https://discuss.ilw.com/ Blogs en Sat, 12 Sep 2026 04:21:21 GMT vBulletin 60 images/misc/rss.png https://discuss.ilw.com/ https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/640053-immigrant-visa-pause-litigation-update-dos-confirms-individual-review-of-more-than-43-000-affected-cases Thu, 10 Sep 2026 19:34:06 GMT As we previously reported (https://www.muimmigration.com/blog/department-of-state-pauses-immigrant-visa-issuance-worldwide/), a federal court in late August ordered the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to resume processing immigrant visa cases that... we previously reported, a federal court in late August ordered the U.S. Department of State (DOS) to resume processing immigrant visa cases that had been refused solely under the now-vacated immigrant visa pause affecting nationals of 75 countries. The court also directed DOS to provide additional information regarding how it would implement the ruling.

On September 8, DOS filed its status report with the court, providing the first details about how affected cases will move forward. According to the filing, more than 43,000 immigrant visa applications may be impacted by the court's order. However, DOS confirmed that there will not be a blanket reopening of all cases. Instead, each case will be reviewed individually by a consular officer.

As part of that review process, some applicants may be required to submit updated documentation, such as a new medical examination or police certificate, while others may be asked to attend a new visa interview. The government also stated that affected cases will be reviewed under current public charge guidance, including new adjudication tools and training procedures recently implemented worldwide.

Importantly, DOS did not provide a timeline for completing review of affected cases. The agency stated that cases will be processed on a rolling basis and that immigrant visa scheduling has been delayed at many posts through September while consulates implement new procedures and training requirements.

What Happens Next?

The parties are scheduled to submit a joint status letter to the court on September 11, 2026, outlining proposed next steps in the litigation. The government's latest filing may prompt additional scrutiny from the court because it provides limited information regarding how and when affected cases will actually be reconsidered.

While DOS has now confirmed that it can identify affected applicants and has begun developing procedures for reviewing their cases, the agency has not committed to a deadline for completing reviews or rescheduling interviews. As a result, many impacted immigrant visa applicants may continue to face uncertainty in the weeks and months ahead.

What Should Affected Applicants Do?

Individuals whose immigrant visa applications were refused solely because of the immigrant visa pause should closely monitor communications from the applicable U.S. embassy or consulate.
However, because DOS has indicated that each case will be reviewed individually and not committed to a specific timeline, applicants should wait for specific instructions before submitting updated documents.

MU will continue monitoring developments in this litigation and provide updates as additional information becomes available.
]]> CMusillo CMusillo https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/640053-immigrant-visa-pause-litigation-update-dos-confirms-individual-review-of-more-than-43-000-affected-cases https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/639870-uscis-allows-30-day-grace-period-for-new-affidavit-of-support-forms Wed, 09 Sep 2026 19:29:21 GMT
The I-864 is required in most family-based green card cases to demonstrate that the sponsoring family member has sufficient financial resources to support the intending immigrant in the United States.

On August 31, 2026 USCIS published new editions of the following forms:

• Form I-864, Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the INA
• Form I-864A, Contract Between Sponsors and Household Member
• Form I-864EZ Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the INA

At the time of publication, the new forms took effect immediately, with no grace period. This meant that any I-864 submission received by USCIS on or after August 31, 2026, using the prior 10/17/24 edition would have been rejected, even if it was mailed out before the new edition was published. The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) quickly filed suit and USCIS reversed its initial position and announced a 30-day grace period.

Through September 30, both the 10/17/24 and 8/24/26 form editions will be accepted by USCIS for filing. Starting on October 1, only the 8/24/26 edition will be accepted.

What Changed?

The new I-864 forms now require the sponsor to authorize USCIS and DOS to pull their credit report. This means that sponsors completing the I-864 should remove any credit freeze before submitting the form to avoid an RFE or denial.

Additionally, the authorization will allow USCIS and DOS to disclose financial information about the sponsor to the sponsored immigrant that is gained through the consumer report.

If you are working with MU on a case that includes an I-864 or related form, your attorney will be in contact regarding any required action.]]> CMusillo CMusillo https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/639870-uscis-allows-30-day-grace-period-for-new-affidavit-of-support-forms https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/idblog/639543-letters-of-the-week-sep-7-sep-11 Tue, 08 Sep 2026 07:03:29 GMT Please leave your comments here... Please leave your comments here...]]> IDBlog IDBlog https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/idblog/639543-letters-of-the-week-sep-7-sep-11 https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/jdzubow/638674-the-unjust-justification-for-revoking-asylum-seekers-visas Wed, 02 Sep 2026 10:04:58 GMT The U.S. Department of State (DOS) plans to revoke (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/u-s-set-for-largest-mass-visa-revocation-in-history-targeting-up-to-200000-foreigners-officials-say) up to 200,000 visitor visas for people who came to the... revoke up to 200,000 visitor visas for people who came to the United States and then applied for asylum. The move is largely symbolic, since the whole point of a visa is to allow someone to enter the country. Once they are here, the visa is no longer needed.

Revoking all these visas will be quite a production; so why would DOS go to the trouble if it has no real-world effect? Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau justified the revocation by claiming that people are "fed up with bogus asylum claims" and that asylum "isn’t supposed to be a loophole to circumvent immigration laws." He cites one recent example--of Colombian national Humberto 'Beto' Coral--which supposedly "highlights such abuse." Mr. Landau's accusations against Mr. Coral are revealing; not for what they say about Mr. Coral, but instead, because they illustrate the Trump Administration's ignorance of our asylum system, and its cavalier attitude towards the rule of law.
Let's start with Mr. Coral. Who is he and why was he seeking asylum in the United States?

Mr. Coral is a left-wing political activist from Colombia. His father was a police officer who was assassinated after he helped lead the government operation that killed Pablo Escobar, a powerful drug lord. Mr. Coral writes that his "political asylum case was not based on opposition to any particular [Colombian] president." Rather, it was based on his investigation into his father's death.

Mr. Coral arrived in the United States on a visitor's visa in 2015 and then filed for asylum. He continued his political activity in the U.S., supporting the left-wing presidential candidate who was ultimately defeated by the Trump Administration's preferred candidate, who is now the president of Colombia.

In June 2026, Secretary of State Marco Rubio determined that allowing Mr. Coral to "remain in the United States… undermines U.S. foreign policy interests in Colombia’s democratic processes and signals that foreign nationals may use U.S. platforms to conduct politically motivated disinformation campaigns and litigation targeting foreign democratic actors without consequence." As a result of this determination, Mr. Coral was detained by ICE, held for a month, and allegedly mistreated. Rather than remain in detention, Mr. Coral withdrew his asylum application, accepted "voluntary departure," and left the country.

It's not exactly clear to me why Christopher Landau selected Mr. Coral as the poster child for "frivolous asylum claims," but Mr. Landau's vitriol for Mr. Coral's politics is certainly apparent:

Coral... has publicly claimed that he applied for asylum as a victim of “war and impunity” in Colombia (although one may wonder what that has to do with official persecution on account of his “race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion”).... he received a work permit, which he continued to renew for a DECADE. During that time, he championed Colombia’s far-left then-President, ran unsuccessfully for a seat in Colombia’s Congress on a pro-government platform, made defamatory comments about a former Colombian President that he was forced to retract, and tried to wage lawfare in our system against then-candidate for President (now President) [Abelardo de la Espriella]. Meanwhile, he denounced the alleged “persecution” of Hispanics in the US.... Talk about an Alice-in-Wonderland scenario: while seeking asylum IN our country FROM Colombia, he was accusing our government of putting people in concentration camps and shilling for Colombia's far-left government.... True to form, he now alleges that he was “tortured” while detained as a “political prisoner” in the US--and, for good measure, challenges the legitimacy of the recent Colombian election.... If this isn't a perfect example of the dysfunction and abuse of our asylum system, I don't know what is.

Setting aside Mr. Landau's uniformed view of the substantive asylum law and his apparent ignorance of the interminable procedural delays, this all sounds a lot like political activity, which is a protected category under the asylum law. Indeed, from Mr. Landau's summary, it appears that Mr. Coral has a strong case for asylum and I can't imagine any Immigration Judge finding his application frivolous.

The problem, of course, is not that Mr. Coral doesn't have a political opinion. The problem is that he has the wrong political opinion, at least from the perspective of the Trump Administration. But rejecting an asylum seeker because you don't like his particular viewpoint is fundamentally inconsistent with the law of asylum.

Asylum was created to protect people who face persecution on account of their political opinion. We as a nation have committed to protect such people because it reflects our values--we believe in Free Speech, especially when that speech involves a political opinion. The specific views expressed are irrelevant to that principle and, more importantly, they are irrelevant to the law of asylum, which protects people who face political persecution regardless of their ideology. And so Mr, Landau's suggestion that we should deny asylum to people whose views are not aligned with the current Administration runs counter to our nation's law. More than that, Mr. Landau's assertion that such cases are frivolous and should serve as justification for revoking tens of thousands of visas is disingenuous and dangerous. Even if you agree with Mr. Landau that we should not offer protection to people whose views we don't like, the law would need to be changed (by Congress) to implement such a policy. Thus, on top of everything else, Mr. Landau's views stand in opposition to the rule of law.

Despite it all, the State Department appears poised to start revoking asylum seekers' visas. While the effect on most applicants will be minimal, I fear that the harm to our government's moral standing and commitment to the rule of law will be profound.

Originally posted on the Asylumist: www.Asylumist.com
]]> JDzubow JDzubow https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/jdzubow/638674-the-unjust-justification-for-revoking-asylum-seekers-visas https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/idblog/638278-letters-of-the-week-aug-31-sep-4 Mon, 31 Aug 2026 09:54:07 GMT Please leave your comments here... Please leave your comments here...]]> IDBlog IDBlog https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/idblog/638278-letters-of-the-week-aug-31-sep-4 https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/637809-department-of-state-pauses-immigrant-visa-issuance-worldwide Fri, 28 Aug 2026 18:14:00 GMT Reports indicate that the U.S. Department of State (DOS) has temporarily paused immigrant visa issuance at U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide while consular officers receive additional training related to public charge determinations. ...
Although DOS has not issued a formal public announcement, some consular posts are reportedly rescheduling immigrant visa interviews, including employment-based immigrant visa cases such as EB-2 and EB-3 applications.

Who May Be Affected?

The reported pause appears limited to immigrant visa applicants processing their green cards through U.S. embassies and consulates abroad. This may include both family-based and employment-based immigrant visa cases.

Potential Legal Challenges

The pause comes shortly after the federal court's decision in CLINIC v. Rubio, which ruled that the 75 country immigrant visa pause was unlawful and emphasized that public charge determinations must be made on a case-by-case basis.

The CLINIC plaintiffs have already filed an emergency motion requesting that the court enforce the judgment in light of this new pause.

What Is Not Affected?

At this time, there is no indication that the reported pause affects:

• H-1B, L-1, E-2, TN, F-1, or other nonimmigrant visa categories

What We Are Watching

• Whether additional consular posts begin rescheduling immigrant visa interviews
• How long interview delays last
• Any formal DOS announcements
• Potential litigation and court developments

Takeaway

The reported pause currently appears limited to immigrant visa cases processed through U.S. consulates and embassies abroad. Because DOS has not provided formal guidance, significant uncertainty remains regarding the scope and duration of the pause. We will continue monitoring developments and provide updates as more information becomes available.
]]> CMusillo CMusillo https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/637809-department-of-state-pauses-immigrant-visa-issuance-worldwide https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/637567-dhs-proposes-new-103-265-fee-for-h-1b-cap-petitions Wed, 26 Aug 2026 16:44:02 GMT On August 25, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a proposed rule (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/08/25/2026-17324/fee-for-certain-h-1b-petitions) that would create a new $103,265 filing fee for H-1B cap-subject... published a proposed rule that would create a new $103,265 filing fee for H-1B cap-subject petitions, including petitions filed under the master's cap exemption. The fee would be in addition to all existing H-1B filing fees.

Importantly, this is only a proposed rule and is not currently in effect. DHS will accept public comments through September 24, 2026, before deciding whether to move forward with a final rule.

Who Would Be Affected?

The proposed fee would apply only to cap-subject H-1B petitions, including regular cap and master's cap filings and for H-1B beneficiaries both inside and outside the US. DHS states that the fee would be imposed at the time of filing and would be payable in addition to all other required fees.

The proposal generally would not affect:

• Cap-exempt H-1B petitions;
• H-1B extensions;
• H-1B amendments; or
• H-1B transfers for workers who have already been counted against the H-1B cap.

What Happens Next?

At this stage, there are no immediate changes for employers. However, if finalized, the rule could significantly increase the cost of hiring foreign workers through the annual H-1B cap process starting with the March 2027 H-1B cap registration season.

We anticipate significant legal challenges if DHS moves forward with implementing the fee, particularly given the ongoing litigation that blocked implementation of the $100,000 H-1B fee.

MU will continue to monitor developments and provide updates as additional information becomes available.]]> CMusillo CMusillo https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/637567-dhs-proposes-new-103-265-fee-for-h-1b-cap-petitions https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/jdzubow/637534-more-sneaky-ways-to-deny-asylum-courtesy-of-the-asylum-office Wed, 26 Aug 2026 10:23:57 GMT
Our favorable humanitarian law conflicts with the Trump Administration's goal of blocking people from obtaining asylum in the United States. Rather than attempting to amend the law, the Administration has implemented a series of procedural and administrative roadblocks to prevent applicants from having their cases evaluated on the merits.

Last week, USCIS issued some new rules for cases at the Asylum Office. The most noteworthy change relates to when evidence is due. Other new (or new-ish) rules concern rescheduling interviews and biometric appointments, and attorney attendance at interviews.

The most significant new rule states that evidence is now due 14 calendar days before the interview:

Starting Aug. 21, 2026, you must submit all evidence in support of your asylum application to the asylum office 14 calendar days before the date of your scheduled interview. Evidence submitted less than 14 calendar days from your scheduled interview may not be included with your asylum application, or we may reschedule your asylum interview. A rescheduled asylum interview due to late evidence submission may affect your eligibility for an employment authorization document (EAD).

Prior to August 21, 2026, most Asylum Offices accepted evidence that was filed at least 7 days before the interview. Requiring asylum seekers to submit their evidence 14 days in advance would not be a big deal if the Asylum Offices gave sufficient notice of the interview. Unfortunately, we often receive the notice only a few weeks before the interview. Unless this practice changes (which is doubtful), applicants will have little time between receiving the interview notice and the due date for submitting evidence.

An obvious solution to this problem might be to submit evidence now, so that the Asylum Office has the evidence even before they issue the interview notice. For people who filed their I-589 online, that is an option. However, for the large majority of applicants who filed by paper, it ain't so easy to submit evidence before you receive the interview notice. That's because the only way to submit additional evidence is by mail, and the Asylum Office frequently loses documents that are submitted early (they also sometimes lose documents that are submitted on time, and so you should bring an extra copy of your evidence to the interview + proof that you filed the evidence timely). I think the safer approach is to gather and organize your evidence, so it is ready to submit quickly once you receive the interview notice.

Perhaps you think the new 14-day rule makes sense, since it gives the Asylum Officer more time to review your evidence and prepare for the interview. Let me disabuse you of that notion. Asylum Officers usually don't look at their cases prior to the interview, and in fact, officers rarely receive the file until after the applicant arrives for the interview and checks in. Indeed, it is common to attend an interview where the officer hasn't looked at the evidence at all and often says as much during the interview.

The 14-day rule is also problematic for attorneys, who are busy and have many cases. A shortened time frame between the interview notice and the due date for evidence makes it more difficult for the attorney to complete the evidence and get it filed.

These difficulties are compounded by another rule change: It has become virtually impossible to reschedule an asylum interview. According to the new rule, effective August 21, 2026, "you must establish exceptional circumstances for USCIS to reschedule your asylum interview" (this same standard applies to people who want to reschedule a biometric appointment). USCIS has previously defined "exceptional circumstances" as including, but not limited to "Battery or extreme cruelty to you or your child or parent; serious illness of you or your spouse, child or parent; or the death of your spouse, child or parent." But even if you have "exceptional circumstances," it is still very difficult to get the Asylum Office to reschedule an interview. Most Asylum Offices will only accept reschedule requests by mail. It usually takes days or weeks for them to respond (if they respond at all), and so you have to prepare for the interview at the same time you are hoping it will be rescheduled.

If the interview (or biometric appointment) is rescheduled, this will stop the Asylum Clock, which may prevent you from getting a work permit (if you already have a work permit, there is no effect if the clock stops).

Another recent rule change (from May 2026) adds to these difficulties. The rule states that "USCIS will no longer permit attorneys and accredited representatives to participate remotely in interviews at field offices and in affirmative asylum... interviews... except in limited circumstances." "All legal representatives must be physically present to attend these interviews." In short, while attorneys were previously allowed to attend interviews remotely, that is no longer an option, which will further limit asylum seeker's ability to find a lawyer.

These new rules aim to handicap asylum seekers by making it more difficult to submit evidence and secure legal representation. By collecting your evidence in advance and having a plan with your lawyer, you will be better positioned to overcome these latest obstacles to asylum.

Originally posted on the Asylumist: www.Asylumist.com]]> JDzubow JDzubow https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/jdzubow/637534-more-sneaky-ways-to-deny-asylum-courtesy-of-the-asylum-office https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/637481-federal-court-ends-75-country-immigrant-visa-pause Tue, 25 Aug 2026 15:10:50 GMT
As a result of the ruling, immigrant visa processing for affected applicants should resume. The list of impacted countries can be found here.

Importantly, the court's decision does not affect the Administration's separate security-based travel restrictions involving 39 countries. Those restrictions remain in place.

What Does This Mean for the Visa Bulletin?

The resumption of immigrant visa processing could have a significant impact on employment-based immigrant visa availability in FY 2027. Thousands of immigrant visa cases that had been on hold may now move forward, increasing demand for immigrant visa numbers. As a result, MU anticipates additional retrogression pressure, particularly for Employment-Based Rest of World (ROW) categories.

There is some positive news as well. Additional employment-based immigrant visas are expected to become available in FY 2027 due to the rollover of unused family-based immigrant visas from FY 2026. This may help offset some of the increased demand created by the end of the visa pause.

MU Law will continue to monitor developments and provide updates regarding any appeal and the impact on immigrant visa processing.
]]> CMusillo CMusillo https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/637481-federal-court-ends-75-country-immigrant-visa-pause https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/637267-september-2026-visa-bulletin-no-movement-to-close-out-fy-26 Mon, 24 Aug 2026 19:49:27 GMT The Department of State has just issued the September 2026 Visa Bulletin (https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/visa-law0/visa-bulletin/2026/visa-bulletin-for-september-2026.html). This blog post analyzes this month’s Visa Bulletin. ... September 2026 Visa Bulletin. This blog post analyzes this month’s Visa Bulletin.

Visa Bulletin

Table A: Final Action Dates — Applications with these dates may be approved for their Green Card (Permanent Residency card) or Immigrant Visa appointment:

Employment- based	All Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed	CHINA- mainland born	INDIA	MEXICO	PHILIPPINES
1st	C	01JUL23	15OCT22	C	C
2nd	C	01SEP21	U	C	C
3rd	01SEP24	01JAN22	01JAN14	01SEP24	01AUG23

Table B: Adjustment of Status Filing Chart

USCIS will continue to use the Table A Final Action chart for I-485 employment-based filings in September 2026. See: USCIS Visa Bulletin Dates

MU Law Analysis

The September Visa Bulletin saw no forward movement which is common for the final month of the fiscal year. There was also no retrogression and no new categories became unavailable.

The Visa Bulletin continues to highlight that recent advancement in priority dates was driven in part by reduced demand, including the impact of prior immigration restrictions and travel bans. These advancements could be temporary as demand increases and if certain restrictions like the 75 country visa pause are lifted. Looking ahead, the Department of State has indicated that further retrogression or unavailability remains possible.

The Visa Bulletin suggests that India EB-1 might become unavailable prior to the end of September.
EB-2 remains current for all countries except India and China but it might become necessary to make the category unavailable prior to the end of September if the annual limit is reached.

The Visa Bulletin noted that FY 2026 will have 186,317 employment-based immigrant visas available, significantly exceeding the normal annual limit of 140,000. This increase is the result of unused family-based immigrant visas from FY 2025 being added to the employment-based visa pool.]]> CMusillo CMusillo https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/637267-september-2026-visa-bulletin-no-movement-to-close-out-fy-26 https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/idblog/637175-letters-of-the-week-aug-24-aug-28 Mon, 24 Aug 2026 10:35:13 GMT Please leave your comments here... Please leave your comments here... IDBlog IDBlog https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/idblog/637175-letters-of-the-week-aug-24-aug-28 https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/636695-uscis-releases-new-form-i-485-effective-september-18-2026 Fri, 21 Aug 2026 13:59:02 GMT USCIS has published a preview version (https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/Preview_Form_I-485_9-18-26_Edition_USCIS_WILL_REJECT_IF_POSTMARKED_BEFORE_09-18-26.pdf) of a revised Form I-485 that will become effective on September... preview version of a revised Form I-485 that will become effective on September 18, 2026. While the overwhelming majority of the form remains unchanged, employers and foreign nationals should be aware of an important update involving public charge questions.

The revised form is not yet available for filing, and USCIS has indicated that the official 09/18/26 edition will become mandatory on September 18, 2026, with no grace period. Applicants filing on or after that date will have to use the new version.

Expanded Public Charge Questions

The most significant change is in the public charge section of the form.

Under the current I-485, applicants are asked about a limited group of public benefits, such as SSI and TANF. The new version instead asks whether the applicant has ever received any means-tested public benefit and requires additional information regarding those benefits, including a chart requesting details about the benefit received.

What About Consular Processing?

These changes apply to adjustment of status cases (green card cases) filed with USCIS and do not directly affect consular processing cases. The current public charge-related immigrant visa issuance pause affecting certain nationalities remains in effect, and there have been no significant Department of State updates regarding implementation of the new public charge framework at U.S. embassies and consulates.

As always, healthcare employers and foreign national employees with questions about these changes should contact their MU attorney regarding their specific circumstances.]]> CMusillo CMusillo https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/636695-uscis-releases-new-form-i-485-effective-september-18-2026 https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/jdzubow/636392-the-time-to-pay-the-asylum-fee-is-now Wed, 19 Aug 2026 12:00:12 GMT Last year, the One Big Beautiful Bill (https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/text) created a filing fee for asylum and an annual fee that asylum seekers must pay each year their application is pending. Unfortunately, the roll out... Last year, the One Big Beautiful Bill created a filing fee for asylum and an annual fee that asylum seekers must pay each year their application is pending. Unfortunately, the roll out of the fee payment system was a mess. It was impossible to pay the fee unless you first received a notice from USCIS or EOIR (the Executive Office for Immigration Review--the office that oversees our nation's Immigration Courts), but some people were able to pay without receiving a notice. Other people were not able to pay even with the notice. Many people never received a notice at all. The fee was temporarily paused by a lawsuit, but then went back into effect. In short, the whole annual asylum fee (AAF) system is confusing. It's also frightening, since failure to pay could result in your asylum case being denied.

For many asylum seekers, the window to pay the AAF closed before they could pay (or before they even knew they were required to pay). Recently, however, the window has reopened for some affirmative asylum seekers, and they have been able to pay the fee. Of course, this happened without an announcement from USCIS; we know about it only because some asylum seekers have reported that they are now able to pay the fee. We do not know how long the payment window will remain open, and so if you have not yet paid the AAF, the time to do that is now.
There are two ways to pay the AAF. One way for affirmative asylum seekers (people with cases at the Asylum Office/USCIS) and another way for asylum seekers in Immigration Court.

For affirmative asylum seekers (at the Asylum Office), they pay through the USCIS Annual Asylum Fee Payment Portal. To make the payment, you will need your Alien number and your receipt number. Both numbers should appear on your asylum receipt and your biometric notice.

If you try to pay the AAF and the website won't accept payment, there are a few actions you can try, as recommended by ASAP, the Asylum Seekers Advocacy Project. First, document your attempts to pay. Take a photo or screenshot, or print the USCIS message that says that the payment period has expired. Record the date. Second, contact USCIS to ask them to reopen your case to allow you to pay, because you never received the payment notice. You can call USCIS at 800-375-5283 or go to the USCIS website and click “Need Help? Chat with Emma” at the bottom right side of the screen. Ask for a service request number. Record that number and the date. Third, you can request that your congressperson contact USCIS for you. You do not have to be a U.S. citizen to do this. You can find contact information for your congressperson here: House of Representatives or Senate. Keep documentation of any efforts the congressperson's office makes on your behalf.

ASAP has also filed a lawsuit related to the asylum fee. The lawsuit has temporarily stayed (blocked) USCIS from imposing a penalty for failure to pay the AAF. However, the situation is fluid and the stay could end at any time. For this reason, it is important to pay the fee as soon as possible, or if you are unable to pay, to document your efforts to make the payment.

For people with an asylum case at the Immigration Court or the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), they also need to pay the annual asylum fee. The court or the BIA should issue an order informing you that it is time to pay. However, these orders are not always issued, and if you have an asylum case pending at the Immigration Court or the BIA, you should make the payment now.

For the Immigration Court or the BIA, you can pay the AAF at the EOIR Payment Portal. You will need your Alien number to make the payment. After you pay, you will get a receipt, which you should save and then file with the Immigration Court or BIA.

If you fail to pay the AAF, the Immigration Court or BIA can deny your asylum application. If that happens, you will remain eligible for Withholding of Removal and protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture, but these are inferior forms of protection and they are more difficult to obtain than asylum. For this reason, it is important to pay the AAF to preserve your opportunity to seek asylum in the United States.

The asylum fee is cruel and pointless, and is often difficult to pay. It seems that the main purpose of the AAF is to harm vulnerable immigrants and the agencies that support them. It also punishes people for delays caused by the U.S. government. While litigation may mitigate the damage caused by the AAF, payment of the fee is required by law, and for asylum seekers who have not yet paid, it is crucial to make the AAF payment as soon as possible.

Originally posted on the Asylumist: www.Asylumist.com
]]> JDzubow JDzubow https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/jdzubow/636392-the-time-to-pay-the-asylum-fee-is-now https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/636229-uscis-publishes-new-editions-of-forms-i-539-i-765-older-editions-will-be-rejected-starting-september-15 Tue, 18 Aug 2026 15:08:40 GMT USCIS will publish revised editions of Form I-539, Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status, and Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization on September 15. The revised forms implement the recently published final rule ending the...
The revised forms will go into effect immediately on September 15 without any grace period. To assist applicants and practitioners in preparing for the transition, USCIS has published preview versions of the new forms and instructions.

USCIS will continue to accept the current editions of Form I-539 and I-765 if they are filed or postmarked before September 15. Beginning September 15, USCIS will reject prior editions of these forms and accept only the new 09/15/26 editions.

MU Law Analysis

This announcement is particularly important for:

• F-1 students filing extension, change of status, OPT, or STEM OPT-related applications;
• J-1 exchange visitors seeking extensions or changes of status;
• H-4, L-2, E dependent spouses, and other nonimmigrants filing Form I-539 or Form I-765;

Because USCIS will reject outdated editions without a transition period, employers and applicants should carefully verify that the correct edition is being used for any filing submitted around September 15, 2026. A rejected filing could result in falling out of status, employment authorization issues, or missed filing deadlines.

MU will continue monitoring USCIS guidance regarding implementation of the new Form I-539 and Form I-765 editions and the broader fixed-period admission rule that we will discuss on our upcoming Webinar on August 25 at 2 PM EST. If you have questions about an upcoming filing, please contact your MU attorney.]]> CMusillo CMusillo https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/cmusillo/636229-uscis-publishes-new-editions-of-forms-i-539-i-765-older-editions-will-be-rejected-starting-september-15 https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/idblog/635983-letters-of-the-week-aug-17-aug-21 Mon, 17 Aug 2026 07:22:07 GMT Please leave your comments here... Please leave your comments here... IDBlog IDBlog https://discuss.ilw.com/blogs/idblog/635983-letters-of-the-week-aug-17-aug-21