TPS is paused, meaning it continues active. And that’s where the headache comes for us, because at this moment it is basically active, it should not end, but if we analyze how it went with the one from 2023, which is already fully ended, we can think that we will continue with this back and forth: they continue it, they pause it, they end it, they pause it. We don’t know. For now, Venezuelan TPS continues, and this decision came out on September 5.

Saúl Noriega:
Now, attorney, what to do especially for those who are there in the U.S.? Because as you well say, it is a back and forth: maybe joy turns into sadness, and then after the pause one says: well, okay, for now I am calm here, but what do I do? For all those who are relatively protected by this TPS.

Attorney Martha L. Arias:
I think that people have to find a way to resolve their legal status if they can. For example, many citizens had asylum pending and some of them did not have a work permit with the asylum. So, my advice is that they apply for the work permit with the asylum so that they can continue at least with that asylum protection and a work permit.
If they didn’t have asylum, but they are with an American or with a resident and have not been encouraged to file the petition because with residents the petition is also delayed, try to do it. There are other options. For example, Venezuelans with TPS who have employers willing to make them a labor petition should also see if that is an avenue, if it is a resource, that may not give them an immediate residence, but at least a long-term plan B.
Otherwise, if they do not have a benefit under immigration law, they will be forced to be here until this TPS. But afterwards they would have to leave, because otherwise they would become illegal in this country, which we all already know is under a policy of rapid and massive deportations. So, it would be delicate to remain without status at this time.

Saúl Noriega:
Look at that point, attorney: from the U.S. authorities they have coined a term, self-deportation. And notice that you said something important: the recommendation is to resolve legal status for those who can. For those who cannot, basically, they should think about packing their bags and leaving the United States, attorney.

Attorney Martha L. Arias:
I think so, I think so, because the conditions of staying here without status are not like they were many years ago. Many years ago people stayed without status and at least they were given a driver’s license. They could live in the United States. Today, with this administration, they have people’s data, TPS data, they can pick up these people and subject them to rapid deportations.
The rapid deportations are detaining them in very improvised places in Florida. Immigration has always had detention centers that are federal government or at least federal government contractors. Here in South Florida they created one, Alcatraz, and they are creating another one further north in Florida, which are centers run by the state and therefore do not have all the necessary infrastructure to provide good service and above all the possibility that the person detained there has good legal representation.
So, in that sense I think that people would risk a lot. At least I would not want to risk myself in such a situation, and rather try to leave either with the same app CBP One, CBP Home, it is the same one they used to enter, now it is called CBP Home, try to use that or leave on their own. The point is to try to… because I don’t think it will be so easy to be in this country without status, at least for the next few years.

Saúl Noriega:
Correct. Attorney, thank you very much for giving us more clarity, and of course so many people in the United States listening to you precisely to make a decision, because you spoke about clarity at the moment: Do I have legal status? No. What do I do? Preferably so that greater problems do not happen. Attorney, thank you very much. Good morning.

Attorney Martha L. Arias:
Thank you. Have a nice day.

Saúl Noriega:
Martha Arias is an immigration attorney, specialist in the Venezuelan issue. 7:14, let’s go to the break and we will return.

The post TPS for Venezuelans: What the Latest Federal Court Decision Means appeared first on Arias Villa Law.

DHS Ends the 2021 TPS Designation for Venezuela

Martha Arias — Thu, 04 Sep 2025 15:38:15 +0000

On September 3, 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced it is terminating the 2021 Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designation for Venezuela. DHS’s press release notes the 2021 designation was set to expire on September 10, 2025, and states that the termination will take effect 60 days after the Federal Register (FR) notice is published (that notice has not yet posted at the time of writing). U.S. Department of Homeland Security

This follows DHS’s earlier action terminating the 2023 Venezuela TPS designation, which became effective April 7, 2025, per the official Federal Register notice. Practically, that means the “redesignated” 2023 cohort has already lost TPS; the September 3 announcement addresses the original 2021 cohort. Federal Register

USCIS’s Venezuela TPS country page also reflects these changes and provides running updates, including references to the February 2025 actions and court developments. Keep checking that page for post-announcement implementation details. USCIS

Key points at a glance

Announcement date: Sept. 3, 2025 (DHS press release). U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Which group is addressed? Individuals registered under the 2021 TPS designation for Venezuela. The 2023 redesignation was already terminated effective Apr. 7, 2025. Federal Register
Expiration vs. termination timing: DHS notes the 2021 designation “will expire on Sept. 10, 2025,” and also says termination takes effect 60 days after the forthcoming Federal Register notice. The FR notice will control the exact wind-down dates and any auto-extensions of documents; watch for it. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Official status tracker: USCIS Venezuela TPS page. USCIS

Because TPS gives eligible nationals protection from removal and work authorization during the designation period, ending a designation has major implications for employment, travel, and overall lawful presence. DHS’s Sept. 3 statement frames the decision as a national-interest determination following interagency consultation—language you will see mirrored in the eventual Federal Register notice. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

What does this mean for you if you were in the 2021 TPS group?

Status & EAD timing will be set by the FR notice.
DHS’s press release previews the termination, but the Federal Register notice will spell out effective dates, any automatic EAD extensions, and instructions for employers and beneficiaries. Do not assume your work authorization has ended until the FR specifies it. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
The 2023 TPS registrants already lost TPS on April 7, 2025.
If you only qualified under the 2023 redesignation, TPS (and related EADs) ended April 7, 2025 per the FR. Federal Register
Continue to monitor USCIS’s country page and newsroom.
USCIS will post the FR link, FAQs, and any updates to filing or document validity there. USCIS

About “CBP Home” and voluntary self-departure incentives

DHS materials describe a “CBP Home” mobile app (a rebranding/expansion connected to CBP’s mobile app directory) that allows certain individuals to register intent to depart and coordinate travel. DHS and CBP pages state the program provides cost-free travel and a $1,000 “exit bonus” after confirmed return for those who use the app to voluntarily depart. If you are considering this path, get individualized legal advice before taking irreversible steps. U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection

DHS has also indicated that people who self-depart via the app may have failure-to-depart fines forgiven and that departing on your own terms can avoid detention and removal. However, this is not a grant of legal status or a promise of future immigration benefits. Your future eligibility (and any re-entry bars) depends on your personal history and applicable law. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

What To Do Next?

Verify your category (2021 vs. 2023) and your current document dates.
Watch for the Federal Register notice that implements the Sept. 3 announcement; it will set the exact legal timeline. U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Talk to an attorney about possible next steps (asylum, family-based options, employment-based filings, cancellation of removal, etc.) based on your unique history. Call Our Office (305-671-0018) or Send a Message
Do not travel internationally without individualized legal advice if your TPS/EAD is ending.
If considering voluntary departure via CBP Home, understand the consequences before you act. U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Conclusion

DHS has announced the end of Venezuela’s 2021 TPS designation, with the operative dates to be finalized by the Federal Register notice. The 2023 redesignation has already ended (April 7, 2025). If you’re affected, keep an eye on USCIS’s Venezuela page and the FR, and get personalized legal advice before making decisions—especially about work, travel, or voluntary departure programs described by DHS/CBP. U.S. Department of Homeland Security | Federal Register | USCIS

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1) When exactly does TPS end for the 2021 Venezuela group?
DHS says the 2021 designation “will expire on Sept. 10, 2025,” and also that termination takes effect 60 days after the FR notice is published. Because the FR notice controls implementation, wait for the FR to confirm the precise dates and any wind-down instructions. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

2) I was approved under the 2023 redesignation. Do I still have TPS?
No. The 2023 designation ended Apr. 7, 2025, per the FR. If you only qualified under that redesignation, TPS and related benefits have already ended. Federal Register

3) Will there be automatic extensions of EADs?
Possibly, but only if the FR notice provides them. Automatic extensions (if any) are always spelled out in the FR. Check USCIS’s country page and the FR once posted. USCIS

4) Can I apply for another status now (asylum, family-based, employment-based, etc.)?
TPS termination does not bar you from seeking any separate, available immigration benefits. Eligibility is case-specific; consult a qualified attorney. (General guidance: watch USCIS program pages and any FR updates tied to your category.) USCIS

5) Is “CBP Home” real, and what does it offer?
DHS/CBP pages describe “CBP Home” as a voluntary self-departure pathway featuring cost-free travel and a $1,000 exit bonus upon confirmed return. Read the fine print and get legal advice; departures can trigger re-entry bars and other consequences. U.S. Department of Homeland Security | U.S. Customs and Border Protection +1

6) If I self-depart, does that guarantee I can come back legally later?
No. Some DHS statements suggest self-departure may “preserve the opportunity” to seek lawful return in the future, but there is no guarantee. Future eligibility depends on your case and the law at that time. U.S. Department of Homeland Security

7) Where will the official termination details appear?
In the Federal Register. USCIS will also update its Venezuela TPS country page and the newsroom with links and instructions. Federal Register | USCIS

Disclaimer

This post is general information, not legal advice. Immigration law changes frequently, and the Federal Register notice will control exact timelines and document validity. If you are affected by TPS changes, consult a qualified immigration attorney about your specific situation before you make decisions about work, travel, or departure.

DHS press release (Sept. 3, 2025): https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/09/03/dhs-terminates-2021-designation-venezuela-temporary-protected-status

USCIS newsroom note (Sept. 3, 2025): https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/news-releases/dhs-terminates-2021-designation-of-venezuela-for-temporary-protected-status

Federal Register – Termination of 2023 Venezuela TPS (effective Apr. 7, 2025): https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/02/05/2025-02294/termination-of-the-october-3-2023-designation-of-venezuela-for-temporary-protected-status

USCIS – TPS: Venezuela (country page): https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/temporary-protected-status/temporary-protected-status-designated-country-venezuela

CBP Home (DHS overview page): https://www.dhs.gov/cbphome

CBP mobile apps directory – CBP Home: https://www.cbp.gov/about/mobile-apps-directory/cbphome

CBP media release mentioning self-departure incentives: https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-announces-new-cbp-link-mobile-app

DHS statement on forgiving failure-to-depart fines for self-deporters: https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/06/09/dhs-announces-it-will-forgive-failure-depart-fines-illegal-aliens-who-self-deport

The post DHS Ends the 2021 TPS Designation for Venezuela appeared first on Arias Villa Law.

Updates on TPS and New Immigration Rulings

Martha Arias — Wed, 02 Jul 2025 18:22:48 +0000

This week on “Cada Tarde” with Carlos and Agustin Acosta, I joined to discuss some critical immigration developments that affect many in our community.

The Supreme Court issued a new ruling that, while it does not decide whether children born in the U.S. to undocumented parents are citizens, limits the ability of federal judges to apply their rulings nationwide. Now, federal court decisions, such as injunctions, will only apply within their specific state or to the parties involved in the lawsuit, not across the whole country. This shift benefits the current administration and may affect how quickly immigration policies can be challenged in federal courts.

We also discussed President Trump’s recent comments on possibly allowing undocumented immigrants in key industries like agriculture and hospitality to remain in the U.S. under special work permits coordinated by employers. While this is just an idea for now, it offers a glimpse of hope for those who have contributed to our economy for many years.

Another major topic was the upcoming expiration of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitians. Unless renewed, TPS for Haiti will end on September 2, 2025, potentially impacting around half a million people. The same uncertainty remains for Venezuelans, whose TPS is set to expire September 10, 2025, unless an extension is announced by July 12.

For all immigration matters, it’s essential to seek reliable legal advice. Don’t face these changes alone. If you or your loved ones have questions about your status, please contact me at 305-671-0018

FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA

ORIGINAL TRANSCRIPT:

Agustín Acosta:
Muy bien amigos, seguimos adelante. Son las seis de la tarde, diecisiete minutos de este día treinta de junio, es el último día, mañana comenzamos un nuevo mes y bueno, pues hay una serie de noticias muy importantes en el terreno migratorio, en el campo de la inmigración que siempre queremos abordar, como hacemos cada tarde de lunes con la doctora Martha Arias, que siempre nos explica, nos pone al tanto y a ustedes que tienen amigos o familiares con asuntos migratorios pendientes, pues es un segmento muy, muy escuchado. Doctora, muy buenas tardes.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Muy buenas tardes, Agustín. Un saludo para usted y toda la audiencia de Actualidad Radio. Feliz lunes.

Agustín Acosta:
Claro que sí, igualmente para usted. Doctora, cuando llegó Trump a la Casa Blanca en enero, se manejó el tema de que los niños nacidos en Estados Unidos de padres indocumentados o ilegales no podían ser considerados ciudadanos de la nación, a pesar del texto que aparece escrito en la Constitución Federal. Inmediatamente se produjeron una serie de demandas y la semana pasada el Tribunal Supremo de Justicia emitió una determinación sobre esto, pero yo la leí y me parece que se quedó corta la determinación, no aborda per se el tema de la ciudadanía de los niños, sino más bien de la capacidad de inmiscuirse de los tribunales federales en el asunto. ¿Cómo lo ve usted?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Efectivamente, sí, Agustín, así mismo es. La Corte Suprema en esta decisión que emitió el viernes pasado no decidió concretamente el punto o el tema legal de si los niños que nacen en Estados Unidos de padres indocumentados van a tener derecho a la ciudadanía. Ese tema quedó todavía para ser resuelto por la Sala de Apelaciones que está viendo o tocando ese caso. Lo que la Corte Suprema decidió es que las cortes federales o los jueces federales no pueden emitir decisiones que tengan vigencia o aplicación en todos los Estados Unidos, es decir, en todo el país. En este caso, específicamente estamos hablando de una pausa que ordenó un juez federal a esa orden ejecutiva que no se le podía dar la ciudadanía a las personas nacidas en los Estados Unidos de padres indocumentados. Un juez ordenó la pausa. La pausa tenía efecto a nivel nacional, a nivel de todos los Estados Unidos. Entonces, el juez, pues, con esta medida cautelar, lo que hizo fue pausar esto. El gobierno apela, la Sala de Apelaciones, a la Corte Suprema. La Corte Suprema lo que dice es no. Los jueces federales no pueden seguir dando pausas que tengan vigencia en todo el país. Solamente van a tener vigencia esas pausas en el estado y hacia las personas demandantes. Entonces, bueno, esta es una decisión que favorece al gobierno del presidente Trump. Por eso quiere decir que de ahora en adelante, cuando haya una pausa de un juez federal, pues según esta decisión de la Corte Suprema, no va a tener vigencia en todos los Estados Unidos. ¿Es alguna ganancia que tiene la administración actual? Pues que estaba precisamente en contra de que los jueces federales emitieran decisiones de un alcance nacional.

Agustín Acosta:
Amigos, conversamos con la doctora Martha Arias, su teléfono es el 305-671-0018. 305-671-0018. Doctora, un tema que hoy tenemos en nuestros titulares, me parece que es interesante porque esto está puramente en el terreno especulativo y a futuro, no hay nada, nada, nada más que un comentario que hizo ayer el presidente Trump durante una entrevista matutina en la cadena Fox. Dijo ayer que considera, que él considera una medida que podría permitir a los migrantes indocumentados que trabajan en ciertos gremios como la agricultura, la construcción, quedarse en los Estados Unidos con un permiso especial que podría ser coordinado por sus empleadores. Y textualmente dijo Trump, aquí hay gente muy buena que no ha cometido ningún delito, que llevan 15 o 20 años trabajando en industrias que me dicen, o sea, dice Trump, que me dicen que no los pueden reemplazar con personas que son ciudadanos y por lo tanto tienen un papel importante en nuestra economía y podríamos, siempre y cuando los empleadores garanticen que no han cometido delito alguno, buscarle una forma para que se queden aquí. Más o menos, ese fue el comentario que hizo ayer el presidente. Pero creo que pues abre una puerta, tal vez a acomodar a muchas personas que en este momento están en peligro.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Efectivamente, eso abre una puerta para todas esas personas porque usted ha visto que el miedo se ha apoderado de la gente, la gente tiene miedo que la detengan, más que la manden a un tercer país al cual no conocen ni siquiera la lengua, no tengan arraigo. Y ahora que se está hablando de esta construcción de esta nueva cárcel aquí en el condado de Miami-Dade County, pues la gente todavía tiene más miedo. Entonces esto está ocasionando que sobre todo los negocios que se dedican a la agricultura o los negocios que llaman “hospitality business”, estos negocios están sufriendo una escasez de personal y esto podría traducirse pues en aumento también de los precios, porque pues estas personas normalmente son personas que están dispuestas a trabajar por un salario más bajo. Entonces este anuncio del gobierno daría un alivio a ese sector hospitalario y al sector de la agricultura. Esperamos que el presidente pues emita una protección para estos, para este sector. Vamos a ver. Esto lo anunció él y bueno, como todos sabemos, él cuando anuncia una cosa es porque ya la tiene en mente cumplir, entonces ojalá pues que podamos tener este beneficio.

Agustín Acosta:
Claro que sí. Y por último, hay otra decisión que también afecta a las personas de Haití. La noticia decía que era medio millón. Yo no creo que haya medio millón de haitianos en los Estados Unidos. A lo mejor yo estoy equivocado. Me parece que son menos personas de Haití pero perderían entonces el tratado de protección temporal?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Sí, perderían el tratado de protección temporal a partir de septiembre 2 de este año. Todos los haitianos, el gobierno anunció que no va a renovar el TPS de Haití y pues es una gran pena porque también sabemos que es un país que tiene muchos problemas, que no se ha podido recuperar de la situación del terremoto. Y bueno, también sabemos que hay problemas de corrupción, que es lo que ayuda a que no se puedan recuperar. Pero, pues, definitivamente el gobierno anunció, sí, se dice que son aproximadamente 500.000 haitianos que se quedarían sin ese estatus de protección temporal. Acuérdense que ya venimos con varios años renovándose y extendiéndose este TPS de personas de Haití. Entonces, en septiembre 2 de este año 2025 se les terminaría el TPS a los haitianos.

Agustín Acosta:
En cuanto al TPS de los venezolanos y al TPS de los cubanos que le permitiría a ciertos cubanos después de un año y un día poder entrar por la Ley de Ajuste Cubano, ¿ha habido algún cambio desde la última vez que hablamos?

Abogada Martha Arias:
No, no ha habido ningún cambio. El TPS de Venezuela del 2021 también está supuesto a vencer el 10 de septiembre de este año 2025. No ha habido ningún cambio o ningún anuncio acerca de esto. Para el 12 de julio se espera, según la ley, es lo normal que se anuncie si se va a extender o no. Vamos a ver cuál es la respuesta.

Agustín Acosta:
Si no interviene el gobierno de manera contraria y no dicen nada, ¿se volvería a extender por un año más automáticamente?

Abogada Martha Arias:
Es correcto. Si no se anuncia la extensión del TPS, no se dice nada, ni se termina, ni se dice nada, es una extensión automática de seis meses según la ley. Si el gobierno lo termina, definitivamente como lo hizo ahora con Haití, pues se termina. Pero pues vamos a esperar a ver cuál es la decisión: si lo termina, si no dice nada o si lo extiende. Esas serían como las tres opciones.

Agustín Acosta:
Muy bien. Muy bien. Pues muchas gracias, doctora. Déjeme dar su teléfono nuevamente y le reitero a los oyentes que cualquier trámite con inmigración hay que tener la mejor asesoría. No vayan solos, no se dejen aconsejar por personas que no conozcan del tema. Le doy el teléfono de la doctora Arias, abogada de inmigración por muchísimos años y una experta en este asunto. Es el 305-671-0018.

También la pueden encontrar en Facebook con su nombre y apellido, Martha Arias, Immigration Attorney, pero su nombre con la versión de M-A-R-T-H-A, Martha Arias por Facebook, o al bufete 305-671-0018, 305-671-0018. Muchas gracias, buenas tardes.

Abogada Martha Arias:
Gracias, buen día.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION:

Agustín Acosta:
Very well friends, we continue on. It is six seventeen in the afternoon on this thirtieth day of June, it’s the last day, tomorrow we start a new month and well, there is a series of very important news in the immigration field, in the area of immigration that we always want to address, as we do every Monday afternoon with attorney Martha Arias, who always explains things, keeps us up to date, and for those of you who have friends or family with pending immigration matters, this is a very, very listened to segment. Attorney, good afternoon.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Good afternoon, Agustin. Greetings to you and the entire Actualidad Radio audience. Happy Monday.

Agustín Acosta:
Of course, likewise for you. Attorney, when Trump arrived at the White House in January, the topic came up that children born in the United States to undocumented or illegal parents could not be considered citizens of the nation, despite the text written in the Federal Constitution. Immediately, a series of lawsuits were filed and last week the Supreme Court issued a ruling on this, but I read it and it seems to me the ruling fell short, it does not address the issue of citizenship for the children per se, but rather the ability of federal courts to get involved in the matter. How do you see it?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Indeed, yes, Agustin, that is exactly right. The Supreme Court in this decision issued last Friday did not decide specifically the point or the legal matter of whether children born in the United States to undocumented parents will have the right to citizenship. That issue is still to be resolved by the Court of Appeals that is seeing or handling that case. What the Supreme Court decided is that federal courts or federal judges cannot issue decisions that have effect or application throughout the entire United States, that is, nationwide. In this specific case, we are talking about an injunction that a federal judge ordered against that executive order that said citizenship could not be given to people born in the United States to undocumented parents. A judge ordered the pause. The pause had national effect, across all the United States. Then, the judge, with this preliminary injunction, what he did was pause this. The government appeals, the Appeals Court, to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court says no. Federal judges can no longer issue pauses that have effect nationwide. Such pauses will only have effect in the state and for the plaintiffs. So, well, this is a decision that favors the Trump administration. So that means from now on, when there is an injunction from a federal judge, according to this Supreme Court decision, it will not have effect nationwide. Is this a win for the current administration? Well, yes, because they were precisely against federal judges issuing decisions with nationwide reach.

Agustín Acosta:
Friends, we are speaking with attorney Martha Arias, her phone number is 305-671-0018. 305-671-0018. Attorney, a topic that we have today in our headlines, I think is interesting because this is purely speculative and about the future, there is nothing, nothing, nothing more than a comment that President Trump made yesterday during a morning interview on Fox. He said yesterday that he is considering, that he is considering a measure that could allow undocumented immigrants who work in certain industries like agriculture, construction, to stay in the United States with a special permit that could be coordinated by their employers. And Trump said literally, there are very good people here who have not committed any crime, who have spent 15 or 20 years working in industries that, as Trump says, they tell me that they cannot replace them with citizens, and therefore they play an important role in our economy, and we could, as long as employers guarantee that they have not committed any crime, find a way for them to stay here. More or less, that was the comment the president made yesterday. But I think that, well, it opens a door, maybe to accommodate many people who are currently at risk.

Attorney Martha Arias:
Indeed, this opens a door for all those people because you have seen that fear has taken over people, people are afraid of being detained, more so of being sent to a third country where they don’t even know the language, have no ties. And now that there is talk of building this new jail here in Miami-Dade County, people are even more afraid. So this is causing especially businesses dedicated to agriculture or those in the so-called hospitality business, these businesses are suffering from a shortage of staff and this could also mean higher prices, because these people are usually willing to work for a lower salary. So, this government announcement would give relief to that hospitality sector and to agriculture. We hope the president will issue a protection for these, for this sector. We’ll see. He announced this, and well, as we all know, when he announces something it’s because he already has it in mind to carry out, so hopefully we can have this benefit.

Agustín Acosta:
Of course. And finally, there’s another decision that also affects people from Haiti. The news said it was half a million. I don’t think there are half a million Haitians in the United States. Maybe I’m wrong. It seems to me there are fewer people from Haiti but would they lose the temporary protected status?

Attorney Martha Arias:
Yes, they would lose temporary protected status starting September 2 of this year. All Haitians, the government announced that it will not renew TPS for Haiti and, well, it is a great shame because we also know that it is a country with many problems, which has not been able to recover from the earthquake situation. And well, we also know there are problems of corruption, which is what keeps them from recovering. But, yes, definitely the government announced, yes, it is said that there are approximately 500,000 Haitians who would be left without that temporary protected status. Remember, this TPS for Haitians has been renewed and extended for several years. So, on September 2 of this year 2025, TPS for Haitians would end.

Agustín Acosta:
Regarding the TPS for Venezuelans and the TPS for Cubans, which allows certain Cubans, after a year and a day, to enter through the Cuban Adjustment Act, has there been any change since the last time we spoke?

Attorney Martha Arias:
No, there has been no change. The TPS for Venezuela from 2021 is also supposed to expire on September 10 of this year 2025. There has been no change or announcement about this. By July 12, according to the law, it is normal for them to announce whether it will be extended or not. We’ll see what the answer is.

Agustín Acosta:
If the government does not intervene in any way and says nothing, would it be automatically extended for another year?

Attorney Martha Arias:
That’s correct. If the extension of TPS is not announced, nothing is said, nor is it terminated, nor is anything said, it is an automatic six-month extension according to the law. If the government ends it, definitely, as they just did with Haiti, then it ends. But we will wait to see what the decision is: if they end it, if nothing is said, or if it is extended. Those would be the three options.

Agustín Acosta:
Very well. Very well. Well, thank you very much, attorney. Let me give your phone number again and I remind listeners that for any immigration procedure you need the best advice. Don’t go alone, don’t take advice from people who don’t know about the subject. I give you the phone number of attorney Arias, immigration attorney for many years and an expert in this matter. It’s 305-671-0018.

You can also find her on Facebook with her name and surname, Martha Arias, Immigration Attorney, but her name with the version M-A-R-T-H-A, Martha Arias on Facebook, or at the firm 305-671-0018, 305-671-0018. Thank you very much, good afternoon.

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

The post Updates on TPS and New Immigration Rulings appeared first on Arias Villa Law.