Beatriz: Immigrant Lawyer Advocating for Noncitizen Children’s Rights

Beatriz, a Venezuelan-American lawyer, faces challenges in advocating for unaccompanied minors amid changing immigration policies and a climate of fear affecting her community.

In February 2025, Beatriz, a Venezuelan-American lawyer, received an unexpected order from the Interior Department directing her nonprofit organization to cease all operations. Beatriz specializes in representing unaccompanied minors—children navigating immigration proceedings without their parents. These vulnerable youngsters often find themselves living with relatives, placed in foster care, or detained in facilities, facing a daunting system alone.

Beatriz’s own journey began when she immigrated to the United States at the age of eight, fleeing violence and political persecution in Venezuela. Having witnessed her parents struggle through numerous meetings with immigration lawyers, she decided to pursue a legal career to help others in similar situations. “I know how terrifying it is to be a child, alone and unable to speak English, trying to deal with authority figures,” Beatriz reflects. “That’s why I became a lawyer, to bring some empathy to that process.” Today, she is a U.S. citizen dedicated to advocating for those who are not.

The abrupt stop-work order disrupted Beatriz’s efforts to assist these children. “It came completely out of the blue—suddenly, everything changed,” she recalls. The order led to the cancellation of federal contracts, forcing organizations like hers to reduce staff and resources. “For those of us left, it was all hands on deck,” Beatriz explains, highlighting the urgency of their mission.

Although the stop-work order was eventually rescinded, the legal battles surrounding the canceled contracts continue. The immediate impact, however, has been severe. “In practical terms, it left children without anybody to advocate for them,” Beatriz states. During this period, she and her colleagues attended numerous hearings to observe and take notes. In one particularly heartbreaking instance, Beatriz witnessed a confused six-year-old appear in court without any legal representation. “These young children are being brought to immigration hearings—speaking no English, and without a lawyer—to try to explain why they shouldn’t be deported,” she laments.

The situation has been exacerbated by the use of “rocket dockets” in immigration courts, which cram multiple hearings into a single day. “They started fast-tracking kids through the system at a time when we weren’t able to accompany them,” Beatriz says, expressing her concern over the increasing challenges faced by unaccompanied minors.

Beatriz has also observed the chaos that ensues when caregivers are detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Some of her young clients have been placed in detention or foster care, while the government has sometimes refused to disclose the whereabouts of their caregivers. “It’s something none of my superiors—including people who worked during Trump’s first term—have ever experienced before,” she notes, highlighting the unprecedented nature of the current climate.

As a result, Beatriz frequently encounters children who are afraid to attend school or even leave their homes. “So much of my job is now simply dealing with anxious kids,” she says. “Pretty much every one of these children has a deep sense that the U.S. is no longer a safe place for them.”

This pervasive fear extends beyond the children to Beatriz’s entire community. Even before the Trump administration canceled Temporary Protected Status for approximately 350,000 Venezuelans, her WhatsApp groups were filled with messages from individuals whose loved ones had disappeared from their neighborhoods. “I have friends who are scared to step onto the street,” she shares. “The demonization of my culture and my community is really hurtful, and really harmful.”

With discussions around denaturalizing or deporting U.S. citizens to foreign prisons and eliminating due process for migrants, Beatriz worries for the safety of her own family, all of whom are now American citizens. “We worked hard to get citizenship, but there’s a real fear that even that won’t protect us,” she says. “For Venezuelans, the feelings of insecurity are always present. It really weighs heavily on us.”

Beatriz’s commitment to her work remains steadfast, even in the face of adversity. She continues to advocate for unaccompanied minors, striving to ensure that these children receive the legal representation and support they desperately need.

Source: Original article

Grandmother Deported to India After Three Decades in the U.S.

A Sikh grandmother who lived in the U.S. for over 30 years was deported to India after enduring harsh conditions in an ICE detention center, raising concerns about the treatment of vulnerable immigrants.

A Sikh grandmother, Harjit Kaur, who had resided in the United States for more than three decades, was deported to New Delhi, India, on September 23. Her deportation followed a week spent in what her attorney described as “barbaric” conditions at a private Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention center in Georgia.

“There was no rationale to detain Bibi Harjit Kaur,” said Deepak Ahluwalia, Kaur’s attorney, in an interview with American Community Media on September 24. “It’s all part of their effort to fill beds.”

Ahluwalia expressed deep concern over Kaur’s treatment, emphasizing her age and health issues. “Her detention was nothing short of barbaric,” he stated. “That type of treatment would affect most people. They chose to do this to a 73-year-old woman with disabilities and health issues.”

Kaur was initially detained at an ICE facility in Bakersfield, California, before being transferred to the Stewart Detention Center in Lumpkin, Georgia, without any notification to her family or attorney.

During her time in detention, Kaur faced numerous challenges. According to Ahluwalia, she was denied water to take her medications and was instead given a plate of ice, which she could not consume due to her dentures. In Lumpkin, she was forced to sleep on the floor in a crowded facility, which was particularly difficult for her given her recent knee surgeries. Additionally, as a strict vegetarian, Kaur was provided meat-based meals for the first six days of her detention. She also experienced multiple instances of being handcuffed during transfers.

The Stewart Detention Center is a private facility operated by CoreCivic, a company that has faced scrutiny for its treatment of detainees.

Kaur, a seamstress who worked at the Berkeley Sari Palace for over 20 years, initially sought asylum in the U.S. in 1991 after the death of her husband. Her asylum claim was based on a credible fear of persecution in India, particularly in the wake of the anti-Sikh riots that followed the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1984. This tragic event led to the deaths of thousands of Sikhs and has been described by many international civil rights organizations as a genocide.

In 2023, California State Assemblywoman Jasmeet Bains introduced AJR2 to recognize the 1984 anti-Sikh riots as genocide. The resolution passed both the state Assembly and Senate without requiring the governor’s signature. A similar measure was introduced in Congress last October by Rep. David Valadao, R-California.

Kaur’s asylum case was denied twice, with the last denial occurring in 2013 by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. After her asylum claim was rejected, she needed travel documents to return to India but had not received the necessary paperwork when she was arrested by ICE on September 8 during a routine check-in at the ICE office in San Francisco. Kaur had consistently complied with immigration authorities, making the required check-ins every six months for the past 12 years.

Her family was unable to sponsor her for permanent residency due to her undocumented status. Ahluwalia explained that an undocumented resident’s family cannot apply for sponsorship while the individual is still in the U.S. Kaur would have needed to return to India to obtain a family-based visa, which was complicated by her lack of travel documents.

In a statement released last week, Kaur’s family expressed their dismay, stating, “Harjit’s case represents a failure of our immigration system. She has been a contributing member of her community for decades, paying taxes, working legally, and building relationships with neighbors and friends. Her detention is not only cruel but unnecessary.”

They further noted, “She has never refused to return to India but cannot without documents.”

Dr. K. Srikar Reddy, the Consul General of India in San Francisco, commented on the situation, stating that it is ICE’s responsibility to request travel documents for individuals being deported. He noted that no such request had been made in the 12 years since Kaur’s asylum claim was rejected.

“Once ICE requests travel documents, it usually takes just a couple of days for us to issue them,” Reddy explained. “But Mrs. Kaur had migrated more than 30 years ago, so we had no information about her. We had to connect with Indian authorities, which took some time.”

When asked whether Kaur might face persecution upon her return to India, Reddy stated, “She was denied by the highest appeals court. That clearly shows that her fears of persecution were unfounded.”

In a statement to NBC News, ICE defended its actions, asserting that Kaur had exhausted all legal remedies several years ago. “ICE is enforcing U.S. law and the orders by the judge; she will not waste any more U.S. tax dollars,” the statement read.

According to the Pew Research Center, India was the fifth largest source of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. as of 2022-2023, following Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras. Reddy noted a slight increase in requests for travel documents over the past seven months.

Estimates suggest that approximately 1.5 million undocumented individuals over the age of 55 reside in the United States. However, ICE does not provide age-specific data on deportations.

Source: Original article

Legal Challenge Emerges Against $100,000 Fee on H-1B Visas

The first legal challenge against President Trump’s $100,000 fee on H-1B visas has been filed, with critics arguing it could devastate key sectors and exceed presidential authority.

A coalition of unions, employers, religious organizations, and healthcare providers has initiated the first federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s controversial $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa petitions. The lawsuit, filed in San Francisco, asserts that the Trump administration has overstepped its constitutional authority, as only Congress has the power to impose taxes or fees.

Trump announced the unprecedented policy on September 19, claiming that the H-1B program, which allows tens of thousands of high-skilled foreign workers to enter the United States each year, had been “deliberately exploited” to replace American workers with lower-paid labor. The new fee is set to take effect just 36 hours after the announcement, prompting panic among employers who rushed to secure workers before the rules changed.

The proclamation mandates that employers pay an additional $100,000 for each new H-1B hire, in addition to existing fees that typically range from $2,000 to $5,000. Notably, this fee does not apply to current H-1B holders or to petitions filed before September 21.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit include the United Auto Workers union, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), healthcare providers, and various religious groups. They argue that Trump’s actions have effectively disrupted a program established by Congress, creating chaos for employers, workers, and federal agencies alike. They contend that the proclamation must be blocked to prevent widespread harm.

“Without relief, hospitals will lose medical staff, churches will lose pastors, classrooms will lose teachers, and industries across the country risk losing key innovators,” stated the Democracy Forward Foundation and Justice Action Center, which are representing the plaintiffs in a joint press release.

The H-1B visa program, introduced by Congress in 1992, permits U.S. employers to hire temporary foreign workers in specialized fields such as technology, medicine, engineering, and education. Each year, the program issues 65,000 visas, with an additional 20,000 reserved for applicants holding advanced degrees. Due to high demand, visas are typically allocated by lottery.

This lawsuit highlights the extensive impact of the H-1B program beyond the technology sector. According to the plaintiffs, approximately one-third of H-1B visa holders are employed as nurses, physicians, teachers, scholars, and clergy. Hospitals and universities have expressed concerns that the new fee could severely hinder their staffing capabilities, while religious organizations fear it may impede their ability to recruit clergy.

“The $100,000 fee will discourage the best and brightest minds from bringing life-saving research to the U.S.,” remarked Todd Wolfson, president of the AAUP, in comments reported by the Associated Press.

Business leaders have echoed these sentiments. Amazon, which received over 10,000 H-1B visas this year, is among the largest beneficiaries, followed by Tata Consultancy, Microsoft, Apple, and Google. California, home to many of these companies, employs the highest number of H-1B workers in the nation. For these businesses, the new fee could translate into tens of millions of dollars in additional costs, not to mention the potential chilling effect on talent mobility.

The Trump administration defends the fee as a necessary measure to curb abuse of the H-1B program and to protect American jobs. Trump has argued that the influx of lower-wage workers has undermined the program’s integrity and poses a threat to national security by discouraging Americans from pursuing careers in science and technology.

Supporters of the fee assert that some outsourcing firms exploit the H-1B program to import workers at salaries as low as $60,000, which is significantly below the typical six-figure compensation for U.S. tech jobs.

The lawsuit raises a critical constitutional question: Can a president unilaterally impose new fees on a visa program established by Congress? The plaintiffs assert that the answer is no, emphasizing that the Constitution reserves the authority to levy taxes or fees for Congress alone.

The proclamation effectively transforms the H-1B program into one where employers must either “pay to play” or seek a “national interest” exemption, which would be granted at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security. This system raises concerns about selective enforcement and potential corruption, according to the lawsuit.

Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, described the “exorbitant fee” as illegal and a potential invitation for corruption. “Congress created the program, and Trump cannot rewrite it overnight or impose new taxes by executive order,” she stated, as reported by the Associated Press.

The lawsuit also critiques the administration for failing to adhere to the required rulemaking process, alleging that agencies such as USCIS and the State Department implemented policies without proper notice or consideration of their impact on employers and innovation.

India is the largest beneficiary of the H-1B program, with Indian nationals accounting for 71 percent of approved visas last year, while China received 11.7 percent, according to government data. The steep new fee is expected to disproportionately affect Indian professionals, potentially straining U.S.-India relations at a time when Washington seeks to strengthen ties with New Delhi.

The plaintiffs are seeking an immediate injunction to halt the enforcement of the fee. A federal judge in San Francisco is expected to hear arguments in the coming weeks. Meanwhile, uncertainty looms as employers remain unsure whether to proceed with petitions and workers find themselves in limbo.

If the court rules against the administration, it would represent a significant rebuke of Trump’s expansive claims of executive authority over immigration. Conversely, if the order is upheld, it could permanently alter one of America’s most vital pathways for high-skilled immigration, with far-reaching implications for the economy, education, healthcare, and international diplomacy.

For now, this lawsuit marks the first but likely not the last challenge to a policy that critics argue threatens to close America’s doors to global talent while entangling employers and workers in costly and confusing regulations.

Source: Original article

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis Poll Reveals Support for Ending H-1B Program

A recent poll by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis reveals significant public support for ending the H-1B visa program, reigniting discussions about U.S. job protection and global competitiveness in technology.

A new poll conducted by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has reignited the debate surrounding the H-1B visa program, revealing strong public support for its elimination. The poll, which was shared on X, found that 62.3% of respondents favored ending the program entirely, while 31.4% supported reforming it. Only 6.3% of those surveyed preferred to maintain the program as it currently stands.

Closing with 49,206 votes and reaching over 638,000 views, the poll has sparked renewed discussions about the future of the H-1B visa program. This program allows U.S. companies to hire foreign workers in specialty occupations, particularly in technology and engineering fields.

DeSantis, who is considered a potential contender for the 2028 presidential election, has been vocal in his criticism of the H-1B visa program. He argues that it negatively impacts job opportunities and wages for American workers. The results of this poll reflect a growing public interest in reforming U.S. immigration policies related to high-skilled labor.

Recently, DeSantis intensified his rhetoric against the H-1B visa program, labeling it a “total scam.” He accuses companies of exploiting the program to import “cheap foreign labor” at the expense of American workers. DeSantis contends that the program is particularly harmful as automation and artificial intelligence are set to displace many white-collar jobs, making the continued importation of foreign workers unjustifiable.

Florida Representative Anthony Sabatini has also called for a complete shutdown of the H-1B visa program, arguing that it is essential for protecting American workers. Critics of the program assert that it has been misused to replace U.S. employees with lower-paid foreign workers.

DeSantis’s remarks have sparked significant controversy, particularly among Indian professionals who make up a substantial portion of H-1B visa holders. Many have pointed out that Indian workers have been integral to the growth and innovation of the U.S. technology sector. The governor’s comments have intensified the ongoing debate regarding the future of the H-1B program and its implications for the U.S. labor market.

The poll conducted by DeSantis underscores the polarizing nature of the H-1B visa program in U.S. public discourse. With nearly two-thirds of respondents favoring a complete end to the program, it is evident that concerns over job security, wage suppression, and the impact of automation resonate strongly with many Americans. This debate highlights the delicate balance between protecting domestic labor interests and maintaining the United States’ global competitiveness in technology and engineering sectors.

Critics of DeSantis’s stance argue that abruptly eliminating H-1B visas could disrupt industries that heavily rely on high-skilled foreign talent, particularly Indian professionals who have long contributed to innovation and growth in Silicon Valley and beyond. Supporters of reform, however, insist that changes or even a complete shutdown are necessary to prevent companies from exploiting the system and to ensure that American workers are not unfairly displaced.

As discussions continue, it is clear that the H-1B visa issue transcends immigration policy, touching on broader questions of economic fairness, technological progress, and national priorities.

Source: Original article

Legal Groups Seek Emergency Order to Prevent ICE from Detaining Immigrant Teens

Advocacy groups have filed an emergency motion to enforce a court ruling preventing the detention of unaccompanied immigrant teens in adult facilities, citing recent violations by ICE.

Washington, D.C., October 4 — The American Immigration Council and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) have filed an emergency motion today, aiming to enforce a 2021 court ruling from the Garcia Ramirez v. ICE case. This ruling prohibits U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from unlawfully detaining unaccompanied immigrant children in adult detention centers once they reach the age of 18.

The motion comes in response to multiple documented instances where ICE has resumed transferring immigrant children who entered the U.S. alone into adult detention facilities upon turning 18, a practice that violates the permanent injunction established in the Garcia Ramirez case.

“The permanent injunction made clear that ICE cannot automatically transfer young people to adult detention centers simply because they have turned 18,” said Michelle Lapointe, legal director at the American Immigration Council. “Locking up these young people in ICE jails rife with overcrowding and hazardous conditions, and far from their support systems, does nothing to make our communities safer; it only inflicts more harm on vulnerable youth.”

When children under 18 enter the United States unaccompanied, they are typically placed in shelters managed by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR). These children are generally released to family members or other vetted sponsors in the U.S., rather than being sent to ICE detention centers. This policy is designed to prioritize care and support for children instead of punishment.

According to the Garcia Ramirez ruling, which resulted from years of litigation by the NIJC and the Council, ICE is required to consider placement in the least restrictive setting once these youths turn 18. This includes exploring alternatives to detention rather than resorting to immigration detention.

“ICE’s attempt to expand the detention of immigrant youth is a direct violation of the courts, which explicitly requires the agency to consider safe, less restrictive alternatives to detention,” stated Mark Fleming, associate director of litigation at the National Immigrant Justice Center. “We will not allow the government to turn back the clock and return to a practice that the courts have already found unlawful.”

The number of individuals in immigration detention has reached unprecedented levels, leading to overcrowding and abusive conditions. Critics argue that the previous administration weaponized the threat of prolonged confinement in these dangerous facilities to coerce individuals into relinquishing their legal rights and accepting deportation. This pressure is further exacerbated by new policies, including financial incentives for unaccompanied youths who agree to leave the country.

“The law is clear: ICE must use safe, less restrictive alternatives, not default to jailing young people indefinitely,” emphasized Marie Silver, managing attorney for NIJC’s Immigrant Children’s Protection Project. “These kids came here seeking safety and hope. They deserve a chance to be free, reunify with family and community members, attend school, and work with their lawyers to have their day in court. Trapping them in dangerous and degrading conditions in immigration detention is compounding their trauma in a cruel and unnecessary way.”

The emergency motion filed today underscores the urgent need to uphold the rights of immigrant youth and ensure compliance with established legal rulings.

Source: Original article

U.S. Government Faces Accountability for Migrant Detentions in El Salvador

After 125 days in El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, two Venezuelan nationals were released, prompting calls for accountability from the U.S. government for their detention and treatment.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Venezuelan nationals Edicson Quintero Chacón and Jose Manuel Ramos Bastidas were released yesterday after spending 125 days in El Salvador’s infamous Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT). Their release came on a U.S.-brokered flight back to Venezuela, alongside approximately 250 other Venezuelans detained at CECOT, a facility criticized for its inhumane conditions.

Counsel for both men expressed relief at their release but underscored the urgent need for accountability regarding their initial detention. The U.S. government transferred the men to CECOT on March 15, 2025, where they were held without charges and incommunicado, in a facility known for mass arbitrary detention and mistreatment.

Both Quintero and Bastidas had previously been ordered removed from the United States. They informed a federal court that they wished to return home to Venezuela, but instead, they were sent to CECOT. The agreement between the U.S. and El Salvador stipulated that the U.S. would send members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua (TdA), yet there is no evidence linking either man to the gang. Their return to Venezuela was part of a prisoner swap deal that also involved the release of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents from Venezuela.

A family member of Quintero, who requested anonymity, expressed shock at the sudden news of the flights to Venezuela. “Edicson should never have been sent to CECOT in the first place. No one should. He was treated cruelly and inhumanely when all he wanted was safety,” they said. “This so-called prisoner swap doesn’t undo the injustice he suffered, nor the pain and terror that my family has had to endure in the past several months.”

Roynerliz Rodriguez, the partner of Jose Manuel Ramos Bastidas, shared her relief at his release. “We have been waiting for this moment for months, and I feel like I can finally breathe, knowing that Jose Manuel is now free from CECOT and on his way home,” she said. “His son, whom he hasn’t seen since he was four months old, is eagerly waiting for him. These last months have been a living nightmare.”

Concerns remain regarding the legality and transparency of the U.S. government’s actions. Many individuals sent to CECOT had pending asylum claims and expressed credible fears of returning to Venezuela. Their forced return, without due process to address their asylum requests, raises significant questions about the U.S. government’s compliance with both domestic and international legal obligations.

There has been no public accounting of how individuals were selected for transfer to CECOT, nor has there been a comprehensive list of those detained. The lack of transparency raises further concerns about whether all victims are accounted for.

The practice of outsourcing detention to foreign facilities, particularly those with documented records of systemic abuse, poses serious human rights and due process issues. Critics argue that the U.S. government should not engage in such arrangements or collaborate with regimes that violate human rights. A full investigation into these disappearances is necessary, along with safeguards to prevent similar actions by future administrations.

Rebecca Cassler, a senior litigation attorney at the American Immigration Council, stated, “We are deeply relieved that Mr. Quintero Chacón and Mr. Ramos Bastidas are finally released from CECOT, but this should never have happened in the first place. The U.S. government paid to detain these men in one of the world’s most notorious prisons, then denied responsibility while they suffered.”

CJ Sandley, a senior staff attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, emphasized the inhumane treatment of the detainees. “The deals made for these Venezuelans’ confinement and transfers treat human beings as bargaining chips and underscore the cruel consequences of criminalizing migration and monetizing torture,” he said. “The U.S. government must stop these abuses and uphold its obligations to protect the rights and dignity of all people.”

Stephanie M. Alvarez-Jones, Southeast Regional Attorney at the National Immigration Project, also expressed her relief at the men’s release. “It is unconscionable that they and 250 other Venezuelan men were sent by the United States to be detained at CECOT and forced to endure suffering,” she said. “While we celebrate their long overdue release, the government must be held accountable for its outrageous actions.”

The American Immigration Council, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and the National Immigration Project represent Mr. Quintero Chacón and Mr. Ramos Bastidas in their habeas corpus proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, where they have been fighting for their freedom from CECOT.

Source: Original article

SAAJCO Initiates Lawsuit Against $100,000 H-1B Fee for Indian-Americans

Labor unions, healthcare providers, and educational institutions have filed a lawsuit against President Trump’s new $100,000 fee for H-1B visa applications, claiming it threatens essential services and the economy.

A coalition of labor unions, healthcare providers, educational institutions, and religious organizations has initiated a lawsuit to challenge a recent executive action by President Trump that imposes a $100,000 fee on every new H-1B visa application. Filed on October 3, the lawsuit aims to halt what the plaintiffs describe as an unlawful and detrimental policy that could severely impact the American workforce and economy.

The proclamation, issued on September 19, 2025, and made effective just 36 hours later, has already created confusion among employers, workers, and federal agencies. Kalpana V. Peddibhotla, Executive Director of the South Asian American Justice Collaborative (SAAJCO), emphasized the importance of H-1B workers, stating, “South Asians make up the majority of H-1B workers and are part of the fabric of America, staffing rural hospitals, advancing lifesaving research, and driving innovation in businesses across the country.”

The lawsuit, titled *Global Nurse Force et al v. Trump et al.*, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. It argues that the executive order is unconstitutional and violates the Administrative Procedure Act. The coalition of plaintiffs includes organizations such as Global Nurse Force, Global Village Academy Collaborative, and the American Association of University Professors, among others.

The H-1B visa program was established by Congress to attract highly skilled professionals from around the world to fill critical roles in the U.S. economy and public services. This program allows U.S. employers to hire qualified foreign talent, including doctors, nurses, engineers, and researchers, after a thorough vetting process.

The coalition’s lawsuit highlights the potential consequences of the new fee, which they argue could lead to significant harm for communities across the nation. Peddibhotla noted that when the government makes it prohibitively expensive for skilled professionals to come to the U.S., entire communities suffer. “Patients wait longer for care, students have fewer teachers, and local economies miss out on the innovation and jobs these experts create,” she said.

The complaint outlines several key arguments against the new fee. It asserts that the fee violates the legislative framework established by Congress, which includes a carefully structured fee and oversight system for the H-1B program. The plaintiffs contend that the President does not have the authority to unilaterally impose such a fee or to create new taxes through executive action.

Additionally, the lawsuit claims that the proclamation invites chaos and favoritism by introducing a vague “national interest” loophole for fee exemptions, which could lead to arbitrary decision-making. The plaintiffs argue that the fee will disproportionately affect rural hospitals, schools, and nonprofit organizations that rely on H-1B workers to fulfill essential roles.

Economists have pointed out that H-1B workers contribute significantly to job creation and innovation in the U.S. economy. The lawsuit warns that forcing skilled talent to seek opportunities abroad could lead to a loss of jobs and innovation within the country. “Without relief, hospitals will lose medical staff, churches will lose pastors, classrooms will lose teachers, and industries across the country risk losing key innovators,” the complaint states.

The coalition is requesting that the court block the implementation of the $100,000 fee and restore predictability for employers and workers. Todd Wolfson, president of the American Association of University Professors, expressed concern about the implications of the new policy, stating, “Trump’s restrictions on H-1B visa applications will lead to less lifesaving research, reduced innovation, and diminished competitiveness.”

Dr. Taylor Walker, President of the Committee of Interns and Residents, SEIU, added that the fee would have a devastating impact on healthcare, particularly at a time when the U.S. is facing a physician shortage. “The unconscionable fee for H-1B petitions will reduce the number of resident physicians available to provide care,” he said.

Skye Perryman, President and CEO of Democracy Forward, criticized the fee as a tactic to undermine American innovation and essential work. “This exorbitant fee invites corruption and is unlawful, destabilizing, and bad for everyone,” she stated. “H-1B workers keep rural hospitals staffed, bring STEM education to schools with teacher shortages, advance lifesaving medical research, and help small businesses thrive.”

As the lawsuit progresses, the coalition seeks to have the court declare the proclamation unlawful and prevent the government from enforcing the new fee. Peddibhotla remarked, “We are asking the court to block the government from enforcing the $100,000 fee and require agencies to continue processing H-1B petitions under the law that Congress put in place.”

The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the future of the H-1B visa program and the broader landscape of immigration policy in the United States.

Source: Original article

Trump’s Second Term Could Bring Major Immigration Overhaul

A recent report reveals that the Trump administration’s immigration policies threaten the foundations of American democracy, marking a significant overhaul in the first six months of his second term.

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 23, 2025 — A special report released today provides an in-depth analysis of the Trump administration’s first six months back in office, revealing a dramatic transformation of the U.S. immigration system that undermines the very principles of American democracy. While some voters may have supported a “tougher” stance on immigration during the election, the report indicates that the administration’s extreme measures extend far beyond mere policy changes; they pose a direct threat to the rule of law.

Titled Mass Deportation: Analyzing the Trump Administration’s Attacks on Immigrants, Democracy, and America, the report was published by the American Immigration Council on July 23. It outlines how the administration has launched a radical, multi-faceted assault on immigrants and the immigration framework.

The report details several actions taken by the Trump administration, including restricting entry into the United States, stripping legal protections from those already residing in the country, and escalating enforcement to unprecedented levels. These measures have dismantled long-standing legal safeguards, defied the authority of Congress and the courts, and weaponized government resources against immigrants and dissenters alike.

“This isn’t just a hardline immigration agenda,” said Nayna Gupta, policy director at the American Immigration Council and co-author of the report. “It’s a wholesale effort to use immigrants and the U.S. immigration system to attack core tenets of our democracy and exercise unchecked executive power to realign the American government around exclusion and fear.”

Key findings from the report highlight several alarming trends:

The end of asylum: The report states that asylum at the southern border is effectively non-existent. The administration has shut down the CBP One application without providing an alternative. Asylum-seekers approaching a port of entry are often turned away, and some are detained indefinitely, even after winning their cases.

Demolishing the refugee program: The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program has been indefinitely suspended, with the exception of white South Africans who have been fast-tracked under questionable persecution claims. This has left tens of thousands of approved refugees stranded abroad.

Mass revocation of legal status: Over one million individuals have had their humanitarian parole and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) revoked in just six months, stripping them of work permits and pushing many into undocumented status.

Weaponizing bureaucracy: The report notes that legal immigration pathways are being obstructed by significant fee increases, processing freezes, and opaque barriers, making it nearly impossible for lawful applicants to obtain or maintain their status.

A maelstrom of fear and chaos: The aggressive enforcement tactics employed by the Trump administration have instilled a constant sense of fear among immigrants of all legal statuses. Individuals can be targeted for arrest, detention, and deportation anywhere, including at churches, schools, and courthouses.

A radical reorganization of law enforcement resources: The administration is establishing an unprecedented, cross-agency immigration operation that utilizes manpower from various federal and state law enforcement agencies and the U.S. military, prioritizing immigration enforcement above all other public safety objectives.

Turbocharging an inhumane detention system: The “Big Beautiful Bill Act,” enacted in July, increases the budget for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention by 308 percent annually. This funding boost sets the stage for a radical expansion of a detention system already criticized for its careless and cruel management, which has placed tens of thousands of immigrants in life-threatening conditions.

The report includes powerful firsthand accounts from individuals affected by these policies. Ilia, a nonbinary Russian dissident, won their asylum case in court but remained in detention for over a year without a release date. Axel, a DACA recipient and youth leader, has chosen to abandon his job to return to school amid uncertainty regarding his legal status. Beatriz, an immigrant lawyer advocating for noncitizen children, has encountered cases that resonate with her own journey to the U.S., including a confused six-year-old who appeared in court without representation. Kaelyn is incurring debt to prevent her partner from being deported to El Salvador’s megaprison under the Alien Enemies Act.

The report warns that while some policies may shift in response to legal challenges, the administration’s broader agenda remains clear: to permanently redefine who belongs in America and how power is exercised by the federal government.

“The administration’s policies are reshaping the immigration system in ways that are unfair, unlawful, and out of step with core American values,” said Dara Lind, senior fellow at the Council and co-author of the report. “We’re witnessing real harm to families, communities, and the rule of law, and the public deserves to understand what’s at stake.”

The full report is available for review, and interviews with experts and individuals impacted by these policies can also be arranged.

Source: Original article

Who Is Deported in the United States and Why?

Research reveals that over 96% of deportation orders in the U.S. target individuals from non-white countries, highlighting systemic racial biases in immigration policies.

Who gets deported in the United States? A recent report from the UCLA Center for Immigration Law and Policy, in collaboration with Million Dollar Hoods, sheds light on this pressing issue. The findings indicate a troubling trend: over 96% of deportation orders issued from 1895 to 2022 were directed at individuals from non-white countries.

During a briefing on September 19, hosted by American Community Media, experts involved in the project, titled Mapping Deportations, presented insights into their interactive maps and visualizations. These tools trace the history of deportation policies back to 1895, revealing patterns of racial bias that persist today.

The panel included prominent figures such as Kelly Lytle Hernández, the Thomas E. Lifka Endowed Chair in History at UCLA and founding director of Million Dollar Hoods; Mariah Tso, a G.I.S. Specialist at UCLA; and Ahilan Arulanantham, Faculty Co-Director at the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law.

The interactive maps allow users to delve into data by year and region, as well as by categories such as race, country, and enforcement tactics. These visualizations incorporate context-rich quotes from lawmakers, highlighting the racial and ideological biases that underpin immigration policies. Features like racing bar charts and log-scale transformations make complex data more accessible and comprehensible. The website connects historical deportation data to current immigration policies, providing a clearer understanding of long-standing systemic patterns of racial discrimination.

According to Hernández, the website’s foundation lies in three significant forced migrations that shaped modern America: the expulsion of Native nations, the transatlantic slave trade, and contemporary mass deportations. While maps and visualizations exist for the removal of Native nations and the slave trade, there has been a notable absence of data on mass deportation.

“I knew, as a historian, that there had been more than 50 million deportation orders in U.S. history, which is a mind-boggling number, but no one had really scraped the data and created a dynamic map showing over time the patterns of deportation,” Hernández explained.

The goal of the website, according to Arulanantham, is to serve as an educational tool that presents a more honest narrative of immigration law and policy history, telling a rich, contextual story that has often been overlooked.

In collaboration with lead cartographer Mariah Tso, the researchers meticulously mapped every deportation order from 1895 to 2022. Tso noted that the data reveals a consistent pattern: over 96% of deportation orders have targeted predominantly non-white countries, reflecting policies steeped in racism.

The visualizations utilize publicly available data from federal authorities, mapping immigration statistics and deportation orders by country or region. Each dot on the map represents deportation orders, with larger dots indicating higher numbers of orders. Historically, prior to 1934, authorities tracked deportations by race or ethnicity, while post-1934, the focus shifted to nationality.

Notably, Mexico has consistently led in the number of deportation orders since 1916.

Arulanantham, who has dedicated 25 years to challenging federal immigration policies on behalf of immigrants and their rights, expressed concern over the stark racial discrimination evident in immigration policy, even under the Biden administration. He cited the Title 42 program, which excluded individuals from the U.S. based on COVID-19 concerns, applying it harshly to Haitians, Afghans, and Central Americans, while allowing virtually all Ukrainians to enter.

“There’s obvious racial discrimination even now that’s driving who gets to come in and also who gets deported,” Arulanantham stated, referencing quotes from lawmakers across different eras. He highlighted former President Donald Trump’s infamous remark regarding immigrants from Haiti and other countries, questioning, “Why are we having people from shithole countries coming here?”

The historical roots of racial discrimination in immigration laws can be traced back to a 1929 law motivated by eugenic ideologies, which remains influential today.

The website provides a historical overview of deportation data organized into five major eras, illustrating the laws enforced, communities targeted, and changing enforcement priorities. Hernández noted that from 1790 to 1875, during the period of slavery before the Civil War, the U.S. immigration system was designed to maintain a white-dominated republic, targeting free black migrants for exclusion.

From 1876 to 1929, the federal government sought to establish a whites-only immigration regime, excluding and punishing non-white immigrants. Despite these efforts, black and non-white immigration persisted, often relegating individuals to low-wage jobs, thereby reinforcing racial hierarchies.

During the Cold War, Congress continued to uphold the whites-only immigration system. Hernández pointed out that following the 1965 Immigration Act, new laws and Supreme Court rulings perpetuated racism within the immigration system, including the 1975 Brignoni-Ponce decision, which legitimized the use of race in immigration law enforcement.

Since 1991, the U.S. federal government has conducted over 7 million deportations and issued more than 25 million voluntary departure orders, establishing what Hernández describes as the largest immigrant detention and deportation system in the world.

Arulanantham cautioned that the current escalation of U.S. immigration policy echoes sentiments from the 1920s, where fears of “morally contagious” individuals from other countries were prevalent. He noted that racist rhetoric continues to influence public perception, as seen in Trump’s claims about Haitian immigrants and unfounded rumors regarding Venezuelans.

“Racism was baked into the immigration system over time, dating all the way back to the antebellum period, and is yet to be fully purged,” Hernández concluded, emphasizing the need for a critical examination of immigration policies and their historical implications.

Source: Original article

New Report Highlights Impact of Expanded Travel Ban on Indian-Americans

A new report highlights the significant economic and humanitarian impacts of the Trump administration’s expanded travel ban, which affects immigration from 19 countries.

WASHINGTON, DC, August 6 — A report released today by the American Immigration Council outlines the extensive economic and humanitarian consequences of the Trump administration’s travel ban, which was expanded in June 2025 to restrict immigration from 19 countries. In 2022, nearly 300,000 individuals from these nations entered the United States, contributing approximately $715.6 million in taxes and filling essential roles in various sectors.

“Those affected by this travel ban are students, workers, and family members who pay taxes, support local economies, and fill jobs in industries facing massive shortages. We’re throwing all of that away, to the detriment of our communities and the U.S. economy,” stated Nan Wu, research director of the American Immigration Council.

According to 2023 data, of the 300,000 individuals from the countries impacted by the travel ban, 82 percent were employed, particularly in sectors already grappling with labor shortages, such as hospitality, construction, and manufacturing. The manufacturing sector alone is projected to face a shortfall of 1.9 million workers by 2033.

“The United States absolutely needs strong screening procedures to protect national security, but this travel ban isn’t how you do that. The Trump administration is trying to sell this policy as a security measure, but when you dig into the justifications, they don’t add up,” remarked Jeremy Robbins, executive director of the American Immigration Council. “Many of the targeted countries had fewer than 500 visa overstays last year. This isn’t about keeping America safe; it’s about keeping certain people out.”

While the original travel ban enacted in 2017 prompted widespread public protests, the 2025 version has seen a more subdued response, attributed to its gradual implementation and expanded exemptions. However, the report emphasizes that the negative impacts remain significant.

“This quieter version of the ban is deeply harmful,” Robbins added. “It separates families, blocks international talent, and hurts communities across the country. The absence of airport protests doesn’t mean the harm isn’t real; it’s just happening more quietly and more bureaucratically.”

Reports suggest that the administration is contemplating the addition of 36 more countries to the travel ban. If implemented, this could prevent tens of thousands of additional individuals from entering the United States, further exacerbating the economic, social, and diplomatic repercussions.

The countries currently affected by the travel ban include:

All travel banned:

Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.

Visas sharply restricted:

Venezuela, Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, and Turkmenistan.

This report underscores the far-reaching implications of the travel ban, highlighting the need for a reevaluation of policies that impact both the economy and the lives of individuals seeking opportunities in the United States.

Source: Original article

US Proposes $100,000 Fee for H-1B Visas Amid Regulatory Changes

The U.S. government has implemented a $100,000 annual fee for H-1B and L-1 visa applications, a decision that could significantly affect Indian professionals in the tech sector.

Washington D.C. – The United States government has introduced a substantial $100,000 annual fee for employers applying for H-1B and L-1 visas. This move is anticipated to have a significant impact on Indian professionals working in the U.S. tech sector. The fee, which takes effect immediately, adds to the existing costs associated with obtaining these visas and aims to prioritize higher-wage foreign workers.

In conjunction with the fee, lawmakers, including Senators Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin, have proposed new legislation aimed at tightening visa regulations. This proposed legislation seeks to raise wage requirements and limit eligibility for certain organizations, further complicating the landscape for foreign workers seeking employment in the United States. Additionally, Senator Tom Cotton has suggested that restrictions be placed on foreign hires at universities and non-profit organizations.

As India is the largest source of H-1B visa holders, this new fee structure may lead to a slowdown in employment opportunities for Indian tech professionals. U.S. companies are likely to adjust their hiring practices in response to the increased costs associated with these visas. Leaders within the tech industry have expressed concerns regarding potential disruptions to workforce planning and recruitment efforts, as the new regulations may deter companies from hiring foreign talent.

The government asserts that these measures are designed to protect American workers and prevent the misuse of visa programs, while still ensuring that skilled foreign workers can fill critical roles in the U.S. economy. The balance between protecting domestic labor and allowing for the influx of skilled foreign professionals remains a contentious issue as these changes take effect.

As the implications of the new fee and proposed regulations unfold, stakeholders in the tech industry and potential visa applicants will be closely monitoring how these changes will affect the hiring landscape and the broader economy.

Source: Original article

US Senators Introduce Major Reforms to H-1B Visa Program

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee is advancing a bipartisan initiative to reform the H-1B and L-1 visa programs, addressing concerns over corporate misuse and its impact on American workers.

The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee is witnessing a rare moment of bipartisan cooperation as top Republicans and Democrats come together to propose significant changes to the H-1B and L-1 visa programs. This initiative is driven by concerns that large corporations have misused these visa systems, often at the expense of American workers.

The H-1B visa program allows U.S. companies to temporarily employ foreign workers in specialty occupations that require specialized knowledge, such as technology, engineering, and medicine. Designed to address labor shortages in fields lacking qualified U.S. workers, the H-1B visa is typically granted for up to three years, with the possibility of extension to six years. Each year, the program caps the number of H-1B visas issued at 85,000, which includes 20,000 reserved for applicants holding advanced degrees from U.S. institutions.

This program is highly competitive, with demand frequently surpassing the available visas, leading to a lottery system for selection. While the H-1B visa has been instrumental in fostering innovation and maintaining global competitiveness for businesses, it has also drawn criticism for potential misuse, wage suppression, and negative impacts on domestic employment. Policymakers continue to grapple with reforms that would balance the interests of employers, foreign workers, and the American labor market.

Among the proposed reforms, the Senators have suggested making job postings public and introducing a stricter definition of “specialty occupation,” which would require applicants to possess at least a bachelor’s degree.

Committee Chair Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, and Democratic ranking member Dick Durbin of Illinois have reintroduced the bill, which includes several key changes:

The legislation would empower the Labor Department to impose fees to hire 100 additional enforcement officers, aimed at increasing oversight of the visa programs.

It proposes stricter wage and hiring standards, ensuring that employers adhere to fair compensation practices.

Mandatory public job postings and narrower eligibility criteria for applicants are also part of the proposed changes, which aim to enhance transparency in the hiring process.

Additionally, the bill introduces new wage and hiring rules that prioritize H-1B applicants with qualifications in STEM fields. It seeks to tighten the definition of “specialty occupation,” mandating a bachelor’s degree as a minimum requirement for applicants.

Employers found in violation of wage rules would face fines or even debarment from the program, reinforcing accountability within the system.

This legislative effort comes on the heels of the Trump administration’s recent imposition of a $100,000 fee on new H-1B applications, which has intensified scrutiny of the visa program.

Grassley emphasized the original intent of the H-1B and L-1 visa programs, stating, “Congress created these programs as limited pathways for businesses to acquire top talent when it can’t be found at home. But over the years, many employers have used them to cut out American workers in favor of cheap foreign labor.”

The proposed changes aim to close existing loopholes and prevent misuse by large corporations that may prioritize cheaper labor over domestic employment. By tightening eligibility criteria, increasing enforcement, and emphasizing higher wage standards, the legislation seeks to protect U.S. workers while still allowing companies to fill critical skill gaps, particularly in STEM fields.

Public job postings and clearer definitions of specialty occupations are expected to promote transparency and fairness in the hiring process. These reforms could help restore trust in the visa system, ensuring it fulfills its original purpose of attracting top talent when genuinely needed, rather than displacing American workers.

Ultimately, this bipartisan approach reflects a pragmatic attempt to modernize immigration policies in a manner that supports both economic competitiveness and workforce integrity.

Source: Original article

Nearly Half of Fortune 500 Companies Founded by Immigrants or Their Children

Nearly half of the Fortune 500 companies in 2025 were founded by immigrants or their children, generating significant revenue and employment opportunities across the United States.

WASHINGTON, DC, August 21, 2025 — A recent analysis of the 2025 Fortune 500 list reveals that 46.2 percent of America’s largest companies, or 231 out of 500, were founded by immigrants or their children. These companies collectively generated an impressive $8.6 trillion in revenue during the fiscal year 2024 and employed over 15.4 million people worldwide. This data highlights the crucial role that immigrants play in fostering innovation, driving economic growth, and creating jobs in the United States.

This figure represents the highest level recorded since the American Immigration Council began tracking immigrant entrepreneurs in its annual reviews of the Fortune 500 list in 2011.

“Immigrants are a driving force behind America’s prosperity. We need immigration policies that reflect that, instead of investing billions of dollars into detention, deportation, and making it incredibly difficult for foreign workers to come here or even renew their visas. These reckless policies undermine America’s greatest competitive advantage: the talent and drive of immigrants,” said Nan Wu, director of research at the American Immigration Council.

Companies founded by immigrants or their children have significantly transformed various industries, including technology, retail, and media. Notable names on the list include Amazon, Apple, NVIDIA, Levi Strauss & Co., Ace Hardware, and Sirius XM Holdings.

Key findings from the analysis indicate that these Fortune 500 companies, established by immigrants or their descendants, generated $8.6 trillion in revenue during fiscal year 2024. This revenue, if compared to national GDPs, would rank as the third-largest economy globally.

Moreover, these companies employed over 15.4 million individuals worldwide, a workforce comparable to the population of the fifth-largest U.S. state. Immigrants and their children founded 80 percent of the Fortune 500 companies in professional and other services, 65.6 percent in manufacturing, and 57.5 percent in information technology.

Among the 14 companies that made their debut on the Fortune 500 list this year, 10 were founded by immigrants or their children.

“Immigrants built nearly half of our Fortune 500 companies, created millions of jobs, and keep our economy competitive. And yet U.S. political leaders are making it increasingly difficult for foreign talent to come here or stay. It’s economic self-sabotage. If we want to stay the world’s innovation leader, we should be welcoming immigrants, not attacking them,” stated Steve Hubbard, senior data scientist at the American Immigration Council.

The American Immigration Council has experts available to provide further insights into the benefits that immigrants contribute to the U.S. economy at both national and state levels.

Source: Original article

New H-1B Restrictions Raise Concerns Among Indian-American Workers

The recent proclamation regarding the H-1B program introduces significant financial barriers and travel risks for skilled workers seeking to enter the United States.

The immigration landscape for skilled workers has undergone a substantial transformation following a recent proclamation concerning the H-1B program. This new directive imposes significant restrictions on the entry of certain nonimmigrant workers, introducing immediate financial requirements and travel considerations.

On September 19, 2025, President Trump issued a proclamation titled “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers,” which mandates a steep new fee for specific H-1B petitions. Effective from 12:01 a.m. ET on September 21, 2025, this proclamation requires that certain new H-1B petitions include a one-time payment of $100,000.

While the fee is substantial, it is important to note that it is a single payment due upon the submission of a new H-1B petition. This change does not affect existing fees or payments associated with H-1B renewals, allowing current holders of H-1B status to maintain their positions without incurring additional costs.

The new fee primarily targets individuals seeking to enter the United States. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has been instructed not to process petitions unless they are accompanied by proof of the $100,000 payment for H-1B workers currently outside the U.S. At this time, the fee appears to be applicable only to new H-1B petitions filed by individuals outside the country.

For beneficiaries already residing in the U.S. and maintaining lawful H-1B status, several actions seem to be exempt from this new fee structure. Extensions of stay, amended petitions, and changes of employer—provided the beneficiary remains in H-1B status—are not explicitly covered by the new proclamation. As such, these actions appear to be exempt unless further guidance is provided.

This proclamation represents a significant shift in employment-based immigration policy, creating a climate of uncertainty for many skilled workers. Given the regulatory confusion and the absence of clear procedures, the risks associated with international travel have increased. Consequently, H-1B employees and their dependents are strongly advised against leaving the United States at this time, as the potential complications could outweigh any benefits.

In addition to the immediate financial implications, the proclamation hints at future reforms aimed at enhancing the H-1B program. The Department of Labor is expected to propose rulemaking to revise and raise prevailing wage levels. This initiative, along with forthcoming rulemaking from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to prioritize high-skilled, high-paid foreign workers in the lottery, aims to refine the H-1B program and ensure that it is utilized to hire only the most qualified temporary foreign workers.

In summary, this recent H-1B proclamation introduces immediate, high-cost barriers for specific new petitions and signals a major shift in future policy, particularly with a focus on prioritizing higher-paid workers. Given the current inconsistencies in guidance, including a recently released FAQ that appeared to conflict with earlier instructions, the situation remains fluid and uncertain for those navigating the H-1B process.

Source: Original article

US Considers Weighted Selection Process for H-1B 2027 Season

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is proposing a weighted selection process for the H-1B lottery, prioritizing higher-paid and skilled applicants, which could limit opportunities for lower-wage roles.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has announced a significant change to the H-1B visa lottery process, as detailed in a notice published in the Federal Register on September 24. The proposed “weighted selection process” aims to prioritize foreign workers who command higher salaries and possess advanced skills, marking a potential shift in how H-1B visas are allocated for the 2027 season.

Under the current system, employers must complete an online registration for each foreign national they wish to sponsor under the cap-subject category. In this arrangement, U.S. employers act as petitioners, while the foreign workers they aim to hire are considered beneficiaries. After all registrations are submitted, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) conducts a random lottery to select from the eligible beneficiaries.

Once a beneficiary is chosen in the lottery, all U.S. employers who submitted registrations for that individual receive a selection notice, allowing them to file an H-1B cap-subject petition on behalf of the selected worker.

The DHS’s proposed revision seeks to move away from a purely random lottery system to one that incorporates additional criteria, thereby creating a weighted approach. This new method is designed to incentivize employers to offer higher salaries and to sponsor positions that require advanced expertise, thereby aligning visa selections more closely with roles that reflect elevated wage levels.

Central to this proposed system is the Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) wage level, which would determine how petitions are weighted. The selection process would prioritize petitions based on the highest wage level that the offered salary meets or exceeds, taking into account the relevant Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code and the location of employment.

In practice, this means that USCIS would first review registrations at OEWS wage level IV, then proceed to levels III, II, and finally I. The term “proffered wage” refers to the salary an employer commits to paying the selected worker, emphasizing the importance of compensation in the selection process.

Each year, the H-1B program allocates 85,000 visas for specialty occupations, with 20,000 of those reserved for individuals holding advanced degrees from U.S. institutions. The proposed weighted selection process aims to direct these limited slots toward candidates with superior skills, qualifications, or compensation, rather than distributing them to lower-paid or less-skilled positions.

As a result of this new framework, securing visas for lower-wage or less-skilled roles could become increasingly challenging. Additionally, the introduction of a $100,000 petition fee presents a significant financial hurdle, compelling companies to carefully assess whether the costs align with their hiring strategies. Together, the increased fees and the proposed weighted selection system could fundamentally alter the landscape of the H-1B visa program.

Experts suggest that the likelihood of implementing this weighted selection process is high, indicating a substantial shift in the H-1B visa allocation strategy. If adopted, these changes could reshape the dynamics of the U.S. labor market, particularly in sectors that traditionally rely on lower-wage foreign workers.

As the DHS continues to refine its proposals, stakeholders in the immigration and employment sectors will be closely monitoring developments regarding the H-1B lottery and its implications for the future of skilled labor in the United States.

Source: Original article

Trump’s H-1B Visa Policy Threatens U.S.-India Tech Relations

Last week’s H-1B visa proclamation by the Trump administration has ignited a fierce debate over its implications for the tech industry and U.S.-India relations.

Last week’s proclamation regarding the H-1B visa program has set the stage for an intense and contentious debate, as tech firms strive to protect their access to global talent while critics advocate for even stricter regulations.

In Silicon Valley, the reaction to the new policy, which imposes a staggering $100,000 fee on H-1B visas, has been largely subdued. Many tech executives are hesitant to publicly criticize President Trump, aware that he often perceives even constructive dissent as an affront. Some industry leaders have even framed the fee as a means to safeguard American jobs, aligning themselves with the administration’s agenda.

However, behind the scenes, lobbying efforts are in full swing. Corporate legal teams and industry groups are working diligently to persuade the administration to reconsider the measure. Their efforts have already yielded some results.

Initially, the White House indicated that the $100,000 fee would apply to all H-1B visas, both new and existing. This announcement caused widespread panic among current H-1B holders, prompting many to rush back to the U.S. before the effective date. Airlines experienced a surge in demand and last-minute cancellations as a result. By the following Sunday, the administration clarified that the fee would only apply to new petitions, alleviating some concerns.

Criticism of the H-1B program has historically followed two main arguments. Trump and his supporters contend that companies exploit the program, using it as a loophole rather than a legitimate talent pipeline. They also assert that it suppresses wages and displaces American workers, as lower-paid foreign employees compete with U.S. graduates.

The recent proclamation is viewed by U.S. officials as the first step toward reforming the H-1B program. The White House announced that the Department of Labor would begin revising and increasing prevailing wage levels, aiming to ensure that the program supports only the most highly qualified foreign workers.

Simultaneously, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is preparing to restructure the H-1B lottery system, prioritizing higher-paid, highly skilled applicants over those at lower wage levels. This shift is expected to spark months of heated debate. Tech companies, which rely heavily on global talent, are likely to push back against what they perceive as punitive measures, while critics of the program will seize the opportunity to advocate for deeper cuts.

Some politicians are already calling for additional restrictions on global talent. Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, a long-time critic of the H-1B program, has urged the DHS to halt work authorizations for international students graduating from U.S. universities. In a recent social media post, Grassley argued that foreign students directly compete with American workers and warned that their presence poses risks of tech and corporate espionage.

If further restrictions are imposed on the visa program, the impact on India could be severe. No other country relies more on the H-1B program than India, where nationals consistently account for over 70 percent of annual approvals.

The H-1B program has significantly influenced India’s economic trajectory in three key ways. Firstly, it has fueled the remarkable growth of the Indian IT industry. Major outsourcing firms like Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), and Wipro have been among the heaviest users of H-1B visas. The steady influx of Indian engineers to the U.S. has contributed to the rise of a $300 billion IT services industry in India, creating numerous jobs within the country.

Secondly, the program has been a substantial source of revenue for India. Conservative estimates suggest that between one and two million Indians have received H-1B visas since the program’s inception in 1990. Currently, Indian workers in the U.S. send back more than $30 billion annually in remittances, supporting families and bolstering the Indian economy.

Lastly, the H-1B pipeline has played a crucial role in expanding the U.S. Indian American community, which has evolved into a significant political force. Their financial and intellectual contributions have served as a bridge between Washington and New Delhi, strengthening bilateral ties.

Of course, the United States has also greatly benefited from the H-1B program. It has been instrumental in building the talent pool of Silicon Valley. Many of America’s most iconic innovations, from semiconductors to social media, have been driven by Indian-born engineers and executives.

However, the new $100,000 fee and the potential for further restrictions pose a threat to this vital talent pipeline. Companies may find it prohibitively expensive to hire foreign talent, which could lead them to scale back or outsource more work overseas. Startups and mid-sized firms, in particular, may struggle to compete for skills on a global scale.

A recent report from JPMorgan Chase projected that the fee could result in 5,500 fewer H-1B applications each month. Additionally, it may deter foreign students from pursuing education in the U.S., further diminishing the talent pool available to American companies.

For the U.S., this policy could undermine its global competitiveness. Tech executives have quietly warned that if hiring foreign workers becomes too costly, companies may accelerate the trend of establishing Global Capability Centers (GCCs) in India and other countries, shifting high-value work abroad rather than creating jobs in America.

For India, the proclamation represents a “double whammy.” Economically, it threatens to impact its largest export market, coming on the heels of the administration’s 50 percent tariff on Indian goods. Diplomatically, it risks straining U.S.-India relations at a time when Washington views New Delhi as a key partner in countering China and securing technology supply chains.

Source: Original article

Ending OPT May Have Greater Impact Than H-1B Fee Increase for Tech Workers

Recent U.S. policy changes regarding the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program may have more significant implications for tech workers than the newly proposed H-1B visa fees.

Recent shifts in U.S. immigration policy have intensified the focus on the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program, overshadowing discussions about the newly proposed fees for H-1B visa applications. This change is particularly relevant for tech workers, as many analysts contend that restricting or eliminating OPT could have a more profound impact on workforce dynamics than the increased fees associated with H-1B applications.

The administration has introduced a substantial fee of $100,000 for certain H-1B visa applicants, a move aimed at discouraging companies from hiring foreign workers under specific circumstances. The intention behind this fee hike is to ensure that only the most critical or specialized roles continue to qualify for H-1B visas under these tightened regulations.

In contrast, the OPT program allows international students to remain in the U.S. and work temporarily after graduation, typically for a duration of up to three years for those in STEM fields. Because OPT is linked to student status rather than work visas, any changes to this program could impact a broader range of early-career workers. Many view OPT as a more accessible and expedited pathway into the U.S. tech workforce. The potential removal or significant restriction of this program could eliminate a crucial stepping stone for recent graduates.

The implications of ending or limiting OPT are particularly concerning for several groups. Recent graduates who rely on OPT to gain professional experience after completing their studies would be directly affected. Additionally, employers who depend on OPT workers for entry-level positions before pursuing long-term sponsorship would face challenges. Furthermore, international students often base their decisions to study in the U.S. on the availability of post-graduation work options, making OPT a vital consideration in their educational journey.

Beyond these immediate effects, the broader implications for the tech sector could be significant. A reduction or elimination of the OPT program could hinder the influx of fresh talent into the tech workforce, leading to increased competition for available roles. This situation may drive more applicants to seek opportunities in countries with more favorable work-visa policies. Additionally, larger firms that can more easily navigate stricter requirements may gain an advantage, further complicating the landscape for smaller companies and startups.

In summary, while the proposed increase in H-1B fees may present challenges for some employers and applicants, the potential restriction of the OPT pathway could result in more immediate and widespread disruption. This is especially true for new graduates and early-career professionals striving to enter the U.S. tech industry.

Source: Original article

Lawsuit Claims Illegal Immigration Arrests by Trump Administration in D.C.

Four D.C. residents and CASA have filed a class-action lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging unlawful immigration arrests by ICE agents that have instilled fear in local immigrant communities.

A class-action lawsuit has been filed against the Trump administration by four Washington, D.C. residents and the national immigration organization CASA. The lawsuit alleges that federal agents have conducted a series of illegal immigration arrests across the District since August, creating widespread fear among immigrant communities.

Filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the lawsuit challenges what the plaintiffs describe as a pattern of arrests made without warrants or probable cause, which they argue violates federal immigration law. According to the law, agents are permitted to detain individuals without a warrant only if they can demonstrate probable cause that the person is unlawfully present in the country and poses a flight risk.

The plaintiffs contend that these legal safeguards have been disregarded. Each individual involved in the lawsuit claims to have been arrested without a warrant, subsequently detained, and later released. CASA, one of the plaintiffs, stated that the recent crackdown has compelled the organization to redirect its resources from social services to crisis response for community members who have been detained.

Elias, a CASA member and one of the plaintiffs, recounted his harrowing experience: “On my way to a life-saving dialysis appointment, I was detained by ICE one mile from the hospital. They ignored my U.S. driver’s license and left me without critical treatment that day, putting my health in immediate danger. I was detained for over eight hours without food or access to my necessary medicine. Since then, I have lived in fear that I could be torn from my family and deported to a place where I cannot get the medical care I need to survive. No one should be treated this way. I am standing up in this lawsuit to make sure ICE is held accountable and stops these unlawful arrests from destroying more lives.”

Advocates for immigrant rights have expressed concern that these practices have fostered an atmosphere of fear. Adina Appelbaum, program director of the Immigration Impact Lab at the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, stated, “Families should not have to live in fear that simply walking to school, going to work, or attending a doctor’s appointment will result in being abducted and dragged away by federal agents without cause. ICE’s wide-sweeping arrests in D.C. are not just cruel; they are blatantly unlawful.”

The plaintiffs are represented by a coalition of organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of the District of Columbia, the Amica Center for Immigrant Rights, CASA, the National Immigration Project, the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, and the law firm Covington & Burling LLP.

Aditi Shah, a staff attorney with the ACLU of D.C., emphasized the disruptive nature of the federal government’s actions. “The government’s policy and practice of arresting people without probable cause are illegal and have disrupted everyday life in the District. The policy and practice disregard important limits Congress has established for immigration arrests and have sown terror among immigrant communities and neighborhoods in D.C. Federal agents, like the rest of us, must follow the law,” she said.

This lawsuit arises in the context of President Trump’s declaration of a “crime emergency” in Washington, D.C., made in August. This declaration led to the deployment of federal law enforcement agents, including ICE, and authorized the Department of Justice to direct the Metropolitan Police Department to assist with immigration enforcement. Although the emergency period has since ended, federal immigration arrests in the city have persisted.

Yulie Landan, a staff attorney with the National Immigration Project, remarked, “For weeks, immigrant communities in D.C. have been living in a state of terror and disruption caused by a policy of indiscriminate targeting being carried out by immigration officials.”

CASA leaders have expressed their determination to combat these practices. Ama Frimpong, legal director at CASA, stated, “CASA members who live and work in D.C. are being targeted by immigration officials simply for existing. With this lawsuit, our members are making it clear: they have had enough of the federal government’s lawlessness and abuse of power. They will not be intimidated or silenced. They will continue to fight until the government is held accountable.”

Madeleine Gates, associate counsel at the Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Urban Affairs, added that the fear extends beyond undocumented immigrants. “The federal government has created a culture of fear in D.C., including among U.S. citizens and immigrants with legal status,” she said. “People are justifiably afraid to go to work or even to walk their kids to school. We are determined to end this unlawful policy.”

A virtual press conference featuring the plaintiffs is scheduled for Friday, September 26, at 12:30 p.m. Eastern Time.

Source: Original article

73-Year-Old Sikh Grandmother Deported to India After ICE Detention

Harjit Kaur, a 73-year-old Sikh grandmother, has been deported to India after facing alleged mistreatment during her detention by ICE, raising concerns about immigration enforcement practices.

Harjit Kaur, a 73-year-old Sikh grandmother who lived in California for over three decades, has been deported to India following weeks of detention that her attorney and community advocates describe as inhumane. Her case has ignited discussions surrounding immigration enforcement and the treatment of vulnerable individuals in detention.

Kaur was detained during a routine check-in with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on September 8 in San Francisco. Despite having reported to ICE every six months for more than a decade, she was taken into custody without warning. Kaur had resided in Hercules, California, since the early 1990s, where she worked modest jobs to support her two sons and five grandchildren, many of whom are U.S. citizens.

Her family had arranged for her to return to India on a commercial flight, intending for her to travel with dignity and be accompanied by a relative. However, ICE transferred her without notice from Bakersfield, California, to Lumpkin, Georgia, before placing her on a charter deportation flight. This abrupt action left her family without the opportunity to say goodbye.

According to her attorney, Deepak Ahluwalia, troubling details have emerged regarding Kaur’s treatment while in detention. Reports indicate that she was held for hours in cells without beds or chairs, forced to sleep on the floor, and shackled during transport. Additionally, she was denied vegetarian meals that aligned with her faith, at times receiving only an apple or even a plate of ice to take her medication. Kaur was also reportedly denied basic medical care for days and frequently refused access to water and hygiene supplies.

The Sikh Coalition, along with Kaur’s attorney, expressed outrage over her treatment. “This treatment is unacceptable for any person,” they stated, “but it is especially disturbing that a 73-year-old grandmother had to endure such conditions.”

Kaur’s immigration journey began in 1991 when she fled political turmoil in Punjab, India, after becoming a widow and raising her two young sons. Over the years, she filed multiple asylum applications, all of which were denied, with the last one submitted in 2012. Although her legal avenues for permanent residency had closed, she remained in the U.S., paying taxes and working as a seamstress at a Bay Area sari shop, Sari Palace, for nearly two decades.

Her community remembers her fondly, with many expressing heartbreak and disbelief over her deportation. “This has been heartbreaking,” one commenter noted. “I remember her from Sari Palace. She was so kind and talked to me like I was family even though it was my first time there.”

The Sikh community in California and beyond has closely monitored Kaur’s case, viewing it as representative of a broader crackdown by immigration authorities. Critics argue that her deportation highlights not only ICE’s harsh tactics but also significant policy shifts that have placed vulnerable immigrants—especially the elderly—at increased risk of mistreatment.

For years, Kaur’s deportation had been delayed due to her lack of necessary travel documents. Indian missions in the U.S. typically require verification of identity and origin before issuing emergency travel certificates, a process that can take weeks. However, this time, her deportation was executed swiftly.

Kaur has now arrived in India and is en route to Punjab, according to her attorney. Her family and community supporters remain deeply concerned about the treatment she endured during her final days in the United States.

Source: Original article

The $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee and Its Impact on Indian-Americans

The Trump Administration’s recent $100,000 fee for H-1B visa applications has raised concerns among the Indian diaspora, particularly regarding its implications for skilled workers seeking employment in the U.S.

On September 19, the Trump Administration announced a significant change to the H-1B visa program, aimed at protecting American jobs. This new policy introduces a $100,000 fee for certain H-1B visa applicants, a dramatic increase from the previous fee of $215. The change is set to take effect at 12:01 a.m. ET on September 21 and will remain in place for one year, with the possibility of extension.

The announcement has sparked fear and confusion among H-1B visa holders and prospective applicants, particularly within the Indian diaspora. More than 70% of H-1B visas issued in recent years have gone to workers from India, making this change particularly impactful for that community.

The new fee will be required for new H-1B petitions submitted by employers, with the intention of restricting the entry of certain nonimmigrant workers. This measure is part of a broader effort to curb abuses of the H-1B program that allegedly displace U.S. workers.

In a statement released by the White House on September 20, the administration outlined the specifics of the executive order. It restricts the entry of nonimmigrant workers in specialty occupations unless their petitions are accompanied by the $100,000 fee. The Secretary of Homeland Security has been directed to deny approvals for petitions from individuals currently outside the U.S. that do not include this payment, although exemptions may be granted on a case-by-case basis if deemed in the national interest.

Employers will be required to maintain documentation of the payment, which will be verified during the petition process by the Secretary of State. The Departments of State and Homeland Security will deny entry to individuals who do not meet the payment requirement and will take necessary steps to implement the proclamation.

The order also mandates that the Departments of Labor and Homeland Security collaborate on guidance related to verification, enforcement, audits, and penalties. Additionally, the Secretary of Labor has been instructed to revise the prevailing wage levels for the H-1B program, while the Secretary of Homeland Security will prioritize high-skilled, high-paid H-1B workers.

The White House’s statement emphasized the administration’s concern that American workers are being replaced by lower-paid foreign labor. It noted that the share of IT workers holding H-1B visas has increased from 32% in fiscal year 2003 to over 65% in recent years. The administration cited specific instances of companies laying off American employees while simultaneously hiring H-1B workers, further fueling the narrative that the program is being abused.

In response to the announcement, immigration lawyers and advocates have organized webinars and disseminated information to clarify the implications of the new fee. Many companies have advised their H-1B employees to avoid international travel and to exercise caution when considering travel plans.

According to White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt, the $100,000 fee will apply only to new H-1B applicants and will be charged per petition. It will not affect existing visa holders who are re-entering the country. Leavitt clarified that this fee is a one-time charge associated with the petition for a skilled worker and is not an annual fee.

Current H-1B visa holders outside the U.S. will not be required to pay the new fee to re-enter the country. Leavitt reassured that these visa holders can travel as they normally would, and the new fee will only apply to the upcoming H-1B lottery round, not to renewals or current visa holders.

Immigration attorney Sweta Khandelwal confirmed that the policy specifically targets individuals outside the U.S. at the time of entry. While current H-1B holders are not directly affected, their international travel may be impacted, and they are advised to avoid unnecessary trips abroad. The policy is set to remain in effect for 12 months, through September 21, 2026, unless extended.

Khandelwal noted that employers must document the $100,000 payment and provide proof during the petition process. The Departments of State and Homeland Security will work together to ensure that visas and entry are denied if the required payment is not made. However, there is currently uncertainty regarding how the Department of State will process the payment, even if employers are willing to comply.

As the situation develops, the Departments of Homeland Security, State, and Labor are expected to issue detailed guidance and initiate rulemaking on wage levels and prioritization standards. Legal challenges to the new fee are anticipated as early as September 22, 2025, according to Khandelwal.

To help the community navigate these changes, the Foundation for India and Indian Diasporic Studies (FIIDS) is hosting an online event featuring CPA and Attorney Neeraj Bhatia on September 22 at 9 p.m. EST (6 p.m. PST) to discuss the implications of the new visa fee.

For those interested in attending, registration is available at: http://tiny.cc/FIIDS-Online-RSVP.

Source: Original article

Immigrant Survivors of Domestic Violence Face Eroding Protections

Immigrant survivors of domestic violence in the U.S. are increasingly facing barriers to safety and justice as legal protections weaken and abusers exploit immigration status.

Immigrant survivors of domestic violence in the United States are confronting escalating barriers to safety and justice. Abusers are increasingly manipulating both legal and immigration systems, filing false police reports, and alerting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to their partner’s undocumented status. This weaponization of immigration status serves as a tool of control, creating a climate of fear that discourages survivors from seeking help.

At an August 12 briefing hosted by American Community Media, advocates and survivors highlighted a troubling trend: immigrant women escaping domestic violence are encountering fewer protections and more obstacles as federal policies shift. The current environment has left many survivors feeling vulnerable and isolated.

Those who seek legal protection often find themselves facing punitive measures rather than support. U visas, designed for victims of violent crime, and self-petitions under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which allow immigrant survivors to apply for status independently of their abuser, are now subject to longer wait times and stricter scrutiny. Additionally, gender-based asylum protections, once a crucial lifeline for women fleeing violence, have been rolled back by federal courts.

Organizations that provide domestic violence support and receive federal funding are also grappling with new restrictions that limit the services they can offer, particularly concerning gender identity and reproductive healthcare.

Carmen McDonald, Executive Director of the Survivor Justice Center in Los Angeles, noted that fear within immigrant communities has intensified following recent ICE raids. “The impact is that it keeps people away from the help they need,” she explained. Reports of discrimination and hate crimes in LA County dropped by a third after the raids—not due to a decrease in incidents, but because survivors stopped reporting them altogether.

McDonald described how survivors are canceling restraining orders and skipping medical appointments out of fear of detention. “Imagine you’re ready to face your abuser in court,” she said. “But instead of thinking about safety and justice, you wonder if ICE will be waiting at the courthouse doors. The silence is not safety—it’s danger. When survivors are silenced, abusers go free. When immigrants are too afraid to call the police, everyone is less safe. This is not just a humanitarian crisis—it’s a public safety crisis.”

Trust in the system is eroding among survivors, according to Morgan Weibel, Director of Legal Services at the Tahirih Justice Center, a national nonprofit that serves immigrant survivors of gender-based violence. “Government policies that entangle local law enforcement with federal immigration actions mean survivors are less likely to come forward,” she stated.

Weibel explained that while VAWA and U visas were established to protect survivors, recent policy changes have raised the stakes significantly. “The administration has introduced extreme vetting, added mandatory interviews, and rescinded exemptions. Even approved applicants can now face detention and deportation. Denials trigger automatic removal proceedings. The stakes are much, much higher. Some survivors are simply not willing to take those risks.”

The weakening of asylum protections has compounded these challenges. Weibel referenced the SS. M decision, which rolled back decades of recognition of gender-based violence as grounds for asylum. “It’s now next to impossible for unrepresented survivors to win their cases,” she said. “No one believes geography should determine whether a survivor lives or dies. Yet that is exactly the consequence of our current system.” Weibel urged Congress to establish a new asylum ground based on gender, stating, “It’s just common sense.”

Patima Komolamit, Executive Director of the Center for the Pacific Asian Family (CPAF), emphasized the cultural and structural barriers that immigrant survivors face, particularly within Asian and Pacific Islander communities. Many survivors deal with language barriers, lack of work history, and financial dependence, all of which abusers exploit.

<p“Immigration status has become an abuser’s tool, now ensconced in our government,” Komolamit remarked. She highlighted the essential role nonprofits play in bridging cultural gaps, noting, “Our organization provides services in 30 Asian Pacific Islander languages. Government agencies cannot meet these needs—that’s why nonprofits exist.”

However, nonprofits themselves are encountering new challenges. Federal funding through agencies like the Office of Violence Against Women and HUD now comes with restrictions tied to executive orders promoting traditional gender roles and limiting discussions of gender identity. “We need funding that allows us to actually serve survivors in the ways we know how,” Komolamit said. “By uplifting our work and raising awareness, media can help us push back against policies that threaten not just client safety, but sometimes our own.”

A poignant personal account was shared by Juana Padilla, a client of the Survivor Justice Center. Padilla recounted her five-year struggle to escape her abusive husband, an ex-military officer who used his status to intimidate her. “It takes me a while to step out,” she said, describing how she fled the country with her children for six years before returning, only to have her abuser kidnap them.

With support from the Survivor Justice Center, Padilla was able to file a VAWA petition and eventually secure legal residency. This status ensured her daughter, born in Mexico and in need of critical medical care, could receive treatment in the United States. “Any woman, with any nationality, has rights,” Padilla stated. “I was lucky to find this center that gave me the tools and advice. Thank you for supporting people like me.”

Experts at the briefing called for urgent reforms, including the establishment of a new asylum ground based on gender, strengthening confidentiality protections for survivors and attorneys, ensuring federal funding supports culturally specific, multilingual services, and addressing rising costs for asylum seekers, including new $100 filing fees.

Despite the mounting challenges, resources remain available for survivors. The National Domestic Violence Hotline can be reached at 1-800-799-7233, the Survivor Justice Center can be found online at www.survivorjusticecenter.org, the Center for the Pacific Asian Family can be contacted at 1-800-339-3940, and the Tahirih Justice Center is available at www.tahirih.org.

Source: Original article

Indian-American Community Responds to Recent Policy Changes in Newsroom

USCIS provides a comprehensive resource for news, data, and updates related to immigration and citizenship on its official website.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) offers a centralized platform for individuals seeking the latest information regarding immigration and citizenship. This resource is accessible through the USCIS News webpage, which features a variety of news releases and alerts organized by topic and date.

In addition to news updates, the USCIS News webpage includes important policy and procedure changes, as well as timely announcements about office closures and other emergencies that may affect the public.

For those interested in visual content, USCIS provides a Video and Image Gallery showcasing various aspects of its operations. This gallery serves as a valuable resource for understanding the agency’s work and its impact on communities across the nation.

Data enthusiasts can explore the Immigration and Citizenship Data page, which presents a wealth of statistics and information related to immigration trends and demographics. This data is essential for researchers, policymakers, and the general public who wish to gain insights into immigration patterns.

To stay connected, USCIS maintains a Social Media Directory that allows individuals to follow the agency on various platforms. This ensures that the public receives timely updates and information directly from USCIS through their preferred social media channels.

USCIS also shares recent speeches, statements, and congressional testimony from its leadership. These documents are searchable by topic and date, providing transparency and insight into the agency’s priorities and initiatives.

For those seeking specific information, the Electronic Reading Room offers access to documents identified under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Users can search for topics of interest using a convenient drop-down list, making it easier to find relevant information.

USCIS recognizes the importance of media communication and has established a network of agency representatives across the country to respond to media inquiries. This ensures that journalists and media outlets have access to accurate and timely information from the agency.

Lastly, USCIS keeps the public informed about upcoming events through its Upcoming Events section. This includes details on local engagements and national events, allowing individuals to participate in discussions and initiatives related to immigration and citizenship.

For more information and updates, visit the USCIS News webpage, where you can find a wealth of resources and stay informed about the latest developments in immigration and citizenship.

Source: Original article

Revised Form I-129 for Immigration Petitions Now Available

USCIS has released a revised Form I-129, which will be the only accepted version starting May 1, 2015, enhancing the petition process for nonimmigrant workers.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has announced the availability of a revised Form I-129, known as the Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker. This updated form, which bears an edition date of October 23, 2014, is now accessible for download on the USCIS forms website.

Beginning May 1, 2015, USCIS will only accept the October 23, 2014 edition of Form I-129. After this date, previous versions of the form, including those dated October 7, 2011, January 19, 2011, and November 23, 2010, will no longer be valid for submission.

The revised Form I-129 is designed to prompt users to complete the form thoroughly, thereby enhancing the efficiency of the processing system at USCIS. By encouraging comprehensive submissions, the agency aims to streamline operations and reduce processing times for applicants.

USCIS emphasizes the importance of using the most current version of the form to avoid delays in processing. It is advisable for applicants and their representatives to download the revised form directly from the USCIS website to ensure compliance with the latest requirements.

For more information on who may file Form I-129 and additional details regarding the petition process, interested parties can visit the USCIS forms website.

Source: Original article

The H-1B Visa Process Faces Challenges Amid Ongoing Uncertainty

The Trump administration’s recent H-1B visa fee increase could significantly impact South Asian American communities, particularly those from India, leading to widespread confusion and concern.

On Friday, the Trump administration announced a major change to the H-1B visa program, which could have lasting effects on South Asian American communities. The fee for obtaining an H-1B visa has surged from a few thousand dollars to an unprecedented $100,000. This dramatic increase raises concerns about the viability of the visa for many employers, potentially making it prohibitively expensive.

The implications for the Indian American community are profound. Historically, the H-1B visa has served as a crucial pathway for thousands of South Asian Americans, particularly those from India, to establish their lives in the United States. Since the program’s inception in 1990, it has facilitated the immigration of a significant number of skilled workers.

Following the announcement, confusion spread rapidly across the U.S. WhatsApp groups lit up with discussions, and frantic emails circulated as individuals sought clarity. Some employers advised their current H-1B employees traveling abroad to return to the U.S. immediately. In a notable incident, an announcement was made on an Emirates flight preparing to take off from San Francisco, allowing passengers to de-board if they needed to.

As the weekend unfolded, the White House provided clarifications, stating that the $100,000 fee would apply only to new applicants, including those entering the upcoming H-1B lottery cycle. These changes took effect on Sunday, leaving little time for preparation.

The technology sector is expected to bear the brunt of this policy change. According to U.S. government data, approximately 300,000 Indians were working in the U.S. on H-1B visas in 2024. This group, along with their families, represents about 10% of all Indian-origin individuals residing legally in the country.

Many prominent American companies have been led by individuals who immigrated to the U.S. on H-1B visas, including Satya Nadella of Microsoft and Sundar Pichai of Alphabet, Google’s parent company. Indra Nooyi, who served as CEO of PepsiCo from 2006 to 2018, is another notable example.

While most media coverage has focused on the tech industry’s challenges, the medical community also has a substantial population of H-1B visa holders. With the U.S. facing a growing shortage of doctors and nurses, this fee increase could exacerbate existing issues in healthcare.

The White House indicated that doctors might be exempt from the new fee, but the overall impact on American universities and academic appointments remains uncertain. As institutions grapple with federal pressures and budget cuts, the implications for higher education could be significant.

A pressing question arises: Does the U.S. have enough homegrown talent to fill high-skilled roles in the near and long term? The answer appears to be no, particularly as the nation seeks to compete in the rapidly evolving field of artificial intelligence. The debate over the value of skilled immigration has created divisions within the political landscape, with some advocating for stricter measures while others, including former H-1B visa holder Elon Musk, argue for a more open approach.

The familial ramifications of this policy change are also noteworthy. India’s Ministry of External Affairs expressed concerns that the new measures could disrupt family units, highlighting the humanitarian consequences of such immigration policies. As the situation develops, the long-term effects on South Asian communities in the U.S. remain to be seen.

Globally, the impact of this policy shift is evident. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has urged Indians to prioritize local products over foreign goods, reflecting a growing trend of nationalism in response to U.S. tariffs and immigration policies. This inward focus may lead to a reverse brain drain, where talented individuals who would typically contribute to the U.S. economy choose to remain in India instead. Meanwhile, countries like Canada, Australia, and the U.K. may seize the opportunity to attract skilled workers from India.

For Indian Americans who supported Trump in the 2024 election, this policy change could test their loyalty. The administration’s actions on legal immigration directly affect their families and communities, raising questions about the future of their support.

As with many recent policy changes, the true effects of this fee increase will unfold over time. Legal challenges may arise, potentially altering the course of these regulations. The combination of high tariffs and sudden visa changes could strain the longstanding relationship between the U.S. and India, impacting commerce and the flow of talent.

Source: Original article

Ex-Meta Engineer Highlights H-1B Visa Dependence in U.S. Tech Industry

A former Meta engineer has sparked a significant discussion regarding H-1B visa usage in the tech industry after revealing that most of his 2017 data engineering team were visa holders.

A former Meta engineer has ignited an online conversation about the reliance on H-1B visas within the tech industry. Zach Wilson, who is now leading his own data analytics startup in San Francisco, disclosed that 15 out of 17 members of his 2017 data engineering team were on H-1B visas. His comments come amid growing concerns over President Donald Trump’s recent proposal to impose a $100,000 visa fee for new applications.

In a post on X, Wilson shared, “When I worked at Meta in 2017, I was on a team of 17 people. 15 of the 17 were on H-1B visas. I was one of two Americans on the team.” He further noted that under the proposed new rules, this would amount to $1.5 million in visa fees solely for core growth data engineering roles.

Wilson’s remarks have resonated widely, particularly among American job seekers. He added, “If you’re an American looking to land a big tech role, now is your time because more than 80 percent of your competition literally just vanished overnight. Good luck!”

Having spent nearly two years at Meta as a data engineer, Wilson transitioned to entrepreneurship by launching his own startup. His post on X has elicited strong reactions from both Indian tech professionals and international observers. Some users clarified that the new visa fees would not impact current H-1B holders, suggesting that the changes would primarily slow the influx of new visa applicants over time. One user noted, “So any effect it will have will be slowing the pipeline of new H-1Bs over time,” highlighting the complexities of the situation.

Indian engineer Nitin Ahirwal contributed to the discussion by emphasizing that Meta’s success in core growth data engineering stemmed from talent rather than nationality. He stated, “If 15/17 engineers were on H-1Bs, that tells you something: US schools are producing users of tech, not builders.” Ahirwal also pointed out that the proposed $1.5 million in visa fees pales in comparison to the $120 billion in value generated by H-1B workers for major tech companies such as Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google (FAANG). He argued, “Your ‘competition’ didn’t vanish. It just shifted. Those engineers will now be building the next Meta, Google, or Nvidia — in Bangalore, Hyderabad, Toronto, or Singapore.”

Another user, Rushikesh Patil, echoed this sentiment, stating, “If 15 out of 17 engineers at Meta were on H-1Bs, it tells you the reality. The talent pipeline wasn’t coming from US schools then and it isn’t ready now. Removing visas doesn’t replace the gap; it just exposes it.”

Tom Anderson, another user on X, shared his own experience, recalling, “I was on the Windows team (8) doing DevOps with Sanchez. We were the only two Americans on that team, and everyone else, including the manager, were from India — not to mention the three directors above the manager.” Wilson responded to Anderson’s comment, suggesting that if Meta had provided him with an opportunity, they would likely extend similar chances to graduates from prestigious institutions like MIT and Stanford if no other options were available.

The cost of filing an H-1B petition has historically ranged from $2,000 to $5,000. However, under President Trump’s new directive, this fee is set to increase dramatically to $100,000 for new applications. Experts warn that this substantial hike could have far-reaching implications for Indian professionals and the companies that rely on their expertise, particularly since Indians constitute over 70% of H-1B visa holders in the United States.

As the debate continues, the implications of these changes on the tech industry and the broader economy remain to be seen. The conversation sparked by Wilson’s post highlights the ongoing complexities surrounding immigration policy and its impact on the workforce.

Source: Original article

India Reacts to Increased H-1B Visa Fees by U.S. Government

The U.S. government’s recent announcement of a $100,000 fee hike on H-1B visa petitions has sparked widespread anxiety among tech professionals in both the U.S. and India.

In a significant move, the U.S. government has announced a steep $100,000 fee increase on H-1B visa petitions, causing a wave of anxiety among tech professionals across the country. As news of the hike spread, many individuals began to assess the potential impact on their careers and futures.

Thousands of miles away in India, families of H-1B visa holders found themselves in a state of panic, grappling with uncertainty regarding travel plans, financial commitments, and the futures of their loved ones residing in the U.S. The announcement has transformed an already high-stakes application process into a source of overwhelming stress, with phones, laptops, and WhatsApp threads buzzing with activity around the clock.

Shubra Singh, a biotech professional currently in the U.S., experienced the tension firsthand during a Saturday night dinner in a Pittsburgh bar. Surrounded by eight Indian friends, all tech professionals on H-1B visas, she witnessed their focus shift entirely to their phones as they anxiously tracked updates on President Donald Trump’s decision regarding the fee increase. What began as a casual evening quickly turned tense, with conversations drowned out by notifications and urgent searches for clarity.

“Our families are sharing all kinds of articles on the H-1B situation,” Singh noted, highlighting the palpable anxiety among her peers. According to reports, Indians constitute the largest group of H-1B visa holders in the U.S., making up approximately 71%, while Chinese nationals account for about 11.7%. The recent proclamation to raise H-1B fees has left many questioning their employment prospects and reconsidering their plans in the U.S.

The impact of the fee hike was felt in India’s stock market as shares of major IT firms declined following the announcement. Investors reacted by offloading shares of leading IT outsourcing companies, including Infosys, Tech Mahindra, Wipro, HCL Technologies, and Tata Consultancy Services. Smaller and mid-sized firms, such as Persistent Systems, Coforge, Mphasis, Firstsource Solutions, and Cyient, also experienced stock price drops ranging from 1.7% to 4.2% during early trading in London.

Analysts are concerned that the $100,000 fee could deter Indian students from pursuing opportunities in the U.S. JPMorgan’s Toshi Jain remarked that this steep fee could act as a new “tax” on securing employment after graduation. Prashanth Prakash, a partner at the Indian venture capital firm Accel, echoed these sentiments, emphasizing the growing challenges for Indian students aspiring to study and work in the U.S.

Meanwhile, panic ensued on an India-bound Emirates flight shortly after the announcement. At San Francisco International Airport, several Indian passengers disembarked just before takeoff, leading to a three-hour delay. Videos posted on social media captured the chaotic scene, with travelers anxiously scrolling through their phones and standing in the aisles, uncertain about their ability to return to the U.S.

The captain of the Emirates flight addressed passengers, acknowledging the unprecedented circumstances and allowing those who wished to leave the aircraft to do so. “Ladies and gentlemen, it’s the captain speaking. Due to the current circumstances, obviously, that are unprecedented for us here at Emirates, we are aware that a number of passengers do not wish to travel with us, and that’s perfectly fine,” he stated.

Describing the situation as chaotic, a passenger shared their experience on Instagram, noting that panic had spread among Indian travelers, prompting some to choose to leave the plane. “It was complete chaos for Emirates passengers at San Francisco Airport this Friday morning,” the user wrote, detailing how they had been stranded for over three hours, waiting for the flight to depart.

In explaining the rationale behind the H-1B visa fee increase, President Trump stated that the program was intended to bring “temporary workers into the U.S. to perform additive, high-skilled functions,” but he claimed it had been exploited to replace American workers with lower-paid, lower-skilled labor.

As the implications of this fee hike continue to unfold, both tech professionals in the U.S. and their families in India are left grappling with uncertainty about their futures.

Source: Original article

Trump Administration Implements $100,000 Fee for H-1B Visas, Embassy Offers Support

Indian professionals express concern as President Trump imposes a $100,000 annual fee on H-1B visa applications, prompting the Indian Embassy in Washington, D.C., to establish an emergency helpline.

In a move that has raised alarm among Indian professionals, President Donald Trump recently signed a proclamation imposing an annual fee of $100,000 on H-1B visa applications. This decision has significant implications for the many Indian nationals who rely on this visa category for employment in the United States.

In response to the growing concerns, the Indian Embassy in Washington, D.C., has released an emergency assistance number for Indian nationals who may need immediate support. The Embassy stated, “Indian nationals seeking emergency assistance may call cell number +1-202-550-9931 (and WhatsApp). This number should be used only by Indian nationals seeking immediate emergency assistance and not for routine consular queries.”

The introduction of this steep fee has sparked serious concerns regarding its potential impact on Indian tech professionals and the overall flow of remittances. Notably, approximately 71 percent of all H-1B visas are granted to Indian citizens, making this development particularly significant for the Indian community.

To alleviate some of the anxiety surrounding the new fee, a senior official from the U.S. administration clarified that the $100,000 charge would apply only to new H-1B visa petitions. Existing visa holders and those seeking renewals will not be affected by this fee.

Following the announcement, the White House emphasized on September 20 that the fee is a “one-time fee” applicable solely to new visa applications, aiming to provide clarity amidst the confusion.

In light of the changes, the Indian government has instructed all its Missions and Posts to extend every possible assistance to Indian nationals who are scheduled to return to the United States within the next 24 hours. The Ministry of External Affairs is actively monitoring the situation and is carefully examining the implications of the newly imposed annual fee on the H-1B visa program.

This development has prompted a wave of reactions from various stakeholders, as many are concerned about the future of the H-1B visa program and its impact on the Indian workforce in the U.S. The Indian Embassy’s establishment of a helpline reflects the urgency of the situation and the need for immediate support for affected individuals.

As the situation continues to evolve, Indian nationals are encouraged to stay informed and reach out for assistance if needed. The implications of this new fee could reshape the landscape for H-1B visa applicants, particularly those from India, in the coming months.

Source: Original article

Beware of Fake Wi-Fi Networks That Can Compromise Your Data

Travelers are increasingly vulnerable to fake Wi-Fi networks that can compromise their personal data while flying, as attackers exploit the growing reliance on in-flight internet services.

As air travel becomes more reliant on in-flight internet for entertainment and services, travelers face heightened risks from fake Wi-Fi networks. Cybersecurity experts warn that these malicious networks are designed to steal personal information, and recent incidents highlight the dangers involved.

Earlier this year, Australian authorities arrested a passenger for operating a fraudulent Wi-Fi network at an airport and during a flight. This setup mimicked the airline’s official Wi-Fi service, but it was actually an “evil twin” hotspot, a term used by cybersecurity researchers to describe a fake network that tricks users into providing their credentials.

While the concept of fake Wi-Fi networks is not new, the context in which it is being used has evolved. Historically, these deceptive networks have been prevalent in cafes, hotels, and airports. However, the recent case marks a troubling trend of attackers extending their reach into the skies, taking advantage of travelers’ increasing dependence on in-flight Wi-Fi.

An evil twin hotspot operates by impersonating a legitimate network, often by copying its name, known as the SSID. When multiple networks with the same name are available, devices typically connect to the one with the strongest signal, which is often the attacker’s network. Once connected, unsuspecting victims may be redirected to a counterfeit login page that requests personal information such as email addresses, passwords, or social media credentials, all under the guise of accessing the airline’s entertainment system.

The implications of such attacks can be severe, leading to account takeovers, identity theft, or further cyberattacks. Travelers are particularly vulnerable in these situations, as they often have limited options for internet access. Mobile data can be unreliable or expensive, pushing individuals toward available Wi-Fi networks that appear legitimate.

Moreover, a shift in how travel providers deliver entertainment and services has exacerbated the issue. Airlines are increasingly replacing traditional seatback screens with streaming portals, cruise lines are promoting app-based services, and hotels are directing guests to digital check-in platforms. This trend means that more travelers are connecting to Wi-Fi networks than ever before, often without considering the potential risks.

In the Australian case, the attacker utilized a portable hotspot onboard, naming it to match the airline’s official Wi-Fi network. Passengers, drawn in by the stronger signal, connected to the malicious network and were subsequently led to a fake login page requesting personal details. In-flight, the stakes are even higher; passengers may feel compelled to share their data to regain access to entertainment options, making the success rate of such attacks alarmingly high.

To protect against rogue Wi-Fi networks, cybersecurity experts recommend using a Virtual Private Network (VPN). A VPN creates an encrypted tunnel between your device and the internet, significantly reducing the risk of data interception, even if you inadvertently connect to a malicious hotspot. However, it is important to note that in-flight Wi-Fi systems may require users to disable their VPN temporarily to access the onboard portal. Once connected, re-enabling the VPN can help secure any subsequent browsing or messaging activities.

While a VPN is a crucial defense, it should not be the sole line of protection. Travelers should ensure their devices have robust antivirus software installed, which serves as the first line of defense against malicious sites and apps that may be pushed through fake portals. This software can also alert users to phishing emails and ransomware threats, safeguarding personal information and digital assets.

Additionally, implementing two-factor authentication (2FA) can provide an extra layer of security. Whenever possible, opt for app-based authenticators rather than SMS codes, as they function offline and are more difficult for attackers to intercept.

Many devices are set to automatically reconnect to familiar networks, making it easier for a fake hotspot with the same name to deceive users. To mitigate this risk, travelers should disable auto-connect features and manually select the correct airline Wi-Fi network before logging in.

When browsing in-flight, it is advisable to look for the padlock icon in the browser’s address bar, indicating that the connection is encrypted via HTTPS. This encryption makes it more challenging for attackers to intercept data transmitted over public Wi-Fi.

Even with these precautions, in-flight Wi-Fi should be treated as untrusted. Travelers are advised to avoid logging into sensitive accounts, such as online banking or work systems, and to limit their activities to light browsing, streaming, or messaging until they can connect to a secure network.

Keeping devices updated is also essential, as outdated operating systems and applications can harbor security vulnerabilities that attackers may exploit. Before traveling, ensure that all software is up to date, as many updates include critical security patches.

When possible, consider switching your device to airplane mode and enabling only Wi-Fi. This reduces exposure to other signals, such as Bluetooth or cellular roaming, which attackers may target during flights.

Be cautious of pop-ups or redirects that may appear on fake in-flight portals. If a page requests unnecessary information, such as your full Social Security number or banking details, treat it as a red flag and close the page immediately.

After the flight, it is important to sign out of the airline’s Wi-Fi portal and any accounts accessed during the journey. This step helps prevent session hijacking if the system retains cached tokens.

The rise of evil twin attacks in the air serves as a reminder that convenience often comes with hidden risks. As airlines increasingly push passengers toward in-flight Wi-Fi, attackers are finding new ways to exploit this dependency. The next time you fly, consider whether it is worth the risk to connect to the first Wi-Fi network that appears. Sometimes, the safest choice is to remain offline until you reach your destination.

Source: Original article

Nayna Gupta Discusses Deportation’s Impact on Families at Shadow Hearing

Nayna Gupta, Policy Director of the American Immigration Council, testified at a Shadow Hearing on September 18, 2025, addressing the severe impacts of deportation on families and communities.

On September 18, 2025, Nayna Gupta, the Policy Director of the American Immigration Council, provided crucial testimony at a Shadow Hearing organized by U.S. Representative Pramila Jayapal, who serves as the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Integrity, Security, and Enforcement.

The hearing, titled “Kidnapped and Disappeared: Trump’s Assault Destroys U.S. Families and Communities,” marks the third installment in Rep. Jayapal’s series focused on the profound human costs associated with deportation policies.

During her testimony, Gupta emphasized the multifaceted consequences of these policies, which she argued have far-reaching effects on both individuals and society as a whole.

One of the key points Gupta raised was the way deportation policies tear apart families and destabilize communities. She illustrated how these actions not only affect the individuals being deported but also have a ripple effect on their loved ones and the broader community.

Gupta also pointed out that such policies undermine due process and fairness within the U.S. immigration system. She argued that the current framework often lacks the necessary protections for individuals, leading to unjust outcomes.

Furthermore, Gupta highlighted that these deportation practices weaken the core values of justice and dignity that should define America. She called for a reevaluation of the immigration system to better align with these fundamental principles.

The American Immigration Council remains committed to advocating for an immigration system that prioritizes family unity, upholds due process, and reflects the ideals of justice and dignity.

As the conversation around immigration continues to evolve, Gupta’s testimony serves as a poignant reminder of the human impact behind policy decisions.

According to the American Immigration Council, the ongoing discourse is essential for fostering a more humane and just immigration system.

Source: Original article

Expanding Surveillance of Immigrants Raises Concerns Over Privacy Rights

Expanding surveillance measures targeting immigrants in the U.S. raise significant concerns about privacy rights, as government agencies increasingly share sensitive data and employ advanced monitoring techniques.

Since the Trump administration took office, the United States has witnessed a significant crackdown on immigrants. Immigration authorities, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), have intensified efforts to question, detain, and deport undocumented immigrants, student visa holders, and green card holders.

To facilitate this crackdown, the administration has directed non-immigration-related government agencies, such as the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Medicaid, to share sensitive information with immigration authorities. During an American Community Media briefing on September 5, data privacy and policy experts expressed concerns that this development sets a dangerous precedent for privacy rights.

Nicole Alvarez, a Senior Policy Analyst for Technology Policy at the Center for American Progress (CAP), described the administration’s use of sensitive records for immigration enforcement as a “digital watchtower.” In a report published last month, Alvarez outlined how the administration is constructing an infrastructure for an expanding surveillance system that poses threats to both immigrants and citizens.

Alvarez noted that the Privacy Act of 1974, enacted in the wake of the Watergate scandal, was designed to ensure that the federal government could only use an individual’s private information for the purpose for which it was collected. However, she argued that the Privacy Act “has simply not kept up with the times.” It was established before the advent of the internet, mass data storage, and the ability to link extensive databases, resulting in limited accountability when data is reused or shared across agencies in unexpected ways.

The administration’s use of sensitive information for purposes other than its original intent—such as IRS or Medicaid data being utilized for immigration raids—can be classified as secondary data abuse. A 2022 report by the Center for Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law revealed that ICE has access to personal information through various sources, including Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) driver’s license records and utility providers’ client records.

Another initiative underway is the consolidation of data from different agencies into a centralized repository, which simplifies the federal government’s ability to surveil both immigrants and citizens. Over time, Alvarez believes that secondary data abuse and the centralization of information will deter individuals from enrolling in or utilizing services offered by government agencies. Immigrants may become hesitant to pay taxes, enroll in healthcare programs, or seek other benefits to which they are entitled.

“When people disengage from public systems, those systems inherently become weaker; they become more unfair and less democratic,” Alvarez explained. “It becomes harder for agencies to serve communities effectively, and ironically, it undermines long-term goals like fraud prevention and civic participation.”

Emerald Tse, from the Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law, echoed Alvarez’s findings regarding the government’s digital watchtower and emphasized that the surveillance extends beyond data collected through federal agencies. The Center’s 2024 report, “Raiding The Genome,” provides a detailed analysis of a DHS program that collects DNA samples from thousands of individuals daily. In 2020, a Department of Justice rule granted DHS the authority to collect DNA from any individual they detain. These samples are then used to create profiles added to a federal policing database accessible to all levels of law enforcement.

“We found that the federal government has been collecting DNA on the assumption that people will commit crimes in the future,” Tse stated. “Profiles were added regardless of whether a person committed a crime or had been charged with one, and this included individuals of all ages, even children as young as four years old.” The report indicates that the DHS has added over 2.5 million profiles to the national policing database through this program, marking a staggering 5000% increase in the number of profiles added over the past three years.

The current administration is also leveraging social media to screen and, in some cases, target immigrants. Earlier this year, student visa interviews were paused for three weeks. Upon resuming, consular officers were instructed to vet applicants based on their social media profiles and online presence. This directive included screening candidates who demonstrated support for Hamas or exhibited a history of political activism. The government has also announced the use of an AI-based application called “Catch and Revoke,” which scours social media profiles of thousands of international students and revokes their visas if their sympathies align with Hamas.

Sophia Cope, Senior Staff Attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, views this social media surveillance as a direct challenge to individuals’ First Amendment rights. She highlighted a troubling trend in which the government is increasingly limiting what immigrants can express on social media.

“First it was pro-terrorism and pro-Palestine content, then it became anti-Semitism, and now it has broadened to include a general hostility toward American values and culture,” Cope explained. “This is absurd because all of that speech— even pro-terrorism speech—is protected under the First Amendment, as long as it does not incite imminent violence.”

As the U.S. government continues to expand its surveillance capabilities, the implications for privacy rights and civil liberties remain a pressing concern.

Source: Original article

Trump Opponents Claim SCOTUS Ruling Promotes ‘Racial Terror’ in ICE Raids

California Democrats condemned a Supreme Court ruling that allows Trump administration immigration raids in Los Angeles, labeling it “un-American” and a potential source of “racial terror.”

California Democrats have expressed strong opposition to a recent Supreme Court ruling that permits the Trump administration to continue its immigration raids in Los Angeles. They characterized the decision as “un-American” and warned that it could lead to a “parade of racial terror.”

Governor Gavin Newsom, a vocal critic of President Donald Trump, took to X (formerly Twitter) to voice his disapproval. He stated, “Trump’s hand-picked SCOTUS majority just became the Grand Marshal for a parade of racial terror in LA. His administration is targeting Latinos — and anyone who doesn’t look or sound like his idea of an American — to deliberately harm our families and economy.”

The Supreme Court’s ruling, which passed with a 6-3 vote, allows the Trump administration to resume immigration raids in California, overturning a lower court’s decision that had previously halted such actions. This case was escalated to the Supreme Court after a federal judge ruled in July that the raids were likely unconstitutional, as they involved detaining individuals based on “apparent race or ethnicity” or their ability to speak Spanish. Immigration advocates have long accused the federal government of targeting Latinos based on these criteria.

In addition to Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and California Senator Adam Schiff also criticized the Supreme Court’s decision. They described the immigration raids as “blatantly illegal.” Schiff remarked, “This Administration rounded up and arrested California residents, including U.S. citizens and legal residents, based on the color of their skin or the language they speak. This is blatantly illegal, yet the Supreme Court is allowing it to happen while the case proceeds.” Schiff has a history of contentious interactions with Trump, which include disputes over the January 6 investigation and Trump’s impeachment trials.

Mayor Bass echoed these sentiments, stating, “I want the entire nation to hear me when I say this isn’t just an attack on the people of LA; this is an attack on every person in every city in this country. Today’s ruling is not only dangerous – it’s un-American and threatens the fabric of personal freedom in the U.S.” She emphasized her commitment to fighting for the rights and dignity of Angelenos, despite the administration’s efforts to undermine them.

The Supreme Court’s majority did not provide an explanation for their ruling. However, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in a concurring opinion, argued that race could be a relevant factor in determining reasonable suspicion for immigration stops. He stated, “To be clear, apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion; under this Court’s case law regarding immigration stops, however, it can be a ‘relevant factor’ when considered along with other salient factors.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, expressing concern over the emergency order that approved such raids. She stated, “We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job.”

The Trump administration welcomed the Supreme Court’s decision, with Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin declaring it a “win for the safety of Californians and the rule of law.” She added, “DHS law enforcement will not be slowed down and will continue to arrest and remove the murderers, rapists, gang members, and other criminal illegal aliens.”

This ruling follows the Trump administration’s directive for immigration officials to carry out raids in Los Angeles, a city that has identified itself as a “sanctuary” for undocumented immigrants. Protests and riots erupted in response to the crackdown, with local leaders like Newsom and Bass condemning the administration’s actions and offering support to undocumented individuals.

As the situation develops, the implications of the Supreme Court’s ruling remain a focal point of contention among California Democrats and immigration advocates, who fear that the decision could exacerbate racial profiling and discrimination in immigration enforcement.

Source: Original article

Indian Diaspora Faces Significant Challenges Amid Global Unrest

The Indian diaspora is facing unprecedented challenges, marked by rising hostility and backlash in Western nations, necessitating a serious examination of its evolving narrative and future strategies.

New Delhi: Since December 2024, I have cautioned that a moment of reckoning is approaching for the Indian diaspora, often celebrated as one of the great success stories of the country. Once regarded as a model minority globally, this community is now confronting perplexing and unprecedented attacks, including mass protests in Australia and Ireland, which call for curbing immigration from India.

In the United States, this backlash has been fueled, in part, by comments from former President Donald Trump and some members of his administration regarding trade tariffs. These remarks have resonated with significant segments of the so-called MAGA base. However, it would be unwise to dismiss this as merely a fringe reaction or conspiracy theory.

Since the early 19th century, when Indians first began migrating to America, this backlash represents one of the most vicious emerging challenges for a community that contributes over $100 billion annually to India’s economy. It is essential to take these developments seriously and address the root causes before they undermine the remarkable narrative of Indian immigration.

As a dark cloud looms over the unprecedented global mobility and interconnectedness of recent decades, the narrative surrounding the Indian diaspora, particularly in Western nations such as the United States, Ireland, and Australia, is souring dramatically. Once celebrated for its high levels of education, professional achievement, and economic prosperity, the community now faces a troubling counter-narrative.

A rising tide of protests, physical attacks, and vitriolic online abuse indicates a significant and alarming shift in perception. This article will explore the complex reasons behind this backlash, arguing that the very success of the Indian diaspora, combined with economic anxieties, cultural shifts, and geopolitical transformations, has ironically made it a target of resentment and hostility.

For decades, the story of Indian immigrants in the West has been framed as a testament to hard work and determination. Arriving in often unfamiliar and challenging environments, they have not only integrated but excelled, becoming one of the most economically successful communities in these nations. Their contributions are particularly notable in fields such as medicine, engineering, information technology, and finance.

This success is not merely anecdotal; it is supported by stark economic data. In the United States, for example, Indian Americans boast the highest median household income of any ethnic group. This economic prowess is increasingly reflected in leadership positions, with a growing number of Indian-origin individuals ascending to C-suite roles in major multinational corporations. Figures like Satya Nadella at Microsoft and Sundar Pichai at Alphabet have become global symbols of this incredible success story.

However, this very visibility and success have, in a cruel twist of fate, sown the seeds of a backlash. In a climate of growing economic inequality and social anxiety in many Western nations, the conspicuous success of a minority group can easily become a focal point for resentment. The narrative of the “model minority,” once a badge of honour, is now being weaponized to create a damaging dichotomy, pitting successful Indian immigrants against other minority groups and even the white working class. The talents and economic success of Indians, once celebrated as contributions to their adopted homelands, are now reframed as threats, a sentiment amplified by populist politicians and media outlets.

This resentment manifests in tangible and dangerous ways. In Australia, anti-immigration protests have specifically targeted Indians. In Ireland, a country historically known for its warmth, a spate of violent and unprovoked attacks against members of the Indian community has instilled a palpable sense of fear. In the United States, while violence may be less overt, hostility is evident in political discourse and online platforms, which have become breeding grounds for anti-Indian sentiment, often revolving around the trope of Indians “stealing” jobs.

The H1-B visa program in the United States serves as a lightning rod for much of this animosity. Designed to allow American companies to hire highly skilled foreign workers, it has faced accusations of misuse. Some employers have been accused of using the program to replace American workers with cheaper foreign labor, and a minority of Indian employees have been complicit in a system perceived to undercut local wages and opportunities. While the majority of H1-B visa holders are highly skilled professionals who significantly contribute to the American economy, the actions of a few have tarnished the reputation of the entire community.

The abuse of the H1-B visa system has provided a potent narrative for those who wish to portray Indian immigrants not as assets but as economic mercenaries. This combination of economic success and the perception of being a threat has drawn unsettling parallels between the contemporary experience of Indians in some parts of the world and the historical experiences of Jewish people. Some argue that Indians are becoming “Jew adjacent,” resented for their success, adaptability, and perceived insularity. Just as Jewish people were historically resented for their economic success, Indians now face a similar brand of envy-fueled animosity.

The “model minority” label, akin to stereotypes used against Jewish people, creates a caricature of a community viewed as both hyper-successful and insular, further isolating them from the broader population.

This troubling trend is compounded by India’s rising stature on the global stage. As India’s economy grows and its geopolitical influence expands, its citizens can no longer be viewed through the patronizing lens of the “third world.” They are increasingly seen as representatives of a powerful nation challenging the established global order. This shift in perception impacts how Indian immigrants are viewed in the West; they are no longer seen as grateful newcomers but as representatives of a competitive and assertive nation. This geopolitical subtext adds another layer to the resentment, transforming economic anxiety into a form of quasi-nationalistic animosity.

Faced with this growing hostility, what is the way forward? Paradoxically, the solution may not be less immigration, but more. The current wave of anti-Indian sentiment is largely fueled by ignorance and caricature. The most effective way to combat these negative stereotypes is through greater cultural exchange and understanding. More immigration from India, particularly from a diverse cross-section of society, can help humanize the Indian diaspora in the eyes of the host population.

When immigrants are not just seen as doctors, engineers, and tech workers, but as artists, writers, musicians, and entrepreneurs, it becomes more difficult to reduce them to a monolithic and threatening stereotype. These new waves of immigrants can act as cultural ambassadors, sharing their stories and showcasing a modern, pluralistic, and dynamic India often absent from the headlines. By engaging with local communities and sharing their culture, they can build the bridges of understanding that are desperately needed.

This is not to suggest that immigration is a panacea for all the complex issues at play. Host nations must also address the underlying economic and social anxieties that make their populations susceptible to xenophobic rhetoric. However, in the long run, the most potent antidote to hate is understanding, and the most effective way to foster that understanding is through human connection.

Indians must also become more politically active in their adopted countries than ever before. The old model of “keeping your head down and working hard” is no longer sufficient. To push back against the negative storm that is set to increase, they must integrate into the political fabric of their adopted countries. It is not enough to make large donations to key political parties; it is time to support community members who will run for office at every level and represent the community in government. The success that Indian immigrants have achieved in business and rising to C-suite positions must now be replicated in politics, with strong ambitions to reach top policy and administration roles.

In July, I recommended a strategic widening of Indian immigration to countries like Japan, Russia, Israel, Scandinavia, and parts of Europe, which remain largely unaffected by the negativity spreading in places like America. It is also time to consider establishing institutions akin to the American Jewish Committee to provide support for Indians who feel imperiled or discriminated against.

It is crucial to remember that in recent years, Indians have been equated with racism through a narrative that blames the age-old Indian caste system for the ills of slavery and racial discrimination in America and Europe. This propaganda has dire social consequences, making it socially acceptable to attack a community that, despite making up only 1% of the U.S. population, contributes 6% of all taxes collected.

Thus, the Indian diaspora in the West finds itself at a crossroads. The success that was once a source of pride has now made it a target of resentment. The model minority label has transformed into a double-edged sword, and the rising power of India has added a new dimension to the challenges they face. The comparison to the historical experiences of Jewish people serves as a sobering reminder of the dangers of allowing prejudice to go unchecked.

The path forward is not to retreat into insularity but to double down on cultural exchange and engagement. By sharing their stories and showcasing the richness and diversity of their heritage, Indian immigrants can challenge the stereotypes and build a future where they are not just tolerated for their economic contributions but are truly valued as integral members of the societies they have chosen to call home.

Source: Original article

For Indian-American Sikhs in ICE Detention, Faith Offers Hope

Simran Singh’s weekly visits to the Mesa Verde ICE Detention Center provide Sikh detainees with essential articles of faith, fostering hope and connection amid their struggles for asylum in the U.S.

Every Thursday, 33-year-old insurance broker Simran Singh embarks on a mission from his home in Bakersfield, California. He fills his car with essential items, stopping at an Indian grocery store for Punjabi-language newspapers and then at a gurdwara to collect around 50 servings of prashad, a traditional sweet pudding made for devotees.

His destination is the Mesa Verde ICE Detention Center, a stark beige structure surrounded by metal fences topped with barbed wire. After checking in and receiving a visitor badge, Singh is escorted to the cafeteria, where he spends the next ninety minutes meeting with approximately sixty Sikh detainees. He distributes cloth dastaars, maalas (prayer beads), karas (metal bracelets), Nitnem Gutke (prayer books), and Punjabi newspapers, engaging in conversations that offer a sense of community and support.

In the midst of the despair surrounding asylum cases, transfers, and fears of deportation, the items Singh brings symbolize a glimmer of hope. “It is heartwarming to see,” Singh reflects. “Now they know that there is someone who knows they exist, that they’re not just a number in a facility.”

Singh’s initiative began in 2016, sparked by his curiosity while volunteering with a Sikh community organization to register voters at the gurdwara. With immigration a hot topic during Donald Trump’s first presidential campaign, he discovered the nearby detention center and decided to investigate. To his surprise, he found three Sikh detainees at Mesa Verde. After completing a volunteer course, he began visiting them regularly.

Over the next four years, Singh’s visits became a weekly routine, coinciding with a significant increase in the number of South Asian detainees, particularly Sikhs from India. Between 2016 and 2020, the number of Sikh detainees rose from three to 40, many detained immediately after crossing the border. This trend mirrored a rise in apprehensions of Indian nationals by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) during that period, peaking at 71,781 encounters in 2023.

Many of these individuals hail from Punjab, Haryana, and Gujarat, fleeing financial insecurity or political persecution. Their journeys to the U.S. often involve perilous travel by air, water, and foot, only to face detention upon arrival.

Language and cultural barriers further complicate the asylum process for South Asian immigrants. Fresno-based immigration attorney Deepak Singh Ahluwalia highlights the challenges posed by language discrepancies, noting that many Border Patrol officers lack the ability to communicate effectively with asylum-seekers. “The language barrier is huge, it’s immense,” he said. “In 10 years, I’ve met one CBP officer who spoke Punjabi!”

For Sikhs, the issue of their articles of faith, particularly turbans, has become contentious during border crossings. Harminder Singh, a 36-year-old Sikh truck driver, fled political persecution in Punjab in 2022. After a grueling four-month journey, he and his family were detained at the San Luis, Arizona border. Despite his pleas to keep his turban on, Border Patrol officers forced him to remove it, leading to a traumatic experience that left him feeling humiliated in front of his children.

After being separated from his family and suffering from physical distress, Harminder was released two days later, only to find himself without his turban. His experience is not isolated; reports indicate that at least 64 Sikh immigrants had their turbans confiscated at the Arizona border around August 2022. Following advocacy from civil rights groups, CBP issued guidance to prevent unnecessary confiscation of Sikh articles of faith, though reports have surfaced of continued issues.

Singh emphasizes the importance of providing detainees with their articles of faith, as many do not have access to them while in detention. The facility’s budget typically covers basic items like books and games, but often neglects the religious needs of detainees. To bridge this gap, Singh has relied on his network to source and deliver essential items.

He has successfully procured Nitnem Gutke, dastaars, karas, and maalas through various means, including donations from family members and local businesses. During his visits, he encourages detainees to share maalas with fellow inmates, fostering connections among individuals from diverse backgrounds.

In addition to delivering articles of faith, Singh has organized kirtan dewans—Sikh devotional concerts—at various ICE facilities, promoting cultural exchange and understanding among detainees. His efforts have expanded significantly, with Singh supplying thousands of religious items to 18 detention centers across multiple states since July 2025.

The COVID-19 pandemic temporarily halted Singh’s visits, but he resumed them in June 2025, witnessing a surge in detainee numbers as restrictions lifted. On a recent visit, he met with 65 South Asian detainees, the highest number he has encountered to date, with more than half identifying as Sikh.

Singh notes a troubling trend: many detainees are now being apprehended during routine ICE check-ins rather than immediately after crossing the border. “They don’t want to miss these visits, so ICE is having these immigrants walk into what ends up being a trap,” he explains.

For many detainees, Singh serves as their only connection to the outside world. Phone calls to family are prohibitively expensive, and the emotional toll of detention is profound. During his visits, detainees often share their stories of hardship and uncertainty, revealing the psychological strain of their circumstances.

Singh acknowledges the difficulty of not knowing the outcomes of the detainees he meets. “I just show up and either they’re going to be there or they’re not going to be there. I don’t get that closure or find out what happens once they’re gone,” he says.

As the number of detainees at the Mesa Verde Detention Center continues to rise, Singh remains committed to providing support and resources to those in need. “It’s a big morale booster,” he states. “They have a way to keep their identity in a place where everyone’s wearing the same clothes, waking up at the same time, following the same schedule, day in, day out for months and years at a time. It’s like putting a bandage on something that requires a major operation.”

Source: Original article

Georgia Worksite Raid Highlights Impact of Trump’s Immigration Policies

On September 4, a massive immigration raid at a Hyundai plant in Georgia resulted in the detention of at least 475 workers, highlighting the chaos stemming from the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

On September 4, law enforcement agents from various state and federal agencies, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), conducted a sweeping immigration raid at a Hyundai manufacturing facility in southeastern Georgia. This operation reportedly led to the detention of at least 475 workers, many of whom were South Korean nationals, including some individuals with legal status. This event marks the largest worksite raid in recent history.

In the aftermath of the raid, the American Immigration Council issued a statement addressing the implications of such actions. Michelle Lapointe, the legal director at the American Immigration Council, who is based in the Atlanta area, emphasized the negative impact of these raids on communities and families.

“These raids don’t make anyone safer. They terrorize workers, destabilize communities, and push families into chaos,” Lapointe stated. “This historic raid may make dramatic headlines, but it does nothing to fix the problems in our broken immigration system: a lack of legal pathways and a misguided focus on punishing workers and families who pose no threat to our communities. Raiding worksites isn’t reform; it’s political theater at the expense of families, communities, and our economy.”

Nan Wu, the director of research at the American Immigration Council, also spoke about the broader implications of such raids. “Immigrant workers are the backbone of our economy, filling critical labor gaps in manufacturing and beyond. Nationwide, 5.7% of manufacturing workers are undocumented, and here in Georgia, they make up 6.7% of that workforce,” Wu noted. “Raiding worksites instead of fixing our pathways to legal employment is cruel, wasteful, and deeply shortsighted. The chilling effect of these raids will make it less likely that people will show up to work, deepening labor shortages and hitting businesses hard at an already precarious economic moment.”

Experts from the American Immigration Council are available to discuss why worksite raids are counterproductive and harmful, as well as to propose smarter, more effective immigration solutions.

Source: Original article

What H-1B Visa Holders Should Do If They Receive a Notice to Appear

Laid-off H-1B visa holders in the U.S. face new challenges as Notices to Appear in immigration court are issued before the grace period ends, creating uncertainty for many families.

H-1B visa holders who lose their jobs and receive a Notice to Appear (NTA) in immigration court are navigating a complex and evolving legal landscape. Typically, laid-off H-1B workers are granted a 60-day grace period to secure new employment or change their visa status. However, recent reports indicate a troubling trend: NTAs are being issued before this grace period has expired, leading to increased anxiety and uncertainty for many visa holders and their families.

According to the Pew Research Center, approximately 400,000 H-1B visas were approved in 2024, with 73% of those going to workers from India. Most of these visas are renewals, highlighting the significant reliance on this visa category among Indian nationals.

To gain insight into the current situation, India Currents spoke with Sameer Khedekar, Founder and Managing Attorney at Vanguard Visa Law in California. The following discussion, lightly edited for clarity, sheds light on the recent changes affecting H-1B visa holders.

Sameer began by outlining the broader implications of recent changes in the H-1B visa process. He noted that a February memo from USCIS indicated that NTAs would be issued to anyone lacking lawful status in the U.S. Initially, this seemed reasonable, but by July, reports emerged of H-1B workers being laid off and subsequently receiving NTAs.

When an H-1B worker leaves their job, whether through a layoff or voluntarily, the employer is required to notify USCIS. This notification triggers the issuance of an NTA, regardless of the employee’s subsequent actions to maintain their status, such as applying for a new job or changing their visa status.

Historically, H-1B holders have enjoyed a 60-day grace period to seek new employment or change their status. This grace period has been uniformly granted since its implementation in 2016. However, the current administration’s approach appears to be eroding this safety net, as NTAs are being issued without consideration of the grace period.

Sameer explained that when an H-1B holder leaves their employer, the withdrawal of their H-1B status often triggers an automatic NTA. This occurs regardless of whether the individual has taken steps to apply for a new H-1B, H-4, or B-1/B-2 visa. Consequently, many individuals find themselves in immigration court, even when they have acted to preserve their status.

While some cases have been dismissed in court due to applicants demonstrating that they maintained their status, the outcomes can vary significantly depending on the judge and the court. The recent wave of layoffs from major companies like Microsoft and Intel has compounded the issue, creating chaos for many H-1B holders.

For those facing layoffs, it is crucial to understand the timing of when their employer will withdraw their H-1B status. Sameer recommended that employees proactively discuss with their employers the possibility of delaying the withdrawal until after the grace period has ended. This conversation, while potentially awkward, is essential given the current climate.

Sameer also highlighted the emotional toll this situation takes on families, particularly those who have lived in the U.S. for many years. The fear of separation due to immigration proceedings is palpable, especially among families with children who have grown up in the U.S.

In terms of legal options, Sameer emphasized the importance of taking action during the grace period. If a visa holder is unable to secure employment within the 60-day window, leaving the country before an NTA is issued is the safest course of action. This approach allows for a case dismissal if the individual departs before the NTA is formally issued.

For those who do receive an NTA, Sameer advised that filing for a change of status to H-4 or applying for a B-1/B-2 visa can help maintain legal status. Even if a job offer is pending, having an application on file can be sufficient to convince the courts to dismiss the case.

Sameer also addressed the challenges faced by non-working spouses and children of H-1B holders. The anxiety surrounding potential deportation can be overwhelming, especially for families who have built their lives in the U.S. Fortunately, many individuals have successfully navigated the legal system to maintain their status, but the process remains fraught with uncertainty.

As the situation continues to evolve, Sameer encouraged H-1B visa holders to remain vigilant and proactive. Monitoring the status of their visa and seeking legal counsel tailored to their individual circumstances is essential. Engaging a personal immigration attorney, rather than relying on company resources, can provide the necessary support in navigating these complex issues.

In conclusion, the current landscape for H-1B visa holders is marked by uncertainty and anxiety. As the government tightens regulations and issues NTAs more frequently, it is crucial for visa holders to understand their rights and options. By taking proactive steps and seeking legal guidance, individuals can better navigate this challenging environment.

Source: Original article

Moving Can Expose Personal Data to Scammers, Experts Warn

Moving can expose seniors to identity theft and scams as data brokers collect personal information to sell to criminals, making it crucial to take steps to protect one’s data.

For many seniors, moving and downsizing can symbolize a fresh start. With a smaller home and less upkeep, it often opens the door to new friendships in retirement communities. However, this transition can also make them vulnerable to identity theft and scams.

Each year, over 3 million elderly Americans relocate, and unfortunately, this demographic is increasingly targeted by scammers. One individual shared her experience of moving her mother into an assisted living facility, only to have her fall victim to two scams before the packing was even completed. The scammers had quickly obtained her mother’s new address and exploited it.

This scenario is not uncommon. Research indicates that more than 70% of cybercrimes are linked to exposed personal data. The act of moving can significantly increase this exposure, as real estate listings, address changes, and moving company records are often collected by data brokers. These brokers then sell this information to criminals, creating a perfect storm for potential scams.

When individuals buy, sell, or change their address, their personal information can spread across numerous systems. Data brokers collect and bundle this information, making it readily available for purchase. This situation is particularly concerning for seniors, who may be preoccupied with the logistics of moving while their personal data is being targeted.

As seniors unpack boxes in their new homes, criminals are simultaneously unpacking their data. This duality highlights the importance of taking proactive measures to safeguard personal information during the moving process.

Data brokers automatically update their files when individuals move, meaning that new addresses, phone numbers, and property transaction details can appear on people-search websites almost instantaneously. Once this information is publicly accessible, scammers can easily acquire it.

The good news is that individuals do not have to tackle the challenge of removing their data from brokers alone. Personal data removal services can assist by contacting data brokers, requesting the removal of personal information, and ensuring that new details do not reappear online. This service functions similarly to hiring a moving company, but for personal data.

While no service can guarantee complete removal of personal data from the internet, utilizing a data removal service can be a wise investment. These services actively monitor and systematically erase personal information from numerous websites, providing peace of mind and reducing the risk of scammers cross-referencing data from breaches with information available on the dark web.

When changing addresses, it is essential to use the official USPS website or visit a local post office. Some third-party sites may appear to offer convenient services but often collect additional data that can be resold. By going directly to the source, individuals can minimize unnecessary exposure of sensitive information.

Additionally, selling a home involves more than just disclosing the price. Personal details such as names, previous addresses, and even photographs of the property can become part of the public record. It is advisable to consult with realtors about what information is automatically disclosed and whether any details can be limited or redacted. Being selective about what is shared can significantly reduce one’s personal footprint tied to a property.

Moving also presents an excellent opportunity to declutter. However, it is crucial not to simply discard old bills, medical statements, or financial records. Instead, these documents should be shredded to prevent identity theft. Despite the perception that dumpster diving is outdated, it remains a tactic used by scammers to obtain personal data. A reliable shredder can help ensure that sensitive information does not fall into the wrong hands.

While it may be tempting to share a “Goodbye, old house!” photo on social media, it is wise to resist this urge. Publicly announcing a move can inform scammers about when a home is empty and reveal a new address. Instead, sharing this news privately with family and close friends can enhance safety.

Another effective strategy for protecting personal information is to freeze credit. This action prevents new credit accounts from being opened in an individual’s name, even if scammers have access to personal details such as an address. Freezing credit is a straightforward process that can be done at no cost with all three major credit bureaus: Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. This measure creates a robust barrier against identity theft, allowing individuals to lift the freeze when necessary.

Moving should be a time of excitement and new beginnings, not an invitation for scammers to exploit vulnerabilities. By taking proactive steps to protect personal data, individuals can significantly reduce their risk of falling victim to fraud. Simple actions, such as shredding documents and freezing credit, can provide essential layers of protection. Ultimately, safeguarding personal information allows seniors to embark on their next chapter with confidence and peace of mind.

Source: Original article

Communities Show Solidarity With Immigrants in the U.S.

Community groups across the U.S. are actively resisting deportation policies and advocating for immigrant rights, emphasizing the vital role immigrants play in the economy.

In response to the Trump administration’s stringent deportation policies, community groups throughout the United States are rallying to advocate for immigrant rights and protections. Their message is clear: “No human being is illegal.”

These powerful slogans resonate deeply within the immigrant rights movement, echoing the sentiments of community activists across the nation. The deportation of immigrants has surged since the Trump administration took office, with reports detailing the shocking deportation of 104 Indians on a military plane in February 2025. To date, nearly 400 Indians have faced deportation.

Over recent months, agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have detained several student activists involved in peaceful protests against the destruction of Gaza. The administration has invoked the 18th-century Alien Enemies Act to deport nearly 300 immigrants to the Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo (CECOT) in El Salvador, a facility notorious for its harsh conditions.

ICE raids have targeted immigrant communities in various towns and cities across America. In Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts, local residents banded together to support their neighbors and friends, demanding due process in the face of these aggressive actions.

Organizations dedicated to immigrant rights, along with legal advocates and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), are working tirelessly to halt deportations, and some courts have issued favorable rulings. The current U.S. population of approximately 342 million includes 53.3 million immigrants, with around 15 million classified as undocumented, often referred to disparagingly as illegal immigrants, according to a January report from the Center for Immigration Studies.

Activists are raising critical questions about who truly contributes to the wealth of the U.S. economy and performs the most challenging jobs. Immigrant workers are recognized as the backbone of the economy, a sentiment echoed at a recent seminar titled “Union and Community Activists Unite for Immigrant Rights,” organized by the Boston South Asian Coalition at the Cambridge Community Center in Massachusetts. The discussions held at this event remain relevant as the issues surrounding immigrant rights continue to escalate.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the construction industry employs approximately eight million workers, with 1.6 million of them being immigrants, representing 20% of the workforce. A report from the University of Michigan highlights that in cities like New York, immigrant workers make up 63% of construction workers, with 40% being undocumented. Furthermore, undocumented immigrant workers face a significantly higher incidence of work-related injuries, with rates 30% higher than those of native-born workers.

The agricultural sector also relies heavily on immigrant labor, contributing 0.8% to the GDP, which amounts to $222 billion. The combined agriculture and food-related industries account for 5.5% of the GDP, totaling $1.53 trillion, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis in 2023. Remarkably, 73% of farm workers are immigrants, with half of them being undocumented.

In the care economy, which includes roles such as nannies, cleaners, and personal care assistants, an estimated 300,000 workers are undocumented, as reported by the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. David Grabowski, a professor of health care policy at Harvard Medical School, noted that foreign-born workers constitute over 30% of non-direct care staff in long-term care facilities, emphasizing their crucial role in maintaining quality care.

The meatpacking industry, known for its hazardous working conditions, employs over 500,000 workers across the country. This sector heavily relies on H-2A and H-2B visa programs to fill jobs, as reported by the American Immigration Council. A 2024 report by the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) revealed that 5,486 workers died on the job in 2022, with 1,248 of those fatalities involving Latino workers, 60% of whom were immigrants.

Community leaders and union activists are calling for organized efforts to combat the attacks on immigrants and all workers. Amrita Dani from the Boston Teachers Union emphasized the importance of collective action, stating, “Teachers and other organized workers can and should organize without fear with members of the community.”

She highlighted the legacy of International Workers Day, honoring the millions of immigrants who participated in demonstrations in May 2006. Evan MacKay, a Boston-based labor leader, pointed out that while contracts can secure victories, active enforcement by the workers is essential to ensure that legal agreements translate into real protections.

Heloisa Galvao, Executive Director of the Brazilian Women’s Group in Boston, shared the growing fears within the Brazilian community, where individuals are hesitant to attend doctor’s appointments, go to work, or send their children to school. This panic has resulted in devastating income losses, leading to increased rates of homelessness and food insecurity.

Galvao advocates for collective action to protect immigrant workers and their families, striving to create a just world for all. The rallying cries of “Hum Ladenge aur Aum Jeetenge!” (We will fight and win!) and “Si Si Puede” (Yes, yes, we can!) reflect the determination of union activists and community organizers from diverse backgrounds to ensure the safety and rights of immigrants.

As the fight for immigrant rights continues, it is clear that solidarity among workers and families is essential, regardless of immigration status. The ongoing efforts of community groups and activists highlight the critical role immigrants play in the fabric of American society.

Source: Original article

Scammers Exploit DocuSign Emails to Facilitate Apple Pay Fraud

Scammers are increasingly using fake DocuSign emails to impersonate Apple Pay transactions, aiming to steal personal information through fraudulent phone numbers and deceptive receipts.

Phishing scams are becoming more sophisticated, with one of the latest tactics involving fake DocuSign emails that appear to show charges from reputable companies like Apple. At first glance, these fraudulent messages seem legitimate, often including a receipt, order ID, and even a support number. However, instead of connecting recipients to Apple or another legitimate service, that number leads directly to scammers.

These phishing emails typically masquerade as billing receipts for recent Apple Pay purchases. They often claim that a subscription has been charged to the recipient’s account and prompt them to call a phone number if they do not recognize the charge. To enhance their credibility, the emails frequently reference well-known brands such as Apple, Netflix, and Expedia, or even local service providers.

Some of these emails include a “DocuSign” link accompanied by a security code, creating the illusion that recipients must access a file to confirm the transaction. In reality, neither Apple nor any of these other companies sends billing receipts through DocuSign, which serves as a significant red flag.

Another telltale sign of these scams is the sender’s email address. Scammers often use addresses that contain odd characters, such as a Cyrillic “B” replacing the “B” in “Billing,” which helps them bypass spam filters.

The scam is designed to catch individuals off guard and pressure them into acting quickly. The email claims that the recipient’s Apple Pay account has been charged for a subscription or purchase, providing an order ID, a charge amount, and a DocuSign link that supposedly contains a receipt or confirmation file. To make the message even more convincing, some versions include a security code to “unlock” the document.

The email also lists a phone number and urges recipients to call if the charge was not authorized. Unfortunately, that number is central to the scam. Instead of reaching Apple, Netflix, or whichever company the email claims to represent, individuals end up speaking with a scammer posing as a support agent.

Once on the call, the scammer attempts to convince the victim that their account has been compromised or that the payment must be reversed immediately. From there, the tactics can vary. Scammers may ask for personal information, such as Apple ID, banking details, or credit card numbers. They might pressure victims to download remote access software under the guise of “fixing” the issue on their device. In some cases, they even demand payment for fictitious account protection or reversal fees.

The ultimate goal of these scams is consistent: to gain enough access to lock victims out of their accounts, steal sensitive data, or initiate fraudulent transactions. What makes these scams particularly dangerous is their combination of multiple red flags within a single message: a realistic-looking receipt, official logos, a DocuSign link, urgent language, and a phone number that appears to be the quickest way to resolve the issue.

Scammers rely on individuals reacting quickly without questioning the details. However, there are several practical steps that people can take to protect themselves from falling victim to these schemes.

First, be wary of email addresses that closely resemble official ones but contain subtle differences, such as extra letters or swapped characters. If the email does not originate from an official domain like @apple.com, it is likely illegitimate.

Second, remember that Apple, Netflix, and other major services do not send billing statements through DocuSign. If a receipt arrives in this format, it is safe to assume it is a scam. Legitimate receipts always come directly from the service provider.

Additionally, exercise caution with any links in suspicious emails. Scammers often disguise harmful links behind text that appears legitimate, such as “View Document” or “Review Payment.” Hovering over the link without clicking can reveal the true web address. If it does not match the official company domain, do not click on it.

Installing strong antivirus software on all devices is another effective way to safeguard against malicious links. This protection can alert users to phishing emails and ransomware scams, helping to keep personal information and digital assets secure.

Instead of relying solely on the email, confirm whether a charge actually exists. Apple users can review purchases directly from the Settings app under their Apple ID. If nothing appears, the receipt is likely fake. Other services offer similar methods for checking transaction history.

Finally, limiting the information available about oneself online can make it more challenging for scammers to craft convincing attacks. Consider removing old accounts that are no longer in use, restricting personal details shared on social media, and utilizing data removal services when possible. This approach reduces the risk of having your name, email, or phone number targeted in scams like this.

While no service can guarantee complete removal of personal data from the internet, data removal services can actively monitor and systematically erase personal information from numerous websites. This proactive approach can provide peace of mind and significantly reduce the risk of being targeted by scammers.

Phishing scams are constantly evolving, and the DocuSign Apple Pay ruse is just one of many. The best defense is to maintain a healthy dose of skepticism. If something feels off, take a moment to stop, double-check, and confirm details through official channels. Scammers thrive on panic and quick reactions. By slowing down and verifying information, individuals can better protect themselves from falling into these traps.

Source: Original article

Young Poet Receives 2025 Award for Creative Writing on Refugees

Eleven-year-old Luu Ly from New York City won the 2025 Celebrate America Creative Writing Contest for her poignant poem honoring her grandparents’ journey as refugees from Vietnam.

WASHINGTON, DC, June 24, 2025—The American Immigration Council has awarded Luu Ly, an 11-year-old student at the Chapin School in New York City, the prestigious 28th annual Celebrate America Creative Writing Contest award. This contest celebrates the immigrant experience through the lens of young writers.

Luu’s poem, titled “American Poem,” tells the compelling story of her grandparents’ escape from Vietnam during the war. It details their journey as refugees who eventually settled in a small town in Louisiana. Initially facing hostility and suspicion from their new community, Luu’s grandmother became one of the first Vietnamese American teachers in the area. Through her dedication and the sharing of her family’s spring roll recipe, she fostered a sense of belonging and connection among her neighbors. Luu continues to honor her grandmother’s legacy by making spring rolls and embracing her grandmother’s motto: “roll forward, always forward.”

In addition to her poetic talents, Luu describes herself as a “proud New Yorker with a foodie’s heart.” She enjoys exploring diverse cuisines and sharing culinary experiences with family and friends, reflecting the values of community and connection that her grandmother instilled in her.

The Celebrate America Creative Writing Contest invites fifth graders from across the nation to reflect on immigration and the importance of being a welcoming society. In a climate where many Americans are increasingly critical of policies that prioritize mass deportation and detention of immigrants, the American Immigration Council is committed to promoting educational initiatives that encourage a more inclusive vision for the United States.

Luu received her award during the 2025 Immigration Impact Reception, hosted by the American Immigration Council on June 20 in Aurora, Colorado. The contest is made possible through the generous support of the MurthyNAYAK Foundation.

Luu, along with her family and representatives from the American Immigration Council, are available to discuss the contest and her winning poem.

Source: Original article

Senate Approves Significant Funding for Immigration Enforcement and Deportation

The U.S. Senate has approved a budget reconciliation bill that allocates unprecedented funding for immigration enforcement, while simultaneously jeopardizing healthcare access for millions of Americans.

Washington, D.C., July 1, 2025 — On July 1, the U.S. Senate passed a budget reconciliation bill that includes an unprecedented allocation of funds for immigration detention and enforcement. This decision comes at a time when millions of Americans face the loss of their healthcare coverage.

The bill was passed with a tie-breaking vote from Vice President JD Vance, earmarking approximately $170 billion for immigration and border enforcement-related provisions. This funding represents a significant increase in the federal budget for immigration enforcement.

Among the key allocations in the bill are $45 billion designated for the construction of new immigration detention centers, including facilities for families. This funding marks a staggering 265 percent increase in the annual budget for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and is 62 percent larger than the entire federal prison system budget. The new funding could result in the daily detention of at least 116,000 non-citizens.

Additionally, the bill allocates $29.9 billion for ICE’s enforcement and deportation operations, effectively tripling the agency’s annual budget. This increase in funding for enforcement comes at a time when between 12 million and 17 million people are at risk of losing their healthcare coverage.

The legislation also caps the number of immigration judges at 800, despite the ongoing record backlogs in the immigration court system. Furthermore, it includes $46.6 billion for border wall construction, which is more than three times the amount spent by the Trump administration during its first term. Critics argue that the wall has failed to contribute meaningfully to border management strategies.

Another notable provision is a new $10 billion fund intended to reimburse the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for costs associated with “safeguarding” U.S. borders against illegal entry. This funding constitutes nearly 50 percent of the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) budget for fiscal year 2024. However, unlike standard budget allocations, this fund lacks strict guidelines, potentially allowing CBP to utilize the funds with minimal oversight.

Overall, this legislation marks the largest investment in detention and deportation in U.S. history. Critics contend that this policy choice does not address the systemic failures of the immigration system and instead exacerbates issues, causing harm and chaos while tearing families apart.

“This bill will deprive 12 to 17 million Americans of basic healthcare while investing unprecedented levels of funding in the president’s increasingly unpopular mass deportation agenda,” said Nayna Gupta, policy director at the American Immigration Council. “At a time when polls show more Americans rejecting mass detention and deportation, this bill ignores what Americans want and doubles down on punitive policies that do nothing to address the real problems in our immigration system, including court backlogs, a lack of legal pathways to citizenship, and a broken U.S. asylum system.”

The enforcement-heavy provisions of the bill come at the expense of necessary investments in asylum processing, legal representation, community-based alternatives to detention, and support for local governments and nonprofits that assist new arrivals.

“Throwing billions at detention centers and enforcement agents is short-sighted. Instead, we should be investing in a system aimed at welcoming immigrants who contribute billions to our economy,” stated Adriel Orozco, senior policy counsel at the American Immigration Council. “We don’t need more jail beds and indiscriminate raids. We need balanced solutions that strengthen due process and keep families together.”

The bill will now return to the House of Representatives, where members are expected to vote on final passage later this week. Experts from the American Immigration Council are available to provide further insights into the specifics of the bill, including its implications for immigration courts, border funding, unaccompanied children, and the increase in ICE agents.

Source: Original article

Trump Administration Proposes Four-Year Limit for Foreign Students in the U.S.

The Trump administration has proposed a rule to limit the duration of stay for international students in the U.S. to four years, aiming to address visa misuse and enhance oversight.

The Trump administration has announced a proposed rule that would impose a four-year limit on the length of time international students can remain in the United States for their studies. This rule, set to be published on Thursday, is part of an effort to curb what the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) describes as “visa abuse” and to improve the agency’s ability to vet and oversee foreign students.

According to the DHS, foreign students have taken advantage of U.S. policies, remaining enrolled in educational programs indefinitely, which the agency refers to as becoming “forever students.” A spokesperson for the DHS stated, “For too long, past Administrations have allowed foreign students and other visa holders to remain in the U.S. virtually indefinitely, posing safety risks, costing untold amounts of taxpayer dollars, and disadvantaging U.S. citizens.”

The proposed rule aims to end this practice by limiting the duration of stay for certain visa holders, thereby easing the federal government’s burden in overseeing foreign students and their immigration history. Since 1978, holders of F visas, which are designated for foreign students, have been allowed to remain in the U.S. for the “duration of status,” meaning as long as they are enrolled as full-time students.

Under the new proposal, foreign students and exchange visitors would be allowed to stay in the U.S. only for the duration of their academic program, capped at four years. This duration is typically shorter than the time required to pursue advanced degrees beyond a bachelor’s degree.

In addition to the changes for students, the proposed rule would also affect foreign journalists, who would initially be admitted for up to 240 days. They could apply for an extension of up to another 240 days, but their stay would not exceed the length of their assignment.

The DHS believes that requiring regular assessments for foreigners wishing to remain in the U.S. for extended periods will facilitate better oversight and reduce the number of individuals in the country on visas. However, the proposed rule has raised concerns among educational institutions and advocates for international students.

International students often pay higher tuition rates and have limited access to scholarships, which means that this new rule could have significant financial implications for U.S. colleges and universities. Fanta Aw, executive director and CEO of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, expressed concern about the potential impact, stating, “It will certainly act as an additional deterrent to international students choosing to study in the United States, to the detriment of American economies, innovation, and global competitiveness.”

As the proposed rule moves forward, it is expected to spark debate over the balance between national security and the benefits of international education in the U.S.

Source: Original article

Ilia: Young Russian Dissident Endures Prolonged Detention

Ilia, a 24-year-old Russian dissident, faces prolonged detention in the U.S. after fleeing persecution in his homeland, despite winning his asylum case.

Ilia, a 24-year-old pro-democracy activist, recently escaped a perilous situation in Russia, only to find himself in a detention facility in the United States. He believed that the U.S. would offer him refuge from the oppressive regime he fled, but instead, he was taken into custody upon arrival.

“I fled Russia because of increasingly harsh laws, because of a government that started persecuting me for my political views and my sexual orientation,” Ilia explains. “I believed the United States would help me.”

Ilia’s activism intensified following the arrest of prominent opposition leader Alexei Navalny in January 2021. Outraged by the government’s actions, he participated in nationwide protests and distributed “Free Navalny” flyers in Krasnodar, the southern Russian city where he was studying at university. The government’s response to these protests was severe, with thousands detained and many subjected to violence by law enforcement. Tragically, Navalny died under suspicious circumstances in a Russian prison camp in February 2024.

By that time, Ilia had already fled Russia, having received threats from Russian intelligence officials. As a nonbinary individual, he faced heightened risks under Putin’s increasingly repressive laws, where simply existing as he does could lead to persecution or imprisonment.

Ilia made his way to Mexico, meticulously following the asylum process. He spent eight months near the border, waiting for a CBP One appointment. In May 2024, when he finally arrived for his scheduled appointment, he was unexpectedly taken into custody and placed in detention at a facility in Louisiana notorious for its abusive conditions.

“I applied for asylum because I believed the U.S. would help me,” Ilia recounts. “But once I was sent to Winn Correctional Center in Louisiana, I faced horrible treatment. The way officers treat detainees is awful. They yell at them, sometimes go as far as to discriminate, make racist remarks, and even subject detainees to sexual abuse.” Despite filing multiple complaints during his year-long detention, Ilia reports that they have gone unanswered.

Although Ilia was detained before the Trump administration took office, he has experienced the effects of its hardline immigration policies firsthand. In March 2025, he won his asylum case after an immigration judge reviewed 900 pages of evidence, including threats from Russian intelligence and letters of support from witnesses to his activism. At this juncture, Ilia should have been released from detention and allowed to start rebuilding his life in the U.S. However, the Trump administration has continued to deny his release.

Ilia has no criminal history and poses no threat to his community. His asylum case was granted based on the fact that he was targeted for advocating the very democratic ideals of free speech that the United States was founded upon. Yet, he continues to endure unnecessary suffering, even after being deemed worthy of protection.

“The situation [in the detention centers] has gotten worse,” Ilia states, noting that the facility where he is held has been operating at maximum capacity since the Trump administration took office. “People have started to realize there’s no way out, that they’re just waiting here to be deported, and they’re losing their minds.”

Source: Original article

Scammers Target Individuals Without Social Media Presence, Experts Warn

Scammers are increasingly targeting seniors who avoid social media, using public records to steal personal information and money.

Many seniors often believe that by avoiding social media and the internet, they are safe from scammers. However, this assumption is misleading. Even those who have never posted online can become victims of fraud.

Scammers can gather a wealth of information about individuals, including their age, home address, names of relatives, property values, and even details about personal losses. This information is often obtained through public records that are digitized and sold, allowing fraudsters to exploit it for their gain.

The reality is that personal information can become public record without any action from the individual. This is largely due to the operations of legal and governmental systems that automatically make certain details accessible. Common sources of this information include obituaries, real estate filings, and probate records.

While these records may seem innocuous on their own, when combined, they create a comprehensive profile of an individual’s life. One particularly cruel scam that has emerged is known as the bereavement scam. In this scheme, scammers monitor local obituaries to identify individuals who have recently lost a loved one. They then reach out to these individuals, posing as funeral homes, grief counselors, or charities, using real names and dates to lend authenticity to their claims.

During times of mourning, individuals are often more vulnerable and less guarded, making them prime targets for these types of scams. Scammers are aware of this emotional vulnerability and exploit it to steal money and personal information.

Even more troubling is the fact that scammers can continue to target the loved ones of deceased individuals long after their passing. They may contact relatives, offering free memorial services or financial products, preying on their grief and vulnerability. This exploitation is made possible by the personal data that has been exposed.

Many people do not realize that scammers typically do not sift through courthouse files themselves. Instead, they rely on data brokers—companies that specialize in collecting and selling personal information. These brokers gather data from various sources, including public records, online purchases, and even leaked information from data breaches.

The result is a detailed, searchable profile that can be sold to anyone willing to pay for it. Even if an individual has never engaged with social media, they may still have a ‘shadow profile’ created from information shared by others or from data breaches. This makes it easier for scammers to target them.

Fortunately, individuals are not entirely powerless against these threats. While it is impossible to eliminate public records, there are steps that can be taken to make it more difficult for scammers to access and misuse personal information. One effective strategy is to utilize data removal services, which actively monitor and remove personal information from various websites. While these services may come at a cost, they can provide peace of mind and significantly reduce the risk of identity theft.

By limiting the availability of personal information, individuals can decrease the likelihood of scammers cross-referencing data from breaches with publicly available information. This makes it harder for fraudsters to target them effectively.

It is essential to recognize that simply avoiding social media does not guarantee invisibility. Scammers do not need individuals to share their lives online; their offline activities can also be tracked and exploited. Public records, such as obituaries and property deeds, are transformed into data points that are sold to brokers and resold to scammers.

Protecting personal data is not solely about avoiding the internet; it is about actively managing and reducing the information that is already available. The less data that scammers can find, the more challenging it becomes for them to execute realistic and emotionally charged attacks. This is a crucial step in safeguarding one’s identity, finances, and retirement.

As concerns about data privacy continue to grow, many individuals believe it is time for government and companies to take stronger action to protect personal information. Engaging in discussions about data privacy can help raise awareness and promote change.

Source: Original article

Reform UK Plans To Deport 600,000 Asylum Seekers In New Crackdown

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has proposed a controversial plan to deport 600,000 asylum seekers, sparking criticism from various political and charitable organizations.

Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform UK, has unveiled a sweeping proposal aimed at addressing immigration in Britain. The plan includes the deportation of up to 600,000 asylum seekers and the withdrawal from key international treaties, including the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Farage’s announcement comes amid rising concerns over immigration, with the party asserting that such measures are necessary to prevent “civil disorder.” He characterized the current situation as an “invasion,” claiming that young men are illegally entering the country.

Dubbed Operation Restoring Justice, the initiative is presented as a solution to the ongoing issue of small boats crossing the English Channel. Farage stated that migrants intercepted at sea should be detained and subsequently deported. “If we do that, the boats will stop coming in days because there will be no incentive,” he asserted during a press conference.

The ECHR has been a critical component of U.K. human rights law, often utilized to halt the deportation of migrants deemed to be in the country illegally. Farage’s proposal to repeal the Human Rights Act and scrap international treaties that impede forced deportations has drawn significant criticism.

Labour Party Chairwoman Ellie Reeves responded to the announcement by emphasizing the lack of detail in the plan. “Today, we got none of those things, nor a single answer to the practical, financial, or ethical questions about how their plan would work,” she remarked.

This proposal follows weeks of small protests addressing mass migration and crimes associated with some asylum seekers. In 2024, Britain received a record 108,100 asylum applications, with many coming from countries such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, and Bangladesh.

Polling data indicates that immigration has surpassed economic concerns as the top issue for voters. Despite holding only four seats in Parliament, Reform UK is currently leading in surveys regarding voting intentions.

Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook dismissed the proposals as “a series of gimmicks” that would ultimately prove ineffective. Critics, including various charities, argue that the plan represents a significant departure from Britain’s human rights commitments.

As the debate continues, the implications of such a drastic immigration policy remain a contentious topic within British politics.

Source: Original article

Axel, DACA Recipient, Works to Protect His Community

Axel Herrera, a DACA recipient in North Carolina, faces increasing challenges as local police checkpoints instill fear in his community, prompting him to take action for those affected by immigration policies.

Since the election of President Trump, Axel Herrera has witnessed a troubling rise in local police traffic checkpoints throughout his North Carolina community. Although Axel, a recipient of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), has legal protection from deportation, many of his friends and family members have been detained or deported following random traffic stops. This reality has left numerous undocumented individuals in his community living in constant fear. “It’s creating a hostile environment,” Axel states. “It’s pretty clear what the government is trying to do.”

At 27 years old, Axel has called North Carolina home since he was seven, when his family fled Honduras in search of a better life. Receiving DACA status felt like a significant achievement for Axel and his family, allowing him to pursue opportunities that once seemed out of reach. He earned a scholarship to Duke University, becoming the first in his family to attend college, and graduated with multiple accolades, including a prestigious Congressional internship.

Following his graduation, Axel took on the role of civic engagement director for Mi Familia en Acción, a nonprofit organization dedicated to supporting Hispanic communities. Over the years, he has focused on registering citizens to vote, developing youth programs, and mentoring immigrants as they navigate educational and professional pathways. “All I ever wanted was to belong, and to give something back,” he reflects.

However, the current political climate has posed significant challenges for Axel and others like him. Ongoing legal battles surrounding DACA threaten to undermine his protection from deportation. Axel must renew his DACA status and employment authorization every two years. Although he managed to process his paperwork just before Trump took office, he remains uncertain about the future of his status when it expires in 2026. He is aware that some Dreamers are struggling to have their applications processed, and the Trump administration has already deported at least one DACA recipient under the pretense of an outstanding deportation order. “Right now, everything is up in the air,” Axel admits. “I’m very concerned about the future.”

One potential outcome is that courts may uphold DACA but revoke the work authorization for its recipients. Given this uncertainty, Axel has decided to step away from his hard-earned job and return to school. This fall, he will leave North Carolina for Yale University, where he has received a scholarship to study business and public policy. “It’s a great opportunity, but also a hedge against losing my status,” he explains. “If I lose my work authorization, then being a student might buy me some time and let me find a different path forward.”

Despite his current protections, Axel feels conflicted about leaving his community behind. Many of his friends and family are constantly communicating via WhatsApp, assessing police conditions whenever they step outside. He knows several young Venezuelans whose humanitarian parole was recently revoked, rendering them unable to work or study. Over the past six months, he has witnessed families torn apart by raids and deportations, or who are simply too afraid of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to pursue education. “I speak all the time with young people whose whole future is on the chopping block,” Axel shares.

Yet, even with his protections, Axel acknowledges a pervasive anxiety. “There’s this looming sense that things could get worse fast,” he says. Under the Trump administration, anti-immigrant sentiment and policies have become more entrenched. He is particularly concerned about the long-term implications of a new state law that mandates sheriffs to cooperate with ICE. Axel fears for his family’s future, stating, “After 20 years, we’re barely scratching the surface of dealing with our status issues. It never ends—and the Trump administration is rolling back so much of the progress we’ve made.”

Source: Original article

Flesh-Eating Parasite Case Reported in U.S. Traveler from Central America

The CDC has confirmed a case of human screwworm infection in Maryland linked to a Central American outbreak, but officials say the risk to public health is very low.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has confirmed the first case of a travel-associated human screwworm infection in Maryland. This case is linked to an outbreak in Central America, specifically in El Salvador.

Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for the Maryland Department of Health and Human Services, informed Fox News Digital that the patient had recently returned from El Salvador, a country currently experiencing a screwworm outbreak. The CDC collaborated with state health officials to investigate the case.

On August 4, the CDC confirmed the diagnosis after experts analyzed images of the larvae. Nixon emphasized that “the risk to public health in the United States from this introduction is very low.”

The New World screwworm, also known as myiasis, is a parasitic infestation caused by fly larvae that feed on living flesh. According to the CDC, individuals can contract myiasis when female flies deposit their eggs on or near a person’s wounds, nose, or ears. The condition can also be transmitted through ticks and mosquitoes that carry the fly’s eggs.

As the larvae grow and consume flesh, a lump develops in the infected person’s tissues. Health experts warn that if left untreated, myiasis can be fatal.

The CDC notes that myiasis is not common in the United States. Most cases diagnosed in the U.S. involve individuals who have traveled to tropical regions where the condition is more prevalent. Livestock, including cattle, sheep, and goats, are particularly susceptible to this parasite, making it a significant economic concern.

In recent reports, Reuters highlighted that the CDC had confirmed a case of New World screwworm in Maryland from a traveler returning from Guatemala. However, the discrepancy regarding the origin of the case remains unverified.

This summer, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins announced plans to establish a sterile fly facility in Texas aimed at combating the screwworm pest. A potential outbreak in Texas could lead to an estimated economic loss of $1.8 billion due to livestock deaths, labor costs, and medication expenses.

As of now, there have been no confirmed animal cases of screwworm infection in the U.S. this year. Fox News Digital has reached out to the USDA for further comments on the situation.

Source: Original article

Kaelyn Faces Debt to Prevent Partner’s Deportation to El Salvador

Kaelyn’s relationship with Yapa, an asylum seeker from Venezuela, has turned into a desperate struggle against deportation, leading her to incur significant debt for legal assistance.

Last summer, Kaelyn found herself at a Latin club in Wilmington, North Carolina, when a charming stranger asked her to dance. Initially reluctant, she was drawn in by his genuine nature. “If anyone else had asked, I would’ve said no, but Yapa is so genuine,” she recalls, using a pseudonym to protect his identity. What began with a dance blossomed into a deep friendship, one that would soon lead to a fight for Yapa’s freedom.

Yapa, who fled violence in Venezuela in 2022, had been navigating the complexities of the U.S. immigration system. He attended regular court hearings and held a legal work permit, working as a delivery driver while aspiring to obtain his commercial trucking license. As their relationship deepened, Kaelyn became an integral part of his life.

The couple spent Thanksgiving together, with Yapa bonding with Kaelyn’s family. He played pool with her father, and her sisters affectionately began calling Kaelyn “reina”—a term of endearment Yapa had used when they first met. They enjoyed movie nights, often watching the Fast and Furious series, and supported each other through language barriers with translation apps and Kaelyn’s college Spanish. Each morning, Yapa would text her to inquire about her day, solidifying their connection.

Before meeting Yapa, Kaelyn, originally from Connecticut, had rarely considered immigration policy. However, the political climate shifted dramatically after President Trump took office, leading her to worry about the fate of asylum seekers. “People would tell me, Oh, you’re overreacting,” she says. “This isn’t 1930s Germany. And I’d say, Yeah, but it’s starting to feel that way. Looking back now, while people were telling me I was being dramatic, I was actually underreacting.”

On February 22, 2025, everything changed when ICE agents unexpectedly arrived in the early morning hours as Yapa was heading to work. Without explanation, they handcuffed him, confiscating his ID and work permit—documents that have not been returned. They provided no details about his destination, only that he was being deported soon.

Kaelyn was devastated when she received a call from Yapa’s sister, informing her that ICE had “abducted” him. Yapa had stayed with Kaelyn until the night before, and she had hoped he would remain with her, feeling that as a U.S. citizen, she could better advocate for his rights. “I couldn’t explain it, but I was so emotional,” she reflects on their last night together. “And he told me, ‘There’s no reason for them to take me.’” Now, her worst fears had materialized, and they were uncertain of his whereabouts, but they knew they had to act quickly to save him.

By the time Kaelyn took action, Yapa had already been transported to Georgia’s Stewart Detention Center. It wasn’t until two months later, during his hearing, that ICE accused him of being affiliated with the Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua (TdA). “Shocking is not even the word,” Kaelyn recalls. “I was shaking.”

In a recent court filing, ICE admitted it has no evidence linking Yapa to any gang. However, a ruling from the Trump administration complicates matters for immigrants like Yapa, who have recently entered the country and are seeking release from detention. As a result, Yapa faces the prospect of spending up to a year in detention while his asylum case is processed, with little control over where he might be deported if he loses.

Kaelyn’s reaction to the gang allegations was visceral; she understood the gravity of the situation. The possibility of Yapa being sent to CECOT, a notorious prison in El Salvador known for its brutality, weighed heavily on her. “I thought, I’m going to have to live the rest of my life knowing he’s in there, and there’s nothing that we can do to get him out of there,” she says. The notion that he—and many other innocent individuals—could be imprisoned in what some describe as a modern-day concentration camp is an “atrocity,” she asserts.

The emotional and financial toll on Kaelyn has been immense. She has hired multiple attorneys for Yapa, accumulating significant debt due to legal fees. Meanwhile, Yapa remains nine hours away from Wilmington, with limited access to phone calls. In April, attorneys from the American Immigration Council and the ACLU took on part of Yapa’s case pro bono. By May, they secured a ruling that prevents the Trump administration from deporting Yapa to CECOT or anywhere else based on the unsubstantiated gang allegations without allowing him a fair chance to contest them. While this decision brought some relief, Kaelyn feels as though her life has been turned upside down.

Conversations with her sister now primarily revolve around updates on Yapa’s case and the latest developments in immigration policy. “We can’t be happy when there’s literally a member of our family who’s been taken from us,” she states. “I’ll never let this go. The administration thinks they’re sowing fear—but they’re creating activists. You can’t destroy someone’s life and expect us to stay quiet.”

Source: Original article

Beatriz: Immigrant Lawyer Advocating for Noncitizen Children’s Rights

Beatriz, a Venezuelan-American lawyer, advocates for unaccompanied minors facing immigration proceedings, navigating challenges posed by recent federal policies that threaten their legal representation.

In February 2025, Beatriz, a Venezuelan-American lawyer, received an unexpected order from the Interior Department directing her nonprofit organization to cease all operations. This directive significantly impacted her work representing unaccompanied minors—children navigating immigration proceedings without their parents.

These vulnerable youngsters often find themselves in precarious situations, living with relatives, placed in foster care, or held in detention centers. Many are as young as Beatriz was when she immigrated to the United States at the age of eight, fleeing violence and political persecution in Venezuela with her family.

Having witnessed her parents struggle through numerous meetings with immigration lawyers, Beatriz pursued a legal career to leverage her experiences in helping others. “I know how terrifying it is to be a child, alone and unable to speak English, trying to deal with authority figures,” she reflects. “That’s why I became a lawyer, to bring some empathy to that process.” Today, Beatriz is a proud U.S. citizen.

The sudden stop-work order disrupted her mission. “It came completely out of the blue—suddenly, everything changed,” Beatriz recalls. The cancellation of federal contracts forced organizations like hers to downsize, leaving those who remained to manage an overwhelming workload. “For those of us left, it was all hands on deck,” she adds.

Although the stop-work order was later lifted, legal disputes over the canceled contracts continue. The immediate fallout, however, has been severe. “In practical terms, it left children without anybody to advocate for them,” Beatriz explains. While barred from providing direct assistance, she and her colleagues attended immigration hearings to observe and take notes. In one particularly heart-wrenching case, Beatriz witnessed a confused six-year-old appear in court without any legal representation. “These young children are being brought to immigration hearings—speaking no English, and without a lawyer—to try to explain why they shouldn’t be deported,” she laments.

Compounding the challenges, immigration courts have increasingly adopted “rocket dockets,” scheduling multiple hearings in a single day. “They started fast-tracking kids through the system at a time when we weren’t able to accompany them,” Beatriz notes. “It’s just been an onslaught of attacks, specifically targeting unaccompanied children.”

Beatriz has also observed the chaos in children’s lives caused by the detention of their caregivers by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Some of her young clients have been placed in detention or the foster care system, while in other instances, the government has withheld information about the whereabouts of caregivers. “It’s something none of my superiors—including people who worked during Trump’s first term—have ever experienced before,” she states.

The impact of these policies is evident in the anxiety experienced by the children Beatriz serves. Many are now afraid to attend school or even leave their homes. “So much of my job is now simply dealing with anxious kids,” she explains. “Pretty much every one of these children has a deep sense that the U.S. is no longer a safe place for them.”

This pervasive fear extends beyond the children to Beatriz’s entire community. Even before the Trump administration canceled Temporary Protected Status for approximately 350,000 Venezuelans, her WhatsApp groups were filled with messages from individuals whose loved ones had vanished from their neighborhoods. “I have friends who are scared to step onto the street,” she shares. “The demonization of my culture and my community is really hurtful, and really harmful.”

As discussions about denaturalizing or deporting U.S. citizens to foreign prisons and eliminating due process for migrants circulate, Beatriz worries for the safety of her own family, all of whom are now American citizens. “We worked hard to get citizenship, but there’s a real fear that even that won’t protect us,” she says. “For Venezuelans, the feelings of insecurity are always present. It really weighs heavily on us.”

Source: Original article

State Department Revokes Over 6,000 Student Visas Amid Policy Changes

The U.S. State Department has revoked over 6,000 student visas, primarily due to visa holders overstaying their visas or engaging in criminal activities.

The U.S. government has taken significant action by revoking more than 6,000 student visas, as confirmed by a State Department official on Monday. The majority of these revocations stem from visa holders overstaying their visas or violating laws.

According to reports, a substantial number of the visa cancellations—approximately 4,000—were linked to criminal records, which included offenses such as assault, driving under the influence (DUI), and burglary. Additionally, between 200 and 300 visas were revoked due to involvement in activities classified as terrorism-related by the State Department. One specific example cited was the fundraising for the Palestinian group Hamas.

This announcement from the State Department occurs in the context of the Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to tighten regulations surrounding student visas. Earlier this year, the government temporarily paused student visa interviews for about three weeks. When these interviews resumed, consular officials were instructed to conduct more rigorous social media vetting to identify applicants with a history of political activism, particularly when such activism is associated with violence.

The revocation of these visas highlights the administration’s focus on national security and the scrutiny applied to foreign students entering the United States. The implications of these actions may resonate throughout the international student community, raising concerns about the potential impact on educational opportunities in the U.S.

As the situation develops, it remains to be seen how these changes will affect future visa applications and the overall landscape of international education in the United States.

Source: Original article

AI and Meditation Help Indian-American Overcome Layoff Challenges

Abhishek’s journey through job loss, resilience, and self-discovery highlights the transformative power of AI and meditation in overcoming adversity.

After dedicating 11 years to building a career in technology, Abhishek found himself at the pinnacle of his dreams—a role in AI Product Marketing at Google. However, in an instant, everything changed. On a cold January morning, he received an unexpected layoff email, leaving him to grapple with the loss of not just a job, but a significant part of his identity.

For many, losing a job can feel like losing a piece of oneself, and for those on work visas, the stakes are even higher. Abhishek had just 60 days to secure a new position or face the prospect of leaving the country he had called home for over a decade. With grief not an option, he was thrust into survival mode.

In the following months, Abhishek launched into a frantic job search, interviewing at 25 companies in less than two months. By the end of this period, he had endured 65 interviews, each one a grueling test of his resilience. The pressure was immense; he had no choice but to keep his visa status intact.

Securing a position at a smaller AI company provided some relief, but it was not the fresh start he had hoped for. Instead, it felt more like a temporary solution. His confidence took a hit as he navigated through a series of toxic work environments. One particularly harrowing experience involved being fired by a CEO on Christmas Day, a moment that left him questioning his self-worth.

As he continued to apply for jobs, Abhishek faced a barrage of rejections. Feedback ranged from “you’re knowledgeable but not the right fit” to “we found another candidate.” Each rejection chipped away at his self-esteem, making the journey feel increasingly daunting.

Amidst the chaos, Abhishek set his sights on a crucial goal: obtaining his green card. Encouraged by a friend from Google, he pursued the EB-1A route, designed for individuals with exceptional abilities. Despite his self-doubt, he worked diligently with an attorney to compile his achievements, ultimately leading to the approval of his green card petition. This newfound legal stability provided a much-needed safety net during a tumultuous time.

Even with this progress, the job search continued, and Abhishek found himself unemployed for over four months. Rather than succumbing to despair, he made a pivotal decision: he would focus on personal growth and learning. He immersed himself in the world of AI, not just as a passive observer but as an active participant.

Abhishek took the initiative to lead hands-on workshops in prompt engineering and revisited coding through free online tutorials. He experimented with various AI tools, including Claude, Perplexity, and Cursor, and volunteered on projects that allowed him to apply his skills in real-world scenarios. This proactive approach not only expanded his knowledge but also rekindled his belief in his capabilities.

After two and a half years of relentless effort, the tide began to turn. Abhishek received four job offers, a testament to his hard work and resilience. With his green card finally in hand, he secured a position that aligned with his aspirations, emerging from the experience more confident and skilled than ever before.

Reflecting on his journey, Abhishek shares valuable insights that he wishes he had known during his darkest days. First and foremost, he emphasizes the importance of building an inner reservoir of happiness and resilience. For him, meditation has been a cornerstone of this practice. With 25 years of experience, he credits his meditation guide, Gurudev Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, for instilling in him the optimism needed to persevere through challenging times.

Abhishek also advocates for hands-on learning, particularly in the rapidly evolving field of AI. He encourages others to actively engage with the technology, pursue free online courses, and take on projects that push their boundaries. The skills and confidence gained through practical experience are invaluable in today’s job market.

Finally, he reassures those who may be struggling that they are not alone. The challenges of rejection, visa anxiety, and toxic work environments do not define one’s worth. With perseverance and a commitment to personal growth, the tide can indeed turn, and brighter days lie ahead.

As Abhishek’s story illustrates, resilience, continuous learning, and a supportive community can help individuals navigate the tumultuous landscape of career challenges and emerge stronger on the other side.

Source: Original article

U.S. Government Faces Accountability Over Migrant Detentions in El Salvador

After 125 days of detention in El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, two Venezuelan nationals were released, prompting calls for accountability from the U.S. government regarding their treatment and forced return.

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 19, 2025 — Venezuelan nationals Edicson Quintero Chacón and Jose Manuel Ramos Bastidas were released yesterday after spending 125 days in El Salvador’s notorious Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT). Their release came as part of a U.S.-brokered flight back to Venezuela, which included approximately 250 other Venezuelans detained at CECOT.

Counsel for both men expressed profound relief at their release, emphasizing the urgent need for accountability from the U.S. government for their initial detention. The U.S. government had sent Quintero and Ramos to CECOT on March 15, 2025, where they were held without charges and incommunicado in a facility widely condemned for mass arbitrary detention and inhumane treatment.

Both men had previously been ordered removed from the United States but had communicated to a federal court their desire to return home to Venezuela. Instead, they were sent to CECOT, despite the terms of the agreement with El Salvador specifying that only “members” of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua (TdA) would be sent. There is no evidence linking either man to TdA.

Their return to Venezuela was part of a prisoner swap deal that also involved the release of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents from Venezuela.

“This news of flights to Venezuela was like being hit with a bucket of cold water because my family had absolutely no idea this was happening,” said a family member of Mr. Quintero Chacón, who requested anonymity. “Edicson should never have been sent to CECOT in the first place. No one should. He was treated cruelly and inhumanely when all he wanted was safety. This so-called prisoner swap doesn’t undo the injustice he suffered, nor the pain and terror that my family has had to endure in the past several months with no idea of whether we’d ever see him again.”

Roynerliz Rodriguez, partner of Jose Manuel Ramos Bastidas, shared her relief, stating, “We have been waiting for this moment for months, and I feel like I can finally breathe, knowing that Jose Manuel is now free from CECOT and on his way home. His son, whom he hasn’t seen since he was four months old, is eagerly waiting for him. These last months have been a living nightmare, not knowing anything about Jose Manuel and only imagining what he must be suffering.”

Concerns remain regarding the legality and transparency of the U.S. government’s actions. Many individuals sent to CECOT had pending asylum claims and expressed credible fears of returning to Venezuela. Their forced return, without due process to address their asylum requests, raises significant questions about the United States’ compliance with both domestic and international legal obligations.

To date, the U.S. government has not publicly accounted for how individuals were selected for transfer to CECOT or the full scope of conditions they endured. There has been no complete list of names released of those detained, leaving uncertainty about whether each victim is accounted for.

The use of foreign detention facilities, particularly those with documented records of systemic abuse, raises serious human rights and due process concerns. Critics argue that the U.S. government should not engage in detention outsourcing arrangements or collaborate with regimes that violate human rights. A full investigation into these disappearances is necessary, along with safeguards to prevent similar actions by future administrations.

“We are deeply relieved that Mr. Quintero Chacón and Mr. Ramos Bastidas are finally released from CECOT, but this should never have happened in the first place,” said Rebecca Cassler, senior litigation attorney at the American Immigration Council. “The U.S. government paid to detain these men in one of the world’s most notorious prisons, then denied responsibility while they suffered. For months, the Trump administration misled the courts and the public, pretending it had no control over their fate. This deal proves otherwise.”

CJ Sandley, senior staff attorney at the Center for Constitutional Rights, added, “We celebrate this news, along with the loved ones of Mr. Quintero Chacón and Mr. Ramos Bastidas and over 250 Venezuelans who returned to Venezuela yesterday after being disappeared and tortured for months at the direction and expense of the United States government. The ‘deals’ made for these Venezuelans’ confinement and transfers treat human beings as bargaining chips and underscore the cruel consequences of criminalizing migration and monetizing torture.”

Stephanie M. Alvarez-Jones, Southeast Regional Attorney at the National Immigration Project, expressed her joy over the release but emphasized the need for accountability. “While we celebrate their long overdue release, the government must be held accountable for its outrageous actions,” she said.

The American Immigration Council, Center for Constitutional Rights, and the National Immigration Project represent Mr. Quintero Chacón and Mr. Ramos Bastidas in their habeas corpus proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, where they have been fighting for their freedom from CECOT.

Source: Original article

Trump’s Second Term Could Lead to Extreme Immigration Overhaul

New report reveals that the Trump administration’s recent immigration policies threaten the foundations of American democracy, marking a significant overhaul of the U.S. immigration system.

WASHINGTON, D.C., July 23, 2025 — A special report released today provides a comprehensive analysis of the Trump administration’s first six months back in office, highlighting a dramatic transformation of the U.S. immigration system that poses a serious threat to the foundations of American democracy. While some voters may have favored a tougher stance on immigration when supporting Trump, the report illustrates how the administration’s extreme measures extend far beyond mere policy changes, undermining the rule of law itself.

Titled *Mass Deportation: Analyzing the Trump Administration’s Attacks on Immigrants, Democracy, and America*, the report was published by the American Immigration Council on July 23. It details how the administration has launched a radical, multi-faceted assault on immigrants and the immigration system.

The report outlines a series of aggressive actions that include restricting entry into the United States, removing legal protections for individuals already residing in the country, and escalating enforcement efforts to unprecedented levels. In doing so, the Trump administration has dismantled long-standing legal safeguards, disregarded the authority of Congress and the judiciary, and weaponized government resources against immigrants and dissenters alike.

“This isn’t just a hardline immigration agenda,” said Nayna Gupta, policy director at the American Immigration Council and co-author of the report. “It’s a wholesale effort to use immigrants and the U.S. immigration system to attack core tenets of our democracy and exercise unchecked executive power to realign the American government around exclusion and fear.”

Among the key findings highlighted in the report are several alarming developments:

The end of asylum has effectively occurred, with the administration shutting down the CBP One application without offering any alternative. Asylum-seekers arriving at ports of entry are routinely turned away, and many face indefinite detention even after winning their cases.

The refugee program has been decimated, with the administration indefinitely suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, except for a select group of white South Africans who have been fast-tracked under questionable claims of persecution. This has left tens of thousands of approved refugees stranded abroad.

A mass revocation of legal status has taken place, with the administration aggressively rescinding humanitarian parole and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) from over a million individuals in just six months. This has stripped many of their work permits and pushed them into undocumented status.

The administration has also weaponized bureaucracy, creating significant obstacles for legal immigration pathways through massive fee increases, processing freezes, and opaque barriers that make it nearly impossible for lawful applicants to obtain or maintain their status.

The aggressive enforcement tactics employed by the Trump administration have instilled a pervasive atmosphere of fear and chaos among immigrants of all legal statuses. Individuals now live in constant anxiety over their safety in the United States, as anyone can be targeted for arrest, detention, and deportation, even in sensitive locations such as churches, schools, and courthouses.

Furthermore, the administration is orchestrating a radical reorganization of law enforcement resources, establishing an unprecedented cross-agency immigration operation that draws on manpower from various federal and state law enforcement agencies and the U.S. military. This effort prioritizes immigration enforcement above all other public safety and law enforcement objectives.

Additionally, the Trump administration’s “Big Beautiful Bill Act,” enacted in July, has turbocharged an already inhumane detention system by increasing ICE’s detention budget by 308 percent annually. This sets the stage for a drastic expansion of a detention system that has already subjected tens of thousands of immigrants to life-threatening conditions.

The report also includes powerful firsthand accounts from individuals affected by these policies. Ilia, a nonbinary Russian dissident, won their asylum case in court but remained in detention for over a year without a release date. Axel, a DACA recipient and youth leader, is abandoning his job to return to school amid uncertainty regarding his legal status. Beatriz, an immigrant lawyer advocating for noncitizen children, has encountered cases reminiscent of her own journey to the U.S., including a confused six-year-old who appeared in court without representation. Kaelyn is incurring debt to prevent her partner from being deported to El Salvador’s megaprison under the Alien Enemies Act.

The report warns that while some policies may shift in response to legal challenges, the administration’s overarching agenda remains clear: to permanently redefine who belongs in America and how power is wielded by the federal government.

“The administration’s policies are reshaping the immigration system in ways that are unfair, unlawful, and out of step with core American values,” said Dara Lind, senior fellow at the Council and co-author of the report. “We’re witnessing real harm to families, communities, and the rule of law, and the public deserves to understand what’s at stake.”

The full report is available for review, and interviews with experts and individuals impacted by these policies can also be arranged.

Source: Original article

Nearly Half of Fortune 500 Companies Founded by Immigrants or Their Children

Nearly half of the Fortune 500 companies in 2025 were founded by immigrants or their children, highlighting their significant impact on the U.S. economy.

WASHINGTON, DC, August 21, 2025 — A recent analysis of the 2025 Fortune 500 list reveals that 46.2 percent of America’s largest companies—231 out of 500—were founded by immigrants or their children. These companies collectively generated an impressive $8.6 trillion in revenue during the fiscal year 2024 and employed over 15.4 million people worldwide. This data underscores the crucial role that immigrants play in driving innovation, economic growth, and job creation in the United States.

This marks the highest percentage recorded since the American Immigration Council began tracking immigrant entrepreneurs in its annual reviews of the Fortune 500 list in 2011.

“Immigrants are a driving force behind America’s prosperity. We need immigration policies that reflect that, instead of investing billions of dollars into detention, deportation, and making it incredibly difficult for foreign workers to come here or even renew their visas. These reckless policies undermine America’s greatest competitive advantage: the talent and drive of immigrants,” said Nan Wu, director of research at the American Immigration Council.

Businesses founded by immigrants or their children have transformed various industries, including technology, retail, and media. Notable companies on the list include Amazon, Apple, NVIDIA, Levi Strauss & Co., Ace Hardware, and Sirius XM Holdings.

Key findings from the analysis reveal that in fiscal year 2024, the Fortune 500 companies founded by immigrants or their children generated $8.6 trillion in revenue. This revenue, if compared with national GDPs, would rank as the third-largest economy globally.

Furthermore, these companies employed over 15.4 million individuals, a workforce comparable to the population of the fifth-largest U.S. state. Immigrants and their children founded 80 percent of the Fortune 500 companies in professional and other services, 65.6 percent in manufacturing, and 57.5 percent in information technology.

Among the 14 companies making their debut on the Fortune 500 list this year, 10 were founded by immigrants or their children.

“Immigrants built nearly half of our Fortune 500 companies, created millions of jobs, and keep our economy competitive. And yet U.S. political leaders are making it increasingly difficult for foreign talent to come here or stay. It’s economic self-sabotage. If we want to stay the world’s innovation leader, we should be welcoming immigrants, not attacking them,” stated Steve Hubbard, senior data scientist at the American Immigration Council.

The American Immigration Council has experts available to provide further insights into the benefits that immigrants bring to the U.S. economy, both at the national and state levels.

Source: Original article

New Report Details Impact of Expanded Travel Ban on Indian-Americans

A new report highlights the significant economic and humanitarian impacts of the Trump administration’s expanded travel ban, which affects immigration from 19 countries.

WASHINGTON, DC, August 6 — A recent report from the American Immigration Council outlines the extensive economic and humanitarian consequences of the Trump administration’s travel ban, enacted in June 2025. This ban restricts immigration from 19 countries and poses a risk of losing $715 million in taxes and $2.5 billion in spending power.

In 2022, nearly 300,000 individuals from the affected countries entered the United States, contributing to critical sectors of the economy and generating substantial tax revenue. “Those affected by this travel ban are students, workers, and family members who pay taxes, support local economies, and fill jobs in industries facing massive shortages. We’re throwing all of that away, to the detriment of our communities and the U.S. economy,” said Nan Wu, research director of the American Immigration Council.

According to 2023 data, of the 300,000 individuals impacted by the travel ban, 82 percent were employed, particularly in industries already grappling with labor shortages, such as hospitality, construction, and manufacturing. The manufacturing sector alone is projected to face a shortage of 1.9 million workers by 2033.

“The United States absolutely needs strong screening procedures to protect national security, but this travel ban isn’t how you do that,” stated Jeremy Robbins, executive director of the American Immigration Council. “The Trump administration is trying to sell this policy as a security measure, but when you dig into the justifications, they don’t add up. Many of the targeted countries had fewer than 500 visa overstays last year. This isn’t about keeping America safe; it’s about keeping certain people out.”

While the 2017 travel ban sparked immediate and widespread public protests, the report notes that the 2025 version has encountered a more subdued response. This muted reaction is largely attributed to the ban’s gradual implementation and the introduction of expanded exemptions. However, the report emphasizes that the resulting damage remains severe.

“This quieter version of the ban is deeply harmful,” Robbins added. “It separates families, blocks international talent, and hurts communities across the country. The absence of airport protests doesn’t mean the harm isn’t real; it’s just happening more quietly and more bureaucratically.”

There are indications that the administration may consider adding an additional 36 countries to the travel ban. Should this occur, tens of thousands more individuals from those nations could be barred from entering the United States, exacerbating the economic, social, and diplomatic repercussions.

The countries currently affected by the travel ban include:

All travel banned:

Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.

Visas sharply restricted:

Venezuela, Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, and Turkmenistan.

This report underscores the far-reaching implications of the travel ban, not only for those directly affected but also for the broader U.S. economy and society.

Source: Original article

Inside Training Facility for Recruits Addressing Trump’s Deportation Policies

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Brunswick, Georgia, serves as the primary training hub for federal law enforcement officers, including those in Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Brunswick, Georgia, stands as a pivotal institution for the training of nearly all federal law enforcement officers in the United States. This facility plays a crucial role in preparing officers from various agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has been at the forefront of immigration enforcement and mass deportation initiatives during the Trump administration.

Established to enhance the quality of law enforcement training, FLETC provides a comprehensive curriculum that covers a wide array of topics essential for effective law enforcement. The center’s programs are designed to equip recruits with the skills necessary to navigate the complexities of federal law enforcement, particularly in areas such as immigration enforcement.

As the demand for immigration enforcement has increased, particularly under the policies implemented during the Trump era, the training provided at FLETC has become even more significant. Recruits undergo rigorous training that prepares them to handle the challenges associated with immigration enforcement, including the legal and ethical implications of their actions.

FLETC’s training programs emphasize not only the technical skills required for law enforcement but also the importance of understanding the communities they serve. This dual focus aims to foster a sense of responsibility and accountability among officers, particularly in sensitive areas such as immigration enforcement.

The facility’s role in shaping the future of federal law enforcement cannot be overstated. As ICE continues to play a central role in the enforcement of immigration laws, the training provided at FLETC will likely have lasting implications for both the officers and the communities they interact with.

In conclusion, the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Brunswick, Georgia, remains a critical institution in the training of federal law enforcement officers, particularly those involved in immigration enforcement. Its programs are essential in preparing recruits to meet the demands of their roles in an increasingly complex legal and social landscape, especially in the context of the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

Source: Original article

Indian-American Community Celebrates Cultural Heritage at Annual Festival

USCIS provides a comprehensive resource for news, updates, and statistics related to immigration and citizenship on its dedicated Newsroom webpage.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has established a centralized Newsroom webpage that serves as a vital resource for the public. This platform offers a variety of news releases and alerts, which are searchable by topic and date, ensuring that users can easily find the information they need.

In addition to news releases, the USCIS Newsroom includes updates on policies and procedures, as well as important announcements regarding office closures and other emergencies. This feature is particularly useful for individuals seeking timely information about USCIS operations.

For those interested in visual content, the Newsroom also hosts a Video and Image Gallery. This section provides access to images and videos that showcase USCIS operations, offering a behind-the-scenes look at the agency’s work.

Data enthusiasts will appreciate the Immigration and Citizenship Data page, which presents various categories of immigration data and statistics. This resource is essential for researchers, policymakers, and anyone looking to understand immigration trends in the United States.

USCIS maintains an active presence on social media, with several accounts dedicated to providing the latest updates and information. Following these accounts can help individuals stay informed about changes and announcements from the agency.

The Newsroom also features a section for recent speeches, statements, and congressional testimony from USCIS leadership. These documents are searchable by topic and date, allowing users to access important discussions and insights from agency officials.

For those seeking more in-depth information, the Electronic Reading Room offers access to documents identified under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Users can search for topics of interest using a convenient drop-down list, making it easier to find specific information.

USCIS understands the importance of communication with the media and has established a network of agency representatives across the country to respond to media inquiries. This ensures that journalists and the public can obtain accurate and timely information about immigration and citizenship matters.

Additionally, the Newsroom provides information about upcoming events, including local and national engagements. This feature allows the community to stay informed about opportunities to engage with USCIS and participate in discussions related to immigration issues.

Overall, the USCIS Newsroom is a comprehensive resource designed to keep the public informed about immigration and citizenship matters. By providing access to news, data, and multimedia content, USCIS aims to enhance transparency and communication with the community.

Source: Original article

US Embassy in India Ends Third-Party Passport Pickup Services

Effective immediately, the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi has ended third-party passport collection to enhance security for passports and visa documents.

NEW DELHI – The U.S. Embassy in New Delhi has announced the immediate discontinuation of third-party passport collection services in India. This change is part of a new security measure aimed at improving the safety of passports and supporting visa documents.

Under the new policy, all visa applicants are required to collect their passports in person from the embassy or a consulate. However, for minors, a parent or legal guardian may collect the passport on their behalf, provided they present an original, signed consent letter from both parents. It is important to note that scanned or emailed consent letters will not be accepted.

To accommodate those who may find it challenging to visit the embassy in person, the U.S. Embassy has introduced an alternative option. Applicants can choose to have their passports delivered to their home or office for a fee of ₹1,200. This delivery service can be selected by updating the document delivery preferences online.

The embassy has also provided guidance for applicants who may encounter technical issues during this process. They are encouraged to report any problems through the “Feedback/Requests” feature on their profile. It is advisable to include a screenshot of the error and specify the preferred delivery location. The embassy recommends that applicants avoid contacting the call center for these updates and instead refer to the official website or their Visa Application Home page for further information.

This policy change reflects the embassy’s commitment to ensuring the security of sensitive documents and enhancing the overall experience for visa applicants.

According to India-West, the U.S. Embassy’s decision underscores the importance of safeguarding personal information and maintaining the integrity of the visa application process.

Source: Original article

Revised Form I-129 for Nonimmigrant Workers Now Available

USCIS has released a revised edition of Form I-129, which will be the only accepted version starting May 1, 2015.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has announced the availability of a revised Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker. This updated form is dated October 23, 2014, and is now accessible for download on the USCIS forms website.

Beginning May 1, 2015, USCIS will only accept the October 23, 2014, edition of Form I-129. After this date, previous editions of the form, specifically those dated October 7, 2011, January 19, 2011, and November 23, 2010, will no longer be accepted.

The revision aims to enhance the completion process for applicants, ensuring that all necessary information is provided. USCIS encourages users to download the revised form to facilitate smoother processing and compliance with the updated requirements.

For more information on who may file Form I-129 and to access the revised document, visit the USCIS forms website.

Source: Original article

Nine Rohingya Nationals Arrested in India After 13 Years of Illegal Residency

Nine Rohingya individuals, who had been residing illegally in India for 13 years, were arrested near the Bangladesh border in Assam and are facing deportation.

In a recent development, nine members of the Rohingya community from Myanmar were detained near the India-Bangladesh border in Assam’s Cachar district. The group had allegedly entered India illegally nearly 13 years ago.

According to police officials, the group consists of two men, two women, one teenage girl, and four children. They had been living in various parts of India before traveling from Hyderabad to Cachar. Their journey culminated at Hilara Railway Station on Monday, after which they sought shelter near the international border.

Cachar Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Numal Mahatta confirmed that the detainees were apprehended from the Katigorah area on Tuesday evening, following a tip-off from intelligence sources.

“They have been staying in India for many years. Recently, they traveled here with the intention of living in this area. They did not attempt to cross the border, but our team intercepted them before they could settle here,” Mahatta stated in a media briefing.

The detainees revealed to the police that they had entered India from Bangladesh approximately 13 years ago and had worked in various states, including Jammu & Kashmir and Telangana. One of the detainees, Abu Bakkar Siddiqui, noted that while they originally hailed from Myanmar, their family members are currently in Bangladesh. “Due to the recent crackdown on migrant workers, we decided to return,” he explained.

Another detainee, Samsur Alam, claimed that they were aided by a human trafficking network that facilitated their journey to Assam and advised them to remain near the border. “We were told not to go out in the daytime, but we went to the market as we had no food,” he recounted.

Authorities have registered a case against the group and confirmed that they will be deported in accordance with directives from higher authorities.

As the situation unfolds, the plight of the Rohingya community continues to draw attention, highlighting ongoing issues related to migration and human rights in the region.

Source: Original article

US Lawmaker: H-1B Visas Key to Physician Shortage Solution

Congressman Greg Murphy emphasized the importance of H-1B visas in addressing the physician shortage in the U.S., a stance that ignited criticism and highlighted a contentious debate.

Congressman Greg Murphy, a Republican from North Carolina’s 3rd district, recently drew significant attention for his comments regarding the use of H-1B visas to address critical shortages in the U.S. healthcare system. Murphy, who is also a practicing physician, argued that foreign-trained medical graduates play an essential role, particularly in underserved rural areas, where the physician shortfall is most acute.

In a post on X, dated August 8, Murphy stated, “H1-B Visas are critical for helping alleviate the severe physician shortage this nation faces. We cannot train enough American Doctors fast enough. We can’t let lack of knowledge of the importance of this program affect patient care.”

This assertion by the 62-year-old lawmaker comes against the backdrop of an ongoing immigration debate in the United States, further inflamed by policy discussions under the Trump administration. Notably, information reported by The New York Times on July 26 cited Joseph Edlow, the then-new Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, who indicated that the administration might implement stricter H-1B guidelines.

Despite Murphy’s stance, his comments met with a wave of criticism, particularly on social media, where many disputed his claims. Several responses, predominantly from Trump supporters, challenged the notion that H-1B visas are indispensable for addressing physician shortages.

One user commented on the discrepancy between Murphy’s statement and the actual utilization of H-1B visas in North Carolina. “Congressman says H-1B is ‘critical’ to fix the doctor shortage. Reality: In NC, 97.7% of H-1Bs aren’t medical, and most of the 2.3% ‘medical’ roles aren’t doctors at all,” read one such comment.

Others highlighted that American medical graduates often face barriers to obtaining residency positions, suggesting that foreign medical graduates are prioritized over local students. “Actually, H-1Bs are not critical for the medical system,” one user argued. “We have American medical students who are denied residency programs because the medical establishment limits them.”

Such sentiments were echoed by individuals who contended that the residency cap set by Congress unfairly limits opportunities for American graduates, while universities allegedly favor international students who pay higher tuition fees. “This is demonstrably false. Universities have been discriminating against U.S. citizens because international students usually pay over double in-state tuition,” stated another commenter.

Another critical voice argued, “Nope. We are done with politicians putting Americans last. You want less qualified doctors instead of funding more residencies or ensuring that American students are given priority in school over foreigners.”

The U.S. faces a complex challenge in addressing its physician shortage, with arguments for and against the H-1B visa program reflecting broader tensions between immigration policy and domestic workforce development.

Indian Embassy Launches Consular Center in Edison

A new Indian Consular Application Center has opened in Edison, New Jersey, providing essential services like passports and visas, improving accessibility for the Indian community in New Jersey, Delaware, and Pennsylvania.

The Indian Consular Application Center officially began offering services on August 1 at its location in Edison Square, Suite 1080, 2035 Lincoln Highway, also known as Route 27. Authorized by the Consulate General of India in New York, these services are managed by VFS Global, as indicated by township officials.

This center is one of several new facilities established across the country as part of a significant initiative to enhance service delivery and offer better support to the Indian community.

“We are proud to welcome the new Indian Consular Application Center to Edison,” said Mayor Sam Joshi. “This center not only improves essential services for our residents but also supports Edison’s businesses by boosting tourism, as it serves individuals from New Jersey, Delaware, and Pennsylvania.”

New Jersey hosts approximately half a million residents of Indian origin. This new center offers a convenient alternative for these individuals, eliminating the need to travel to New York to access essential services.

The Edison Indian Consular Application Center provides a wide array of services, including the issuance of passports and visas, and the processing of Overseas Citizenship of India applications and surrender certificates. The facility also handles Non-Resident Indian and Life certificates, certifications of birth, death, and marriage, police clearance certificates, and other formalities such as the Global Entry Program. It also offers document attestation, No Obligation to Return to India documentation, and registration of birth and marriage.

The center is scheduled to operate six days a week and includes numerous additional services within their fees, such as photographing for applications, photocopying supporting documents, assistance in form completion, and the provision of return courier services for completed applications.

According to MyCentralJersey.com, the establishment of this center represents a significant effort to make consular services more accessible to the Indian community residing in and around New Jersey.

Court Ruling Introduces Changes for Green-Card Applicants

A federal court ruling has clarified that EB-5 immigrant investors need to keep their capital at risk for two years, aligning with current policies and providing clarity in the green card process.

A recent federal court decision has marked a pivotal moment for foreign nationals seeking permanent residency in the United States through the EB-5 immigrant investor program. Under this ruling, EB-5 investors are no longer required to keep their investments “at risk” for longer than two years, affirming a current U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) policy and dismissing a legal challenge from a trade group representing regional investment centers.

The EB-5 visa program, introduced in 1990, offers wealthy foreign nationals a path to U.S. residency by investing in American projects. However, the program has faced criticism over potential abuses. The court’s decision helps reduce the financial and procedural uncertainties for applicants by providing a clear timeline on the investment risk period, which could significantly impact the thousands currently navigating U.S. immigration policy.

The recent ruling in Washington came after a lawsuit filed by Invest in the U.S.A. (IIUSA), an association of EB-5 regional centers. The IIUSA contended that the 2022 EB-5 Reform and Integrity Act (RIA) did not alter the existing requirement, which linked the investment period to the adjudication of conditional green card status, potentially compelling investors to keep their funds tied up indefinitely if the immigration process was delayed.

Judge Ana C. Reyes sided with the government and the American Immigrant Investor Alliance (AIIA), an organization advocating for immigrant investors. She declared that the 2022 RIA revised the law’s language regarding the sustainment period for capital investments. According to her order, EB-5 investors who made their investments post-March 2022 need to keep their money at risk for just two years after the capital is placed into an investment. This decision doesn’t apply to those who invested before the RIA, wherein the sustainment period begins after obtaining conditional lawful permanent residency, influenced by immigrant visa bulletin dates.

With this decision, USCIS is charged with drafting new regulations to formalize these rules, including a notice of proposed rulemaking and a period for public comment, a process that could span one to two years, or possibly longer. While USCIS’s existing policy on the EB-5 program will remain during this rulemaking period, the precise wording of these new regulations remains pending.

The discussion around the EB-5 program was notable even in political discourse, reflecting divided views among policymakers. President Donald Trump once suggested exchanging high investment amounts for U.S. citizenship in a speech, emphasizing the need to reform the program, which some officials considered fraught with fraud and inefficiencies.

In the meantime, advocacy groups supporting EB-5 investors continue to plan for active involvement and legislative reform efforts in Congress, ensuring the program maintains its integrity while being fair to investors and fulfilling broader economic development goals.

The current USCIS policy on the two-year sustainment for post-RIA investments continues to persist, maintaining the older standards for pre-RIA investors. The final regulatory outcomes may influence further legislative debate and reforms in the future.

Republican Senator Supports H-1B for Medical Field, Faces Criticism

Republican Senator Greg Murphy faced backlash on social media after asserting that H-1B visas are essential to addressing the shortage of physicians in the United States, particularly in rural areas.

Amid growing anti-H-1B sentiment in the United States, Republican Senator Greg Murphy sparked controversy on the social media platform X by stating that H-1B visas play a crucial role in mitigating the nation’s physician shortage. According to Murphy, who is also a physician, rural communities in particular struggle to attract American doctors, making foreign medical graduates indispensable in providing care.

“H1-B Visas are critical for helping alleviate the severe physician shortage this nation faces. We cannot train enough American Doctors fast enough. We can’t let lack of knowledge of the importance of this program to affect patient care,” Murphy stated. With a background in urology and a long medical career, Murphy has firsthand experience in international medical contexts. At the age of 20, he spent a summer in India working in a Catholic leprosy hospital and later engaged in medical missionary work in Haiti following the 2010 earthquake.

Murphy’s comments ignited backlash, with some critics labeling him as “out of touch” and accusing him of being “compromised by foreign lobby,” especially since the current sentiment among many Republicans is to halt these visa programs due to claims that they displace American graduates. One user argued that, “H1-B physicians are a tool for profit-maximizing used by corporate health systems and private equity-controlled medical groups. They like to hire foreign medical graduates because they tend not to complain about gross ethical problems, malpractice, and understaffing.”

The criticisms extended beyond concerns about job displacement, with several users on X advocating for strict reforms. “We don’t need any foreign physicians!!! What we need are mass deportations and visa reform!!! Also, DEI has been a disaster for medical schools. They’ve been discriminating against White students for years. No more foreigners!!!!” expressed another commentator.

Murphy also faced responses claiming deliberate misinformation. In one such response, a user said, “That is such a blatant lie. In reality, we just have H1B frauds with questionable backgrounds destroying the future of qualified Americans. Shame on you.”

Some critics contended that the focus should be on improving the conditions for American medical students, arguing that residency programs often admit foreign students instead of qualified Americans. “Actually, H-1Bs are not critical for the medical system. We have American medical students who are denied residency programs because the medical establishment limits them. Even after going $10s of thousands in debt and passing all their classes, these Americans are denied residency programs, while foreign students are admitted. That’s just wrong,” another user commented.

While the debate over H-1B visas predominantly swirls around the tech industry, given Silicon Valley’s reliance on foreign talent, the scrutiny has extended to medical fields as well. The controversy underscores the broader debate about the impact of foreign professionals on domestic employment and education opportunities.

According to Times of India, the current discussions highlight the tension between meeting immediate healthcare needs and addressing long-standing concerns about American workforce employment.

Canada PR Pathway: Jobs in 118 Companies Guarantee Residency

Canada has introduced a new pathway for skilled workers to gain employment and permanent residency, focusing on 118 designated employers in the West Kootenay region of British Columbia.

In a bid to attract skilled workers and provide them with opportunities for permanent residency, Canada has unveiled a new immigration route, emphasizing its commitment to filling labor shortages in smaller communities. The initiative is centered on the Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot (RNIP), also known locally as the Rural Community Immigration Pilot (RCIP).

The RNIP targets skilled workers looking to settle and work in the West Kootenay region of British Columbia, where 118 designated employers have been identified to participate in this program. This focus aims to address industry-specific labor shortages while benefiting both employers in need of skilled workers and immigrating individuals seeking to establish themselves in Canada.

By participating in this pilot, designated employers in the West Kootenay area are positioned to recruit skilled international workers who will fill existing gaps in the workforce. This move is part of a broader strategy to stimulate economic growth and support community development in regions that traditionally grapple with attracting and retaining a skilled labor force.

The initiative not only provides skilled workers with employment opportunities but also facilitates a streamlined process for gaining permanent residency. The focus on smaller communities aims to balance out population growth, enabling these areas to thrive and flourish by securing the human resources necessary for key industries.

According to Zee News, this program is part of Canada’s ongoing efforts to refine its immigration policies, making them more responsive to the needs of local economies while offering viable long-term residency solutions to foreign skilled workers looking to contribute to Canada’s socio-economic landscape.

Judge Blocks Trump Birthright Citizenship Order Nationwide

A federal judge appointed by President Joe Biden has issued a nationwide injunction against former President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship, citing constitutional conflicts.

In a decisive legal move, U.S. District Judge Deborah L. Boardman delivered a ruling that blocks former President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship, a directive which had sought to deny citizenship documents to certain groups of children born in the United States. Boardman’s decision, announced Thursday, underscores the provision of the Fourteenth Amendment and contends with existing Supreme Court precedent.

Boardman’s ruling supports a class-action lawsuit filed by the immigration rights group, CASA. The judge determined that the plaintiffs presented a strong case for a class-wide preliminary injunction, arguing that the executive order’s contradiction of the Constitution justified this legal remedy. “The plaintiffs have established that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their constitutional claim,” Boardman elaborated in her opinion.

The injunction aims to prevent the irreparable harm of denying citizenship to the children affected by the executive order. Boardman noted that maintaining the current state of birthright citizenship aligns with public interest and equity considerations, emphasizing that the government’s position would not be adversely affected by upholding the status quo pending the resolution of the lawsuit.

This ruling marks the fourth instance of a federal judge imposing such an injunction on Trump’s executive order, following a Supreme Court ruling in June. Trump’s directive, unveiled at the start of his second term, had insisted that U.S. agencies refuse citizenship documentation to children born to unauthorized immigrants, or those without at least one parent being a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.

Initially, the executive order faced swift challenges from lower courts before progressing to the Supreme Court’s review. In May, the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision addressed the scope of lower courts’ authority to implement nationwide injunctions, rather than directly tackling the executive order’s validity. This prompted a wave of legal responses from various advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and CASA, who adjusted their legal approaches in line with the Court’s guidance on seeking class-action lawsuits.

According to The Washington Post, these developments signal ongoing judicial resistance to changes proposed under the Trump administration concerning citizenship rights.

US Green Card Numbers to Increase Under New Proposal

Lawmakers have introduced the Dignity Act of 2025, a bipartisan proposal aiming to increase green card availability and enact comprehensive immigration reforms.

The Dignity Act of 2025, or H.R. 4393, has been presented in Congress as a new initiative to address ongoing issues within the U.S. immigration system. This proposed legislation seeks to enhance the availability of green cards to immigrants and includes a variety of reforms to address visa backlogs and the legal status of Dreamers while also implementing significant changes to border security and verification rules.

Introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives on July 15, 2025, by Representatives Maria Elvira Salazar, a Republican from Florida, and Veronica Escobar, a Democrat from Texas, the bill represents a rare bipartisan effort to tackle immigration reform. The Dignity Act proposes a multitude of border security measures and revisions aimed at expanding access to permanent residency.

The legislation outlines a pathway for those brought to the U.S. as minors and recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) to adjust their status to that of lawful permanent residents. This transition would depend on meeting certain criteria, including graduating from college or a technical school, serving for three years in the U.S. military, or maintaining four years of consistent employment with a valid work permit.

Additionally, the act aims to expedite the legal visa process, targeting a reduction in visa backlogs to a maximum of 10 years. Those who have been waiting in employment or family-based visa backlogs for over a decade would have the option to pay a $20,000 fee for expedited processing. To further alleviate delays, the bill proposes to raise the per-country cap from 7 percent to 15 percent of the annual total for both employment-based and family-sponsored green cards. This increase is intended to ease country-specific bottlenecks that particularly affect applicants from India and China, who currently face extended wait times compared to other nationalities.

The latest figures indicate that approximately 1.17 million people obtained green cards in 2023, marking a 15.2 percent increase from the previous year due to modifications in pandemic restrictions and immigration policy. The majority of these green cards (64.6 percent) were family-sponsored, with employment-based categories accounting for 16.7 percent.

Florida Representative Maria Elvira Salazar emphasized the significance of the Dignity Act, remarking, “The Dignity Act is a revolutionary bill that offers the solution to our immigration crisis: secure the border, stop illegal immigration, and provide an earned opportunity for long-term immigrants to stay here and work. No amnesty. No handouts. No citizenship. Just accountability and a path to stability for our economy and our future.”

In terms of legislative progress, the Dignity Act of 2025 is currently under review by multiple House committees, including the Judiciary and Homeland Security, as it moves forward in the legislative process.

Source: Original article

US Visa Bond Program Restricts Airports for Travelers

Beginning in 2025, the U.S. will implement a visa bond program requiring certain international travelers to enter and exit through designated airports, potentially posting bonds up to $15,000, alongside a new visa fee.

By August 20, 2025, the United States will launch a new visa bond program targeting nationals from countries with high rates of visa overstays. Applicants for a B-1/B-2 tourist or business visa may be required to post a refundable bond that ranges between $5,000 and $15,000. In addition to this financial requirement, they will be allowed to enter and exit the country only via an exclusive list of U.S. airports.

The aim of these restrictions is to more closely monitor compliance with visa terms. The U.S. Department of State asserts that the new requirements will facilitate the tracking and potential apprehension of travelers who may overstay their visas. However, civil rights and travel advocacy groups argue that the policy may lead to profiling and discourage legitimate travel for tourism, study, and business purposes.

This latest move is expected to complicate logistics for airlines, as they will now be tasked with verifying eligibility for both visa and airport restrictions.

In a parallel initiative, the U.S. is preparing to introduce a $250 Visa Integrity Fee, applicable to all nonimmigrant visa categories, including those for tourists, students, temporary workers, and exchange visitors. This fee will be mandatory in addition to both the visa bond, where applicable, and existing standard application fees.

The Visa Integrity Fee is scheduled to take effect on October 1, 2025, adding yet another financial burden to prospective travelers.

Both the bond program and integrity fee mark significant shifts in U.S. visa policy. For travelers from affected countries, the expense and logistical challenges of visiting the U.S. may serve as a substantial deterrent. The requirement to use specific airports adds a further layer of scrutiny and inconvenience. Although billed as temporary pilot programs, critics note that the infrastructure being established indicates these measures might extend beyond the current administration.

According to Live and Let’s Fly, these developments suggest a long-term strategy to reshape U.S. visa management.

H-1B Workers Issued Notices Despite 60-Day Grace Period

H-1B visa holders who have faced employment termination are receiving Notices to Appear from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, raising concerns over the enforcement of the 60-day grace period.

H-1B beneficiaries are encountering complexities as U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issues Notices to Appear, despite the supposed protection granted by the 60-day grace period following employment separation. These charging documents instruct the affected foreign workers to appear before an immigration judge, initiating removal proceedings based on specified legal grounds and allegations.

According to the rules governing the H-1B visa, if a worker’s employment ends, either voluntarily or involuntarily, they, alongside their dependents, are required to leave the United States within 60 days or by the end of their visa’s authorized validity period, depending on which is shorter. This grace period allows nonimmigrant workers to pursue a change in nonimmigrant status or adjust their status without having to immediately exit the country. The objective is to provide these individuals a window to maintain their lawful status or seek new employment opportunities within the United States.

However, despite the protective intent of the 60-day rule, some H-1B visa holders have been receiving Notices to Appear, prompting significant concern among foreign workers in the United States. The regulations state that nonimmigrant employees should not be deemed as having failed to maintain their status solely because their employment ceased, within the stipulated timeline. Yet, the discretionary power granted under these regulations to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appears to complicate this assurance.

The relevant provisions also state that DHS has the authority to eliminate or reduce the 60-day grace period as a discretionary measure. During this period, foreign workers are not permitted to engage in employment unless explicitly authorized. These considerations are crucial for H-1B visa holders who are between jobs or planning career transitions in the U.S., especially in light of changes implemented by the previous administration under President Trump.

Such developments have emphasized the need for H-1B visa holders to be acutely aware of the evolving regulations and potential uncertainties they might face in maintaining their immigration status. According to NAFSA: Association of International Educators, the dynamic regulatory environment necessitates vigilance and proactive planning by affected individuals.

Trump Visa Policy Disrupts Students Before Classes Begin

International students are facing considerable delays in securing U.S. visas, a situation that risks disrupting college budgets nationwide as the Trump administration takes a hardline stance on immigration.

As the start of the academic year approaches, universities across the United States are dealing with the fallout of significant delays in student visa processing. The Trump administration’s recent immigration policies have added to the challenges, leaving many international students in limbo and potentially impacting university finances due to diminished enrollments.

Arizona State University, one of the many institutions bearing the brunt of visa delays, revealed that around 1,000 incoming international students still need their visas. The resulting budgetary impact could amount to “tens of millions of dollars,” according to the university’s president. Similarly, Furman University in South Carolina is already bracing for lower enrollment numbers this fall due to the situation abroad, prompting contingency plans like offering students the chance to start their studies in locations such as London.

The interplay of President Donald Trump’s immigration policies and higher education strategies has elevated concerns among both private and public colleges, which warn that such measures could dampen international student enrollment. This potential decrease in students poses a substantial financial threat to institutions, as international students typically pay full tuition.

Cornell University’s Vice Provost for International Affairs, Wendy Wolford, voiced concerns about international students struggling to procure visas promptly. Approximately a quarter of Cornell’s student body comprises international students, making the issue particularly pressing for the institution.

Preliminary forecasts by NAFSA: Association of International Educators and JB International estimate a 30% drop in first-time foreign student enrollment on U.S. campuses this fall. This decline could spell a loss of approximately $2.6 billion in tuition revenue across the country, according to Shorelight, an international education organization.

The situation has visibly affected visa issuance in key markets such as India, where a notable drop in the number of student visas issued has been observed. A significant disparity exists, with Chinese students receiving visas at a rate seven times higher than their Indian counterparts, as noted by an official at a prominent private university.

Families like one from New Delhi, whose daughter plans to study in the U.S., have found themselves caught in the bureaucratic snarl. The student had initially secured a visa appointment before the temporary pause on interviews, yet she was still denied a visa under section 214(b), which questions the applicant’s intent to return to their home country. As securing another visa appointment proved futile, the family has considered alternative arrangements, such as enrolling at the University of Edinburgh instead.

A State Department spokesperson acknowledged the dynamic nature of visa interview scheduling, mentioning that expedited appointments are assessed individually. However, the delays have emerged as more disruptive than the pandemic itself, as per Arizona State University President Michael Crow. The institution estimates that one-third of its incoming international students have yet to receive their visas.

An admissions official at a small private college echoed this sentiment, noting the unprecedented number of international students without visas this year. Typically, only a few students would be in this predicament, but currently, around 10 are still waiting for visas, a significant figure for a college with less than 100 international students annually.

Furman University also forecasts a decrease in new student enrollments this fall semester, with a notable reason being a drop in international student numbers caused by persistent issues with the U.S. visa process, as noted in their bond documents. Their expected freshmen count for the new academic year stands at 562, a decrease from 613 the previous year.

The pause in visa interviews, announced in late May by the Trump administration, came shortly after most colleges’ enrollment deadlines. Although interviews resumed in mid-June, the process remains painstakingly slow, according to Tom Dretler, CEO of Shorelight, with resumption occurring variably by country, city, and consulate.

The visa backlog has prompted questions from members of Congress, particularly regarding Indian students, a significant international student demographic for the U.S. The U.S. embassy in India has indicated that new appointments for student or exchange visitor visas will be severely limited for the foreseeable future.

In Gurgaon, Adarsh Khandelwal, co-founder of Collegify, a college counseling firm, has observed virtually no visa appointments opening for his clients this year. This has compelled about 60% of his students, who had planned to start their studies in the U.S. this fall, to turn to alternative options or defer their plans.

As universities work to mitigate the impact, some are formulating backup plans. The University of Arizona is testing a London site for students unable to travel to the U.S., while Northeastern University is exploring remote learning opportunities or possible enrollment at its overseas campuses. The University of Toronto’s Munk School is also an option for Harvard Kennedy School graduates encountering visa hurdles.

The issue may extend beyond this fall, affecting future enrollment and colors how international students perceive studying in the U.S., as noted by Daniel Santos from Prepory—a college admissions service. The confidence in U.S. higher education systems seems to be waning among prospective international students.

Source: Original article

Policy enhancements aim to prevent aliens who are males from being authorized to participate in women’s sports in the United States

WASHINGTON— U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is issuing guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual in alignment with Executive Order 14201, Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports, which directs the Department of Homeland Security to develop policies to prevent the entry of male athletes seeking to compete in women’s sports. USCIS will affirmatively protect all-female athletic opportunities by granting certain athlete-related petitions and applications, that had previously been abused and offered to men, only to women, ensuring that male aliens seeking immigration benefits aren’t coming to the U.S. to participate in women’s sports.

USCIS has clarified eligibility for certain visa categories: O-1A aliens of extraordinary ability, E11 aliens of extraordinary ability, E21 aliens of exceptional ability, and for national interest waivers (NIWs), to guarantee an even playing field for all women’s athletics in the United States.

“Men do not belong in women’s sports. USCIS is closing the loophole for foreign male athletes whose only chance at winning elite sports is to change their gender identity and leverage their biological advantages against women,” said USCIS Spokesperson Matthew Tragesser. “It’s a matter of safety, fairness, respect, and truth that only female athletes receive a visa to come to the U.S. to participate in women’s sports. The Trump Administration is standing up for the silent majority who’ve long been victims of leftist policies that defy common sense.”

This policy update clarifies that USCIS considers the fact that a male athlete has been competing against women as a negative factor in determining whether the alien is among the small percentage at the very top of the field; USCIS does not consider a male athlete who has gained acclaim in men’s sports and seeks to compete in women’s sports in the United States to be seeking to continue work in his area of extraordinary ability; male athletes seeking to enter the country to compete in women’s sports do not substantially benefit the United States; and it is not in the national interest to the United States to waive the job offer and, thus, the labor certification requirement for male athletes whose proposed endeavor is to compete in women’s sports.

The guidance, in Volumes 2 and 6 of the USCIS Policy Manual, is effective immediately and applies to benefit requests pending or filed on or after the publication date, is controlling, and supersedes any related prior guidance.

For more information on USCIS and its programs, please visit uscis.gov or follow us on X (formerly Twitter)InstagramYouTubeFacebook and LinkedIn.

OPT Changes Could Impact Indian Talent, US Tech Economy

The potential elimination of the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program poses a significant threat not only to international students, particularly those from India, but also to the U.S. technology sector that relies heavily on skilled foreign talent.

In Washington, the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program is currently under scrutiny as potential legislation threatens its future. H.R. 2315, known as the “Fairness for High-Skilled Americans Act of 2023,” was introduced by Republican Congressman Paul Gosar on April 10, 2023. The bill, now under committee review, seeks to terminate the post-study work rights for international students on F-1 visas. Advocates of the bill argue OPT serves as a “shadow guestworker program,” but its opponents warn of significant consequences for the U.S. economy and global talent dynamics.

The OPT program allows international students to gain work experience in their field of study after graduation. According to the 2024 SEVIS “By the Numbers” report by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 194,554 students were on OPT in 2024, a 21.1% increase from 2023. This included 95,384 students on a 24-month STEM-OPT extension, with Indian students comprising 48% of these participants—the equivalent of nearly 45,800 engineers, coders, analysts, and scientists contributing to American firms.

The critics of OPT often argue that it displaces U.S. graduates, but proponents emphasize that the tech economy relies on international expertise, with Indian students playing a crucial role. In 2024 alone, Amazon hired 5,379 OPT students and 6,632 STEM-OPT extension workers, with other tech giants like Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Tesla also employing thousands from this talent pool. Companies like Citigroup, Oracle, Bloomberg, Qualcomm, and NVIDIA are among the top STEM-OPT employers, offering roles in pivotal fields such as AI, cybersecurity, and quantum computing.

Should OPT be eliminated, Indian students will face substantial challenges. Without the program, they lose a valuable pathway to work experience, debt repayment, and career advancement. OPT serves as a critical bridge to the H-1B visa and long-term employment in the U.S. The financial implications are also severe; Indian students often invest between $60,000 and $100,000 in a U.S. STEM degree, and without OPT, the return on this investment becomes questionable.

University enrollment from Indian students has already shown signs of decline, decreasing by over 28% from March 2024 to March 2025, according to SEVIS data. This trend highlights the potential fallout if the OPT program is dissolved. Without the program, international students may seek opportunities in other countries with more accessible pathways, like Canada or Germany, causing a ripple effect on U.S. educational revenues and innovation.

Supporters of the bill argue that OPT is a backdoor to employment, asserting that the U.S. should prioritize local workers. However, critics suggest the bill could undermine the U.S.’s competitive edge and innovation by cutting off a critical supply of skilled labor. Many influential figures in tech, such as Google’s Sundar Pichai and IBM’s Arvind Krishna, began their U.S. careers on F-1 visas with OPT, further underscoring its importance to cultivating industry leadership.

The debate over OPT encapsulates a broader discussion about the balance between immigration policy and economic growth. The elimination of OPT not only threatens the dreams of international students but could also have a significant adverse impact on America’s tech future, university funding, and its innovation pipeline, which depends heavily on global talent.

In conclusion, the termination of the OPT program may have far-reaching consequences that extend beyond student hardships. It risks damaging the U.S.’s competitiveness, labor market, and position as a global leader in tech and innovation—concerns supported by organizations such as the Business Roundtable, TechNet, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who have opposed the proposed legislation.

According to The Times of India, the situation remains fluid as the bill undergoes further review. Its outcome will significantly influence not only international students but also the very fabric of the U.S. tech economy.

US to Revoke Student Visas for Class, Program Absences

The U.S. government has cautioned international students that failing to comply with student visa regulations could result in the revocation of their visas and disqualification from future U.S. visa applications.

The United States has issued a stern warning to international students, emphasizing the significant repercussions of violating student visa standards. This advisory was disseminated via the official X handle of the U.S. Mission in Nigeria on Monday. The warning underscores that students who fail to attend classes, drop out, or exit their academic programs without duly informing their educational institutions may face the revocation of their U.S. student visas.

Moreover, these violations could also lead to disqualification from obtaining future U.S. visas, according to the message. The U.S. Mission strongly advised all student visa holders to comply strictly with the terms of their visas. Maintaining academic status and adhering to regulations are crucial to prevent any immigration complications.

The advisory clearly stated the importance of keeping educational institutions informed of any changes in academic status. It read, “If you drop out, skip classes, or leave your programs of study without informing your school, your student visa may be revoked, and you may lose eligibility for future U.S. visas.”

The U.S. government urges students to “always adhere to the terms of your visa and maintain your student status to avoid any issues,” highlighting the importance of compliance with visa regulations for international students in the United States.

This advisory serves as a reminder for the thousands of international students studying in the U.S. who rely on their student visas to continue their education. It is essential for these students to understand and fulfil all conditions attached to their visa status to prevent any unforeseen immigration issues that could impede their academic pursuits.

According to Punch, these directives form part of broader measures to ensure that international students in the United States adhere to the stipulations of their visa agreements.

Indians Opt for US Investment Visas Amid H-1B Challenges

As hurdles for H-1B and student visas grow, Indian citizens increasingly turn to U.S. investment visas, notably the EB-5, as a pathway to permanent residency.

The EB-5 visa program is attracting unprecedented interest from Indian citizens amid tightening immigration policies under the Trump administration. As details remain scarce about the forthcoming Gold Card visa, which was announced by President Donald Trump in February, the existing EB-5 visa — aimed at immigrant investors — has seen a surge in applications from India, reaching all-time highs, according to recent data.

The American Immigrant Investor Alliance (AIIA) reports a significant increase in demand for the EB-5 visa from Indian applicants starting in April 2024. This spike is attributed to stricter controls on student and temporary work visas. The United States Immigration Fund (USIF), which manages several EB-5 regional centers, corroborates these findings. Nicholas Mastroianni III, president and CMO of USIF, noted that in the first four months of the fiscal year 2025, Indian applicants filed over 1,200 I-526E petitions, exceeding the figures for any previous full year.

Experts link the rising interest in the EB-5 program to extensive backlogs in other immigration categories, such as the H-1B visa and green cards, with more than 11 million U.S. immigration applications currently pending. This context has positioned the EB-5 visa as one of the fastest and most reliable routes to achieving permanent U.S. residency.

The city of Mumbai is at the forefront of this surge, with data from Invest In the USA (IIUSA) reporting that 1,428 EB-5 visas were issued to Indians in FY2024, up from 815 in FY2023. The majority of these applications were processed through the U.S. consulate in Mumbai. Over the period from October 2024 to May 2025, 543 out of 638 unreserved consular processing applicants used the Mumbai consulate.

Approval rates for Indian applicants have shown a positive trajectory over the years. As per Ravneit Kaur Brar, an attorney-at-law based in California, the approval rate rose from 59% in FY2022 to 82% in FY2024. Projects in rural areas typically take between eight to 24 months to process, while those in high-unemployment areas may take from 12 to 30 months.

Mastroianni noted a significant uptick in interest following the Gold Card announcement, suggesting that uncertainty regarding future visa programs, alongside more stringent regulations on traditional student and work visa paths, has prompted many Indian investors to pursue the EB-5 visa sooner rather than later. “We are witnessing one of the most promising surges in EB-5 interest from Indian families in recent history,” said Mastroianni. He emphasized that this rise in demand is coupled with a growing sense of determination among applicants. “With the spectre of visa retrogression looming and the current ability to file concurrently from within the U.S., families are prioritizing stability, permanence, and long-term security. EB-5 is no longer seen as an alternative — it has become the preferred strategy.”

According to Financial Express, these trends indicate a shifting landscape in immigration preferences and strategies, particularly among Indian citizens seeking greater reliability and security in their residency plans.

Green Card Update Announced for Married Couples by Immigration Officials

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released updated policy guidance affecting the evaluation of family-based immigrant visa petitions as part of its efforts to enhance the integrity of the process.

The new policy guidance from USCIS, effective as of August 1, targets how family-based immigrant visa petitions—commonly utilized by married couples seeking green cards—are assessed. The updated procedures aim to address fraudulent or non-meritorious petitions that could undermine confidence in lawful pathways to permanent resident status in the United States.

The policy now stands as a crucial development given the backdrop of a reported 11.3 million pending applications that USCIS is currently handling. As part of these efforts, USCIS emphasized that the acceptance of such a petition does not automatically confer legal immigration status on the beneficiary. USCIS may issue a Notice to Appear in removal proceedings should a beneficiary be identified as otherwise removable under U.S. immigration laws.

This update seeks to bring clarity to existing protocols and empower the agency in evaluating the authenticity of marriage-based and other family-related immigration petitions. These pathways serve spouses and immediate relatives pursuing lawful permanent residency. The guidance provides detailed criteria on eligibility, necessary documentation, interview processes, and the handling of multiple or interconnected petitions. It also specifies the conditions under which these petitions may be referred to other government entities.

A significant portion of the updated document elucidates the process for forwarding approved petitions to the Department of State’s National Visa Center. This is particularly pertinent if a beneficiary originally aimed to adjust their status within the U.S. but was subsequently deemed ineligible.

The policy further elaborates on scenarios where U.S. citizens, particularly those involved in military service or overseas government assignments, might file Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, directly with the Department of State. This filing is available under specific scenarios, especially in reaction to extensive disruptive events.

USCIS, in its press release, articulated that enhancing its capacity to verify eligible marriages and family connections is pivotal in maintaining compliance with the law. A principal focus of the updated policy is on fortifying alien screening processes to safeguard national security by identifying individuals with malicious intent for removal.

Morgan Bailey, a partner at Mayer Brown and a former senior official at the Department of Homeland Security, previously remarked to Newsweek on the perception of USCIS by the Trump administration. They emphasized that the administration viewed the primary role of USCIS as a screening and vetting body rather than one that distributes immigration benefits.

The updated policy is already in effect, as USCIS continues to navigate the complexities of its backlog while prioritizing immigration integrity and security.

Indian Migration Challenges: West Attracts as India Faces Exodus

An Indian software consultant in Sweden has sparked a discussion on why many Indians who leave the country are reluctant to return, citing a wide array of advantages and disadvantages between living in India versus the West.

Ankur, a software development consultant based in Sweden, recently ignited a lively debate on social media regarding the longstanding question of why Indians often choose to remain abroad rather than return home. His commentary, shared via X, came in response to a post by Dr. Rajeshwari Iyer, an Indo-American who compared Indian and Chinese immigrants in the West. Dr. Iyer observed that while Chinese immigrants often return to their home country, Indians seem to prefer staying abroad.

Ankur’s extensive 20-point analysis of the situation includes both attractions of the West and deterrents within India that influence this decision. Opening his argument, Ankur highlighted the disparities in pay and living standards between the regions. He pointed out that Western countries provide “reliable basics” like consistent electricity, clean water, and fast internet, which are significant factors when Indians consider where to reside long-term.

Among the attractions listed, Ankur mentioned the higher quality of life, including better health and safety standards, as well as a significant economic advantage in terms of “dollar savings and stock options,” which help in wealth accumulation. He argued that such benefits draw Indians toward Western countries, which he described as more meritocratic with stronger passports compared to India’s offerings.

Ankur contends that India actively pushes people away through systemic inefficiencies. His list starts with the country’s notorious red tape, which can delay processes by weeks or even months. This bureaucratic inefficiency is often compounded by corruption and inconsistent changes in policy, tax, and import rules, which further frustrate residents.

The consultant also addressed the lack of civic sense among the general population, noting that issues like littering and public spitting are prevalent. Additionally, infrastructural weaknesses such as broken pavements, frequent power outages, inadequate public transportation, and water shortages are critical considerations for Indians abroad contemplating a return.

An absence of meritocracy in India was another critical point in Ankur’s critique. He cited social issues like hooliganism and moral policing as factors that deter potential returnees, further enhancing the appeal of residing in Western environments.

In summing up his argument, Ankur drew a stark comparison between women’s safety in the West and in India. He asserted that women’s safety “after dark” is far better in Western countries and claimed that due to safety concerns, “99% of Indian women never want to come back permanently.”

Ankur encapsulated his points by acknowledging the emotional complexities the diaspora faces in making such decisions. He concluded that the attractions of living abroad often seem more compelling than the emotional ties to India, influencing many Indians to choose not to return home permanently.

According to New India Abroad, Ankur’s insights have prompted widespread reflection among Indians both domestically and overseas, fueling discussion about the factors that continue to drive migration from India toward Western nations.

Indian Americans Concerned About New Big Beautiful Law

President Donald Trump has signed the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” a sweeping piece of legislation that overhauls the U.S. tax code, expands spending on defense and border security, and introduces new industry incentives, all while contributing an estimated $3 trillion to the national deficit over the next decade.

As Americans celebrated the 249th anniversary of their nation’s founding, President Donald Trump enacted a nearly 900-page piece of legislation known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill.” This comprehensive reform affects the U.S. tax system, increases funding for defense, border security, and infrastructure, and provides various industry-specific incentives and subsidies. Despite these changes, the legislation will likely add $3 trillion to the national deficit within the next ten years.

While the bill encompasses a wide array of provisions impacting all Americans, it poses particular challenges for immigrant communities, including Indian Americans. Of significant concern is the allocation of $170 billion for border security and immigration enforcement. Within this, $75 billion is designated for the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), an agency that has faced criticism for its aggressive tactics concerning undocumented immigrants.

Indian nationals, who make up approximately 6% of the U.S. immigrant population, are particularly impacted. The Indian diaspora has already witnessed alarming enforcement actions, with dozens of undocumented Indian immigrants deported earlier this year. The expansion of ICE funding heightens fears that such deportations could increase in frequency.

It’s not just undocumented immigrants who are affected; the legislation has also triggered anxiety among Indian nationals legally residing in the country on H-1B visas. More than a million Indian nationals are currently caught in a significant green card backlog, attributed to a legislative cap that limits employment-based green cards from any single country to 7% of the annual total of 140,000. This translates to only 9,800 green cards annually for Indian applicants, many of whom are highly skilled workers, leading to wait times that could extend for decades.

The exact impact of the new legislation on H-1B holders remains to be seen, yet there is heightened concern. The “America First” ideology, which opposes foreign labor, combined with increasing scrutiny of visas, raises fears of stricter enforcement. Indian students with F-1 visas also experience growing vulnerability amid increased enforcement of policies against campus protests and free speech.

Beyond immigration issues, there are financial provisions in the law that affect diaspora households, notably a 1% tax on international remittances starting next year. Although initially proposed at a 5% rate, intense lobbying from the money transfer industry led to its reduction. Remittances from the U.S. to India, estimated to range between $25 billion to $29 billion annually, represent the largest total sent from any one country.

The legislation also proposes substantial reductions in critical public services, including a $1 trillion cut in Medicaid spending over the next decade, potentially leaving 10 million more Americans without health insurance coverage. Despite a perception of affluence among Indian Americans, many families, especially recent immigrants or those in lower-wage jobs, rely heavily on public health programs for essential services.

On a broader scale, the macroeconomic implications of the bill have been criticized for exacerbating the federal debt, which already stands at over $36 trillion. From visa holders facing an increasingly hostile immigration environment to families dependent on remittances and public health programs, the wide-reaching effects of the new law are deeply personal.

In its effort to emphasize “America First,” the “One Big Beautiful Bill” may inadvertently alienate many, including Indian Americans who have long pursued the American dream.

Trump Proposes Revoking Birthright Citizenship in New Plan

The Supreme Court recently allowed the federal government to develop plans to revoke birthright citizenship for children of certain immigrants, potentially leading to significant changes in U.S. citizenship policy.

In a move that raises fundamental questions about constitutional rights in the United States, the Supreme Court has enabled the Trump administration to begin formulating plans to end birthright citizenship for some children of immigrants. This policy shift targets approximately 150,000 babies born each year who have traditionally been granted automatic citizenship under the 14th Amendment since 1868.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in June, an immigration agency unveiled the initial phase of its strategy to enforce this dramatic alteration in citizenship policy. This proposal includes the possibility of revoking citizenship from the children of immigrants without permanent legal status, as well as those whose parents are lawful residents, including visa holders, Dreamers, and asylum-seekers.

The plan suggests that there will be a federal review process of parents’ legal status, possibly taking place in hospitals shortly after childbirth. This approach could profoundly affect the lives of children born in the U.S., who might face deportation to countries they have never visited, leaving them in a state of statelessness.

This development follows a series of federal court decisions that initially blocked the administration’s efforts to change birthright citizenship. The courts previously deemed the executive order as unconstitutional. However, the Supreme Court’s recent ruling has shifted the legal landscape, allowing the government to pursue these plans further.

The implications of this policy are far-reaching, influencing the lives of many children born on American soil and challenging longstanding interpretations of the 14th Amendment. The proposed changes have sparked widespread debate over the nature of citizenship and constitutional rights in the United States.

The details of the implementation plan, released in a bureaucratic memo, have drawn significant attention due to their potential impact on the nation’s immigration and citizenship framework. The memo’s language suggests a deliberate intention to impose these changes, despite the complex legal and human rights issues involved.

According to Slate, this policy could lead many individuals, raised and living their entire lives in the U.S., to face removal to countries with which they have no connection, or to a future in legal uncertainty.

Source: Original article

DOJ to Prioritize Revoking Citizenship Cases

The Justice Department has intensified its focus on denaturalization, aiming to strip U.S. citizenship from naturalized citizens involved in certain criminal activities, according to a recent memo directing attorneys to prioritize such cases.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is placing a strong emphasis on denaturalization efforts, targeting naturalized Americans who have committed certain crimes, as per a June 11 memo. The initiative grants U.S. attorneys broader discretion in pursuing these cases and is aimed at individuals who were not born in the United States. According to 2023 data, there are nearly 25 million immigrants who hold naturalized citizenship.

One recent example of this policy in action is the case of Elliott Duke, a military veteran originally from the United Kingdom. Duke, who uses they/them pronouns, has had their citizenship revoked after being convicted of distributing child sexual abuse material, an activity they admitted to engaging in before becoming a U.S. citizen.

Denaturalization, a tactic that saw significant use during the McCarthy era and more recently under former Presidents Obama and Trump, is employed to remove citizenship from individuals who may have lied about criminal backgrounds or affiliations with illegal organizations on their applications. The current directive from Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate indicates that such proceedings will be a top priority for the DOJ’s Civil Division.

“The Civil Division shall prioritize and maximally pursue denaturalization proceedings in all cases permitted by law and supported by the evidence,” Shumate noted in the memo.

This focus on denaturalization marks the latest step by the Trump administration to transform the U.S. immigration system fundamentally. Other actions have included attempts to end birthright citizenship and reduce refugee admissions.

Legal experts have voiced significant constitutional concerns regarding the potential implications for the families of naturalized citizens. According to Cassandra Robertson, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University, civil litigation for denaturalization raises issues of due process violations, as those involved are not entitled to government-provided legal representation, and the burden of proof is lower than in criminal cases.

Critics argue that this could lead to a “second class of U.S. citizens,” with those naturalized at greater risk of losing their citizenship. Sameera Hafiz from the Immigrant Legal Resource Center expressed shock at the administration’s expansion plans for denaturalization.

However, Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation supports the measures, stating that the privilege of U.S. citizenship should be revoked from those who engage in serious criminal behavior.

The DOJ memo outlines expanded criteria for denaturalization, including national security violations and fraud crimes like those involving the Paycheck Protection Program or Medicare. Additionally, U.S. attorneys have been granted “wide discretion” in pursuing other cases deemed important by the Civil Division, leading to concerns about the government’s broad authority in these matters.

Steve Lubet, professor emeritus at Northwestern University, highlighted the vagueness of these categories and their potential overreach. He also raised concerns about the ripple effects on families, particularly children whose citizenship derives from a parent facing denaturalization.

The case of Elliott Duke illustrates the potential consequences for those caught in denaturalization proceedings. Duke, who was convicted of offenses before completing the naturalization process, is now effectively stateless and unable to challenge the legal decision without difficulty.

The push toward denaturalization parallels actions taken during the McCarthy era, characterized by intense scrutiny and removal of citizenship from thousands, until a 1967 Supreme Court ruling curtailed such practices. Recent technological advances under the Obama administration facilitated the identification of potential denaturalization cases, leading to an uptick in these actions during Trump’s first term.

Despite concerns about expanding the criteria for denaturalization, experts like Robertson question the scope of cases that actually warrant such action. She suggests that intensified enforcement might target individuals with minimal infractions, aligning with broader trends in immigration enforcement under the current administration.

Source: Original article

Trump Administration Proposes Stricter Citizenship Test and H-1B Reforms

The Trump administration is set to introduce significant immigration reforms, targeting the H-1B visa program and the U.S. citizenship test, with plans to make both processes more challenging.

The Trump administration is preparing to implement a new wave of immigration reforms aimed at changing the visa system for skilled foreign workers and revising the citizenship test. Joseph Edlow, the newly appointed Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), detailed these plans in an interview with The New York Times, describing the existing citizenship evaluation as “easy.”

“The test as it’s laid out right now, it’s not very difficult. It’s very easy to kind of memorize the answers. I don’t think we’re really comporting with the spirit of the law,” Edlow stated during the interview on Thursday.

The proposed changes arise amid a broader crackdown on immigration during Trump’s second term, which has seen tightened visa rules and reduced refugee programs, affecting both documented and undocumented immigrants. The administration intends to reintroduce a stricter version of the citizenship test first seen during Trump’s initial term in office. Under the new format, applicants must correctly answer 12 out of 20 civics questions compared to the current requirement of 6 out of 10, thereby ensuring a deeper understanding of U.S. civics and governance beyond rote memorization.

Another key proposal involves restructuring the H-1B visa program, which serves skilled foreign workers. Edlow indicated that the USCIS plans to prioritize companies offering higher wages over the current lottery-based system. This revision would address criticism that companies exploit the system by hiring cheaper foreign labor, thus undercutting American workers.

Vice President JD Vance echoed these concerns, criticizing companies that lay off domestic workers while continuing to hire foreign workers. However, Edlow maintains, “I really do think that the way H-1B needs to be used… is to, along with a lot of other parts of immigration, supplement, not supplant, U.S. economy and U.S. businesses and U.S. workers.”

Despite the administration’s push, not everyone agrees with the proposed direction. Doug Rand, a former Biden official, cautioned that favoring higher-salary positions might undermine the original purpose of the H-1B program. “Like it or not, the H-1B program is the main way that U.S. companies can hire the best and brightest international graduates of U.S. universities,” Rand remarked to The New York Times. “Congress never allowed DHS to put its thumb on the scale based on salary.”

Edlow, who was confirmed by the Senate in July 2025, is anticipated to play a pivotal role in shaping immigration policy. With extensive experience in immigration enforcement and policy, stemming from his previous tenure at USCIS and the Justice Department, Edlow emphasized that immigration should serve as a national asset. “I think it absolutely should be a net positive,” he commented. “And if we’re looking at the people that are coming over… to advance certain economic agendas and otherwise benefit the national interest, that’s absolutely what we need to be taking care of.”

Though detailed policy documents outlining these reforms have not yet been disclosed, the USCIS has signaled a broader return to the rigorous approach seen during Trump’s first term. That era witnessed tightened green card eligibility rules and alterations to the asylum system, many of which faced legal challenges.

According to The New York Times, the tangible impact of these proposed changes on businesses and immigrants remains closely watched as the policies unfold.

H-1B Visa at Risk Due to Job Promotion

An H-1B visa holder faces immigration hurdles after a job promotion led to unexpected complications in renewing their visa for international travel.

An H-1B worker who had achieved a promotion in the United States is now dealing with potential visa complications, stemming from a change in job position. Initially entering the U.S. on an H-1B visa as a Quality Engineer, the worker advanced to the role of Electrical Engineer following a departmental shift and a salary increase in September 2024.

The individual’s visa was stamped in December 2024 based on their original position, during which their legal advisors did not indicate any potential issues. However, with urgent family travel plans on the horizon, the worker now faces a pressing need to have their visa re-stamped this December. Human Resources has flagged new concerns related to the promotion, prompting the legal team to request updated job details to reassess the situation.

This unforeseen delay has left the employee understandably anxious about the possibility of facing questions or encountering delays at the consulate, all while time is dwindling. Compounding the issue is HR’s slow response rate, with communication delays extending beyond a week, further intensifying the worker’s fears of being unable to return to the U.S. due to an H-1B technicality.

The employee is now grappling with a decision: whether to press harder on HR and legal teams for swift action or to proceed for stamping with their initial job details—a move that could potentially lead to inquiries about their current salary and job responsibilities.

This situation highlights the complexities and potential challenges that even a positive career advancement can trigger in the realm of U.S. immigration processes for H-1B visa holders, demonstrating how nuanced changes can result in substantial bureaucratic hurdles.

According to M9 News, the unfolding scenario underscores the precarious balance H-1B visa holders must maintain between career progression and compliance with U.S. immigration laws.

Source: Original article

Immigration Alerts Green Card Holders With New Warning

S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has issued a stern reminder to green card holders to always carry their proof of immigration status to avoid potential legal repercussions.

Lawful permanent residents in the United States are being reminded by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to keep their alien registration documentation with them at all times. The advisory emphasizes that failure to produce such documentation when stopped by federal law enforcement could result in misdemeanor charges and fines, according to a recent message by CBP posted on a social media platform.

This reminder is particularly pertinent in light of former President Donald Trump’s directive aimed at removing millions of migrants living without legal status. The Trump administration has upheld the stance that individuals residing unlawfully in the U.S. are considered criminals. Additionally, there have been instances where individuals with legal residency status, including green card holders, have been detained during Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations. Newsweek has documented numerous cases involving green card holders and applicants being caught in such raids.

The importance of carrying proper documentation is underscored by the Office of Homeland Security Statistics, which estimated that around 12.8 million lawful permanent residents were residing in the United States as of January 1, 2024. The legal requirement for noncitizens to carry registration documents is not new and originates from Section 264(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. This statute classifies the failure to carry these documents as a federal misdemeanor.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has noted that lawful permanent residents who disregard this legal requirement could risk losing their immigration status and face potential removal from the country. Those detained by federal law enforcement have the right to remain silent and request legal representation. While it is mandatory to carry proof of status, individuals are not obligated to answer questions without a lawyer present.

In recent developments, USCIS has introduced a new $1,050 fee for certain applications that were previously free when filed as part of a green card case being adjudicated by an immigration court. This fee applies to Form I-131, which is used to request travel documents like advance parole, and Form I-765, the application for employment authorization. The implementation of this fee poses an added financial burden on individuals navigating the immigration court system while seeking lawful permanent residency.

Customs and Border Protection has reiterated its guidance through social media, emphasizing, “Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him. Failing to do so can lead to a misdemeanor and fines if you are stopped by federal law enforcement. If you are a non-citizen, please follow the laws of the United States of America.”

What to Do If Laid Off on H-1B or L-1 Visa

Losing a job in the United States can significantly impact foreign nationals on H-1B or L-1 work visas, as it may trigger a time-sensitive need to secure new employment or alter their immigration status.

Losing employment in the United States is difficult for anyone, but for foreign nationals on H-1B or L-1 visas, it presents unique challenges. Their legal status is directly tied to their jobs, meaning job loss can start a countdown to finding a new position or changing immigration status before they fall out of lawful presence. Legal experts stress the importance of swift and strategic action during this crucial period.

Under U.S. immigration regulations, H-1B and L-1 visa holders are typically provided a 60-day grace period following the termination of employment. This grace period begins the day after one’s last working day, not the final date of receiving payroll or severance benefits. During these 60 days, affected individuals have the opportunity to secure new employment, enabling a new employer to file a visa transfer petition, or they can request a change in immigration status. It is crucial to note, however, that remaining on paid leave or severance does not equate to maintaining a valid visa status, a misunderstanding that frequently surprises people.

Attorneys recommend taking definitive steps by no later than 45 days into the grace period. Transferring an H-1B to a new employer requires a certified Labor Condition Application (LCA) from the Department of Labor, and this process can take up to a week. Delaying the start of this process risks exceeding the grace period. If a new job offer is not secured by then, individuals are advised to apply for a temporary status, such as a B-2 visitor visa, to avoid falling out of status before the deadline.

In some instances, visa holders might be eligible for completely different visa categories. Individuals with substantial financial resources could consider the EB-5 investor visa, which allows applicants to gain permanent residency by investing at least $800,000 in a qualifying U.S. project. The program also facilitates concurrent adjustment of status, permitting the individual to live and work in the U.S. while their green card application is pending approval. Alternatively, enrolling in school and switching to an F-1 student visa could be an option, though this route carries inherent risks. Immigration attorneys caution against programs offering “Day One CPT,” which face increasing scrutiny and may affect future visa or green card eligibility. Only enrollment in reputable, accredited institutions is considered safe.

Another potential pathway is switching to dependent status. If an individual’s spouse maintains valid H-1B or L-1 status, an application for an H-4 or L-2 visa, respectively, may be possible. This change can provide more time in the United States to find employment or plan subsequent steps, although re-entering the workforce will likely necessitate a new petition and, at times, consular processing outside the U.S.

The situation presents additional challenges for L-1 visa holders. The L-1 visa is company- and position-specific, preventing workers from easily switching employers unless the new company is a qualifying affiliate that files a fresh petition. If no internal transfer is possible, individuals must either change to a different nonimmigrant status or leave the U.S. before the grace period concludes.

Those in the process of obtaining a green card through their employer, particularly those in the PERM labor certification phase, may also find their application jeopardized by a job loss. A new employer willing to restart the process is typically required for the green card application to proceed. Workers approaching the end of their sixth year in H-1B status and awaiting green card-related milestones should seek early legal intervention to explore alternative strategies.

While job loss can initially seem like a sudden dead end for foreign workers, immigration attorneys emphasize the existence of viable pathways forward if quick action is taken. Understanding the grace period, exploring alternative visa options, and consulting legal professionals can make a significant difference in retaining the opportunity to live and work in the United States.

The NPZ Law Group, which specializes in immigration and nationality law, advises foreign workers to seek legal counsel immediately after losing a job to plan tailored options effectively.

Source: Original article

Indian Tech Professionals in US: Wealthy But Facing Challenges

For many Indian tech professionals, the allure of working in the United States on an H1B visa often transforms into a journey fraught with loneliness, stress, and workplace challenges.

Securing an H1B visa and landing a job in the United States is perceived as a major achievement for Indian students, associated with success, a lucrative salary, and global recognition. However, beneath this facade of prosperity, many of these professionals encounter significant personal and professional hurdles.

Recently, a post on Reddit by an Indian tech worker gained widespread attention. Despite holding a prestigious master’s degree, maintaining a stable position, and earning a commendable salary, he expressed profound dissatisfaction with his life. “I live alone with my cat. I have no friends. No respect at work. I feel like I’m losing my mind,” he admitted, a sentiment that resonated with thousands of others.

The core of the problem lies in the nature of the H1B visa system. It inherently ties employees to a single employer, creating a precarious situation where changing jobs could mean jeopardizing their visa status. As a result, many endure unfavorable working conditions to avoid risking their stay in the U.S.

For students, these challenges begin even before their careers start. Upon completing their education in America, they face the daunting task of securing employment within a 60 to 90-day window to maintain their visa status, failing which they must return to their home country.

This pressure can lead some to disastrous outcomes, either returning home burdened with debt and disappointed aspirations or accepting underpaid or exploitative roles just to remain eligible within the visa framework. Meanwhile, families and friends back in India often only witness the financial success, oblivious to the emotional toll exacted by such circumstances.

Social media further compounds the problem, as it tends to portray only the glamorous aspects of life abroad—smiling photos and travel snapshots—while concealing the mental breakdowns and visits to therapy that some individuals face.

Nevertheless, a minority manage to find solace, whether through fortuitous job changes, supportive supervisors, or even relocating to other countries. Amidst these challenges, a pertinent question surfaces: Is the pursuit of the American dream truly worthwhile if it costs one’s peace of mind? Increasingly, a quiet acknowledgment of doubt has begun to emerge.

Transit CEO Resigns Due to Green Card Issue

The CEO of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) has stepped down due to complications in obtaining a green card, despite his Canadian citizenship and long-term plans with the organization.

Collie Greenwood, who was serving as the CEO and general manager of MARTA, resigned after his Employment Authorization Document expired in June. This document had allowed him to work legally in the United States despite not yet having secured a green card.

Greenwood, a Canadian citizen, has navigated U.S. immigration challenges, which can delay green cards for months or even years. In Greenwood’s case, the process left him unable to continue in his position, prompting him to take early retirement as announced in a MARTA board release last Thursday.

Greenwood joined MARTA in 2019 as chief of bus operations and urban planning before ascending to CEO in January 2022. Over his 35-year career, he began as a bus driver and worked his way through the ranks, illustrating his deep commitment to public transportation.

Despite the expiration of his work permit on June 18, Greenwood remains legally in the United States as he awaits the delivery of his green card. MARTA’s board acknowledged this and expressed regret over the situation, as Greenwood could not attend their recent meeting due to his pending immigration status.

Jennifer Ide, MARTA Board Chair, expressed sadness over the circumstances, emphasizing the complex nature of immigration issues in the United States. She praised Greenwood’s decision, stating it was a personal choice for the welfare of his family.

Ide also highlighted Greenwood’s contributions, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic and the transition after losing a previous general manager. Under Greenwood’s guidance, MARTA has become well-prepared to support Atlanta in hosting significant international events, including the upcoming FIFA World Cup games in 2026.

In his statement during the MARTA press release, Greenwood expressed gratitude for his time at the organization. He underscored his and his wife’s decision to retire as an opportunity to focus on family and friends.

Atlanta City Council President Doug Shipman commented on social media about the transition, suggesting that MARTA’s new leadership search presents a chance for a significant operational and strategic refresh. He called on the board to actively involve key stakeholders in redefining MARTA’s priorities and scale of change needed.

In the interim, Rhonda Allen, MARTA’s chief customer experience officer, has been appointed as acting general manager and CEO, ensuring continuity as the board searches for Greenwood’s permanent replacement.

MARTA, which plays a critical role in Atlanta’s public transit infrastructure, faces challenges typical of large transit systems but remains crucial in connecting the city, especially as it gears up for future event hosting responsibilities.

USCIS Reaches Fiscal Year 2026 H-1B Cap

07/18/2025

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has received enough petitions to reach the congressionally mandated 65,000 H-1B visa regular cap and the 20,000 H-1B visa U.S. advanced degree exemption, known as the master’s cap, for fiscal year 2026.

We will continue to accept and process petitions that are otherwise exempt from the cap. Petitions filed for current H-1B workers who have been counted previously against the cap, and who still retain their cap number, are exempt from the FY 2026 H-1B cap. We will continue to accept and process petitions filed to:

  • Extend the amount of time a current H-1B worker may remain in the United States;
  • Change the terms of employment for current H-1B workers;
  • Allow current H-1B workers to change employers; and
  • Allow current H-1B workers to work concurrently in additional H-1B positions.

U.S. businesses use the H-1B program to employ foreign workers in specialty occupations. We encourage H-1B petitioners to subscribe to receive H-1B cap season email updates by visiting the H-1B Cap Season page.

GOPIO Webinar on Immigration Upheavals and Indian Diaspora Challenges highlighted for advocacy and future impact

(New York, NY: July 18, 2025) 

GOPIO’s inaugural Webinar receives wonderful response;

Immigration Upheavals and Indian Diaspora Challenges highlighted for advocacy and future impact

 The Global Organization of People of Indian Origin (GOPIO) inaugurated its new international webinar series on July 12, 2025, with a compelling session titled “Indian Diaspora and Immigration Upheavals – Path Forward.” The webinar started with a welcome by Webinar Series chair Sunil Vuppala, who is also GOPIO’s Associate Secretary.  Chief Guest was Lord Bhikhu Parekh, a member of the House of Lords in London. The event gathered leading immigration attorneys, policymakers, and community thought leaders to examine the shifting landscape of immigration policy across the US, Canada, and the UK.

Moderated by renowned thinker and researcher Dr. Maya Chadda, Professor Emeritus at William Paterson University and a permanent member of the Council of Foreign Relations, the webinar tackled pressing issues faced by Indian students and immigrants—ranging from visa backlogs and restrictive reforms to evolving international student work policies in the USA, Canada and UK.

GOPIO’s Founder and Chairman Dr. Thomas Abraham, framed the initiative with a clear message: “Our goal is to create a global platform that not only informs but equips the Indian diaspora to navigate complex immigration landscapes with clarity and purpose. Through these webinars, GOPIO remains a catalyst for connection, advocacy, and community resilience.”

GOPIO President Prakash Shah, emphasized the series’ vital role in responding to community needs and said, “This series is more than information—it’s a lifeline. We are committed to amplifying the concerns of our communities across borders and shaping a proactive response to immigration challenges with expert insights and collaborative solutions. In addition, we want to galvanize the Indian Diaspora for a greater contribution to reshape the future of global migration.”

Featured Experts and Insights

Lord Bhikhu C. Parekh – Member of the House of Lords of the United Kingdom, is a renowned political philosopher and speaker emeritus. He opened the webinar with remarks reflecting on the diaspora’s historical resilience despite the many challenges faced in the early years and more recent times.  Lord Parekh added “Migration out of India had been quite common, in pre-Aristotelian times in 3th and 4th Century BC, people usually moved from Gujarat to various parts of Greece, Rome and South-East Asia. Then it remained static and picked up again, when slavery was abolished and it was replaced by indentured labourers scattered across 42 countries.”

David Nachman, Esq. – New Jersey-based immigration attorney and founder of NPZ Law Group, highlighted “Enforcement priorities under the proposed Big Beautiful Bill and shared the immigration matters under various categories to be considered by the present and future diaspora members planning an immigration to US not only from India but also from Australia, UK, Europe to rejoin their extended family.”

Stephanie Dy, Esq. – Chicago based Parikh Law Group Immigration attorney specializing in high- skilled visas, explained stricter H-1B and L-1 vetting protocols. “She covered the effect of the Trump Administration’s immigration policies on the visa categories used by the Diaspora, specifically the Student and Employment visas and highlighted that any change in immigration policy is seismic and significant and impacts the diaspora especially as during 2024 the US India Mission broke records for 2nd year in a row with record over 1 million non-immigrant visas issued.”

Shaima Ammal, London based Solicitor and Advocate. “She shared post-pandemic reforms reducing low-skilled migration from India and recent changes in the policies has led to primary focus on border security and stopping illegal immigration with focus shifting towards allowing those that can contribute to the economy with English language are encouraged and how this will be implemented is to be seen.”

Dr. Sudhir Shah, Mumbai based Immigration Specialist – Provided insights into EB-5, L-1, and family-based visa options for Indian nationals. “He focused on the current visa requirements and encouraged those applying for visas, do it with honesty and preparing yourself for the visa application then you will be definitely granted the visa.”

Gaganjot Kaur – Toronto based Immigration expert, discussed ripple effects of U.S. border security measures on Canadian student policy. “She shared the policies has led to focus on international students that includes additional vetting, financial stability, education field as areas being considered along with a cap of 5% being introduced.  She added that the investor visa option is still open in Canada.” 

GOPIO Immigration Issues Webinar Organizers, Chief Guest, Moderator and Panellists: First Row: Prakash Shah, Dr. Thomas Abraham, Gaganjot Mundra; Second Row: Prof. Maya Chadda, Dr. Sudhir Shah, David Nachman; Thord Row: Lord Bhikhu Parekh, Sid Jain, Shaima Ammal; Fourth Row: Stephanie Dy, Raj Punjabi and Kumu Gupta

The session started with a tribute to Michael Phulwani, a renowned Indian American immigration attorney & immigration pioneer, with touching remarks from President Shah and Attorney David Nachman recounting shared legal journeys and cultural insights from India.

Key Action Items and Initiatives

  • Encourage HR teams to implement visa tracking systems and sponsor risk policies
  • Request Immigration lawyers provide timely guidance on new regulations and higher denial trends
  • Counsel International students to comply with work hour limits and timely OPT applications
  • GOPIO to host monthly webinar series covering technology, youth leadership, and healthcare investment
  • Next webinar on AI and Technology set for August 9, 2025
  • Plans launched for international symposium on AI, quantum computing, and tech innovations in early 2026
  • Efforts underway to establish GOPIO chapters in Boston, Nashville, South Jersey and Pune through local WhatsApp network. Those interested to join may contact Sid Jain at +1 201 889 8888 or email at siddharth@aaaumom.com.
  • Advocacy for India-USA bilateral facilitation to ease and enable investment-based visasGOPIO General Secretary Sid Jain gave the concluding remarks and vote of thanks to all in attendance. The event concluded with calls for collaboration, education, and ongoing dialogue among Diaspora communities.**GOPIO logo is a trademark registered under the US and India Patent and Trademark Office.

    For more info on GOPIO International Monthly Programs, contact Sunil Vuppula +1 (732) 331-3084 or Rohit Vyas GOPIO Global Media Council Chair at 732-319-0972 or send an email to gopio@optonline.net.

     

Trump Administration Evaluates New H-1B Visa Issuance Method

The Trump administration is exploring a potential overhaul of the H-1B visa lottery system by introducing a weighted selection process.

The Trump administration has revealed plans to potentially change the way H-1B visas are administered, particularly by introducing a “weighted selection process.” In a recent submission to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) indicated it is considering alterations for the capped part of the H-1B system.

The H-1B visa program, which grants 85,000 visas annually, has become a battleground for supporters and opponents. President Donald Trump’s supporters are advocating for more stringent immigration controls, while prominent figures like Elon Musk, along with the president, continue to back the initiative. This visa is a critical pathway for tech companies to hire highly skilled foreign professionals, a point of contention for those who believe it displaces American workers.

Details regarding the potential weighted selection process remain sparse, according to the DHS filing. Nonetheless, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has been mentioned as a responsible entity for implementing these potential changes. Traditionally, H-1B visas are distributed through a lottery system, which aims to provide an equal chance for all applicants. Yet, large corporations such as Amazon, Meta, and Microsoft are able to submit more applications, disproportionately securing more visas.

Earlier this year, the Institute for Progress, an independent think tank focusing on innovation policy, proposed removing the lottery system. They reasoned that assessing applications based on criteria like seniority or salary could enhance the program’s economic value significantly. Doing so would, according to the think tank, allocate visas to the most qualified temporary immigrants.

Connor O’Brien, an Economic Innovation Group researcher, expressed support for rethinking the H-1B allocation system by emphasizing, “The details of the rule and how it is implemented will matter a lot. But eliminating the H-1B lottery in favor of a system that prioritizes higher earners first is a no-brainer.”

As of now, no specific timeline has been announced for these changes. It’s also unlikely that next year’s H-1B applicants will be affected, given that the current year’s quota is already filled.

Source: Original article

Countries That Prohibit Dual Citizenship Revealed in New Map

Data mapped by Newsweek reveals that at least 39 countries around the world do not allow dual citizenship, highlighting diverse global perspectives on nationality and identity.

A recent survey by the Harris Poll found that 42 percent of U.S. adults have considered or plan to move abroad to improve their lifestyle or financial situation. The percentage increases among younger generations, with 63 percent of Gen Z and 52 percent of millennials expressing similar sentiments.

According to Henley & Partners, a U.K.-based investment migration consultancy, many countries restrict dual citizenship to preserve national identity, ensure loyalty, and avoid complex legal scenarios. The consultancy identified several nations that do not permit individuals to hold more than one nationality.

In Africa, countries like Botswana, Cameroon, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Eswatini, Guinea, Libya, Mauritania, Senegal, Tanzania, and the Republic of Congo prohibit dual citizenship. Meanwhile, in the Americas, Cuba and Suriname uphold similar rules. European countries with this restriction include Andorra, Estonia, Monaco, and San Marino.

Asian nations with bans on dual citizenship encompass a wide range, from Azerbaijan, Bhutan, and Brunei to China, India, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, North Korea, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Uzbekistan. Each country has specific reasons for maintaining these restrictions, often revolving around issues like divided allegiance and potential security threats, such as military conflicts or espionage. Legal complexities related to taxation and rights, along with fears that dual nationality might undermine cultural or political cohesion, also play a role in these decisions.

For example, China completely bans dual citizenship, emphasizing the need for loyalty to safeguard national unity. India also prohibits dual nationality to maintain legal and administrative clarity but provides an alternative through the Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) status. This status offers limited rights without granting full citizenship. Singapore enforces a strict one-citizenship policy, underlining national allegiance and requiring proof of renunciation of other citizenships before granting naturalization.

Tim Osiecki, the director of thought leadership and trends at The Harris Poll, noted a shift in the American Dream. “For most of modern history, the American Dream was rooted in one place: America. But that’s shifting,” he previously told Newsweek. According to Osiecki, dual citizenship is increasingly becoming a goal for middle-class Americans who seek greater control over their future in an uncertain world, marking a mindset shift from a singular national allegiance to adaptability.

Osiecki also pointed out that while the intent to move abroad among younger Americans is significant, it is not indicative of a mass migration. “This isn’t about a mass migration overnight, but we are at a tipping point,” he said. “One in five younger Americans say they’re seriously considering moving abroad, and that kind of intent matters.” He emphasizes that although it is not yet an exodus, it signals a changing perception of life in the United States.

The notion of the American Dream might not be fading; it could simply be evolving to accommodate the growing desire for mobility and flexibility in an increasingly interconnected world.

Trump Administration Shares Medicaid Data with ICE

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials are now authorized to access the personal data of 79 million Medicaid enrollees to locate individuals living illegally in the United States, as per a recently signed agreement between the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

In a bold move by the Trump administration, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials will gain access to extensive personal data from the nation’s Medicaid program to identify immigrants residing illegally within the U.S. This agreement, unveiled by The Associated Press, is part of an ongoing crackdown on illegal immigration.

The agreement, signed Monday, outlines that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will utilize Medicaid enrollee data to trace the locations of undocumented immigrants. This unprecedented sharing of personal health data with deportation authorities marks a significant escalation in the Trump administration’s efforts to bolster immigration enforcement.

While the agreement was not publicly announced, it has sparked considerable debate regarding the legality and ethics of such data sharing. Some lawmakers and officials within the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have expressed concerns, highlighting potential violations of privacy.

The shared information will include names, home addresses, birth dates, racial and ethnic data, and Social Security numbers, which ICE will access through a controlled database from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday to Friday, until September 9. ICE officials are prohibited from downloading the data but are afforded access for a limited period.

Tricia McLaughlin, the assistant secretary at the DHS, stated in an email that the initiative aims to ensure Medicaid benefits are not wrongfully extended to undocumented aliens. However, specific details on whether the DHS has accessed this data remain unclear.

The sensitive nature of the data sharing has been met with resistance and skepticism, especially since federal law mandates that all states provide emergency Medicaid services for life-saving situations, regardless of the patient’s citizenship status. The potential ramifications could deter individuals from seeking necessary medical attention, fearing repercussions from ICE.

Hannah Katch, who served as a CMS adviser during the Biden administration, criticized the agreement, emphasizing that CMS historically did not share personally identifiable information outside the agency except for investigations related to waste, fraud, or abuse.

Last month, the Trump administration pursued access to detailed Medicaid enrollee data from seven states where lawfully present but non-citizen immigrants could enroll in full Medicaid programs. Those states, namely California, New York, Washington, Oregon, Illinois, Minnesota, and Colorado, all led by Democratic governors, have resisted this federal push. These states committed not to charge the federal government for coverage related to these immigrants, and have expressed concerns over privacy violations.

This controversy has led to lawsuits from 20 states alleging breaches of health privacy laws, challenging the CMS’s decision to comply with DHS data access requests. Internal communications at CMS reveal hesitation regarding the data exchange amid ongoing litigation, with discussions about seeking a delay from the White House.

Political opposition has been vocal. Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff and other members of Congress have directly addressed DHS and HHS officials, asserting that the data transfer constitutes a substantial infringement on privacy rights and could dissuade citizens from seeking essential healthcare services.

Despite criticisms, HHS officials maintain that their actions are lawful and comply with regulations, emphasizing that the initiative seeks to ensure that Medicaid benefits are properly allocated. Spokesman Andrew Nixon reiterated this position while responding to the ongoing legal challenges.

Source: Original article

3,000 Indian Professionals Eligible for UK Visa in July Ballot

Under the UK-India Young Professionals Scheme, 3,000 working professionals from India aged 18 to 30 will have the opportunity to live and work in the UK for up to two years.

The UK-India Young Professionals Scheme, launched in February 2023, provides Indian citizens aged 18 to 30 with the opportunity to reside and work in the United Kingdom for a duration of two years. To be eligible for this visa, applicants must possess an eligible qualification and hold at least £2,530 in savings.

The selection process begins with a ballot, which will open for 48 hours starting at 1:30 p.m. on July 22 and closing at 1:30 p.m. on July 24. There is no cost to enter the ballot, but once selected, applicants must pay a £319 fee while applying for the visa.

Entering the ballot requires potential applicants to provide their name, date of birth, passport details, a scan or photo of their passport, phone number, and email address.

Once selected in the ballot, applicants must submit a valid passport or other proof of identity and nationality, evidence of holding at least £2,530 in their bank account via bank statements, qualifications documentation, and present tuberculosis (TB) test results if residing in India. Additionally, a police report or clearance certificate from India is required.

A total of 3,000 visas are available for 2025 within this scheme. Most of these positions were offered in February, with the remaining slots to be distributed in July when the final ballot is conducted.

Those successful in the ballot will be contacted via email and will then have 90 days to complete the visa application process online. This process includes paying a visa application fee and the immigration health surcharge (IHS), as well as providing biometric information, such as fingerprints and a photo.

If individuals are selected in the ballot but decide against applying for the visa, they are under no obligation to proceed.

For more detailed guidance on the UK-India Young Professionals Scheme and the ballot system, interested individuals can visit the official UK government website.

According to World Malayalee Voice, the UK is committed to strengthening bilateral relations with India through this unique opportunity for young professionals.

Rakesh Gangwal Named on Forbes’ 2025 Richest Immigrants List

Rakesh Gangwal, co-founder of IndiGo Airlines and Chairman of Southwest Airlines’ board, has secured the 29th position on Forbes’ 2025 list of America’s richest immigrants, with a net worth of $6.6 billion.

Forbes recently published its 2025 rankings of the richest Americans, highlighting a notable presence of immigrant billionaires among the country’s elite. While Elon Musk from South Africa, Sergey Brin from Russia, and Jensen Huang from Taiwan topped the list with net worths of $393.1 billion, $139.7 billion, and $137.9 billion respectively, the list also features Rakesh Gangwal at the 29th spot.

Gangwal, a prominent figure in the aviation industry, co-founded IndiGo Airlines, India’s largest airline by market share. He also serves as the Chairman of the board of directors for Southwest Airlines. His financial holdings are primarily tied to his 14 percent stake in InterGlobe Aviation, the parent company of IndiGo, based in Gurgaon, India. According to the Bloomberg Billionaire Index, his estimated net worth is around $7.83 billion, attributed largely to his interests in the aviation sector.

Born in 1953 in Kolkata, India, Gangwal obtained a bachelor’s degree in engineering from the India Institute of Technology Kanpur in 1975 and later pursued an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. His career began at Ford Motor Co. as a financial analyst, followed by a role as a production and planning engineer with Philips India.

Gangwal’s journey in the airline industry began in 1980 when he joined United Airlines. By 1984, he advanced to the position of manager for strategic planning. He furthered his career as an executive vice president for Air France in 1994 and later served as CEO of US Airways from 1998 until his resignation in 2001. In 2006, he co-founded IndiGo, which was publicly listed in 2015.

The Forbes list underscores the contributions and success of immigrant billionaires in the United States. India’s prominence is significant, topping the list with 12 immigrant billionaires, an increase from seven in 2022. It is followed by Israel and Taiwan, which each boast 11 immigrant billionaires. Canada and China have also shown increased numbers, contributing nine and eight billionaires, respectively, this year.

Germany and Iran each account for six US-based billionaire immigrants, while France, Hungary, and Ukraine follow with five and four, respectively. This year, a record 125 foreign-born individuals were named as billionaires in the United States, up from 92 in 2022.

The collective wealth of these immigrant billionaires stands at an impressive $1.3 trillion, which represents 18 percent of America’s total billionaire wealth of $7.2 trillion. A notable 93 percent of these individuals are self-made, with nearly 70 percent earning their fortunes in the technology and finance industries.

According to Source Name, this year’s list exemplifies the remarkable achievements and significant economic contributions of immigrants in the United States.

Green Card News Issued by U.S. Immigration Officials

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has published its August 2025 visa bulletin, detailing significant updates on the processing dates for various immigrant visa categories.

The monthly release of the visa bulletin serves as a crucial resource for individuals and families aiming for permanent residency in the United States, guiding them through what is often a challenging and prolonged process.

For applicants seeking green cards, keeping abreast of the visa bulletin is essential. It helps determine the timeline for adjusting their immigration status by providing updates on when they become eligible, which primarily depends on the date a sponsorship petition was filed by either an employer or family member. This establishes the priority date, distinct from the date of filing for permanent residence, which the bulletin governs to indicate when immigrants can move forward with their applications.

The USCIS’s latest bulletin arrives at a time when the agency is grappling with a significant backlog of approximately 11.3 million pending applications. The new updates in the bulletin are vital for applicants who need clarity on when they can proceed with their green card applications.

The State Department’s issuance of the bulletin includes updated priority dates that provide a framework for when applicants can either file their visa applications or adjust their immigration status. For the fiscal year 2025, family-sponsored immigrants face a limit of 226,000 visas, as outlined in Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Meanwhile, employment-based preference immigrants have a global cap of at least 140,000 visas annually.

Further, per the INA’s Section 202, country-specific limits are enforced for preference immigrants, capping each nation’s share at 7 percent of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based visa numbers combined—amounting to about 25,620 visas per country. Dependent territories have a separate limit of 2 percent or 7,320 visas.

These statutory constraints heavily influence visa availability and wait times, especially for countries with high demand such as India and China. The bulletin’s findings illustrate how important these priority dates are for Indian nationals, who often face extended wait times due to these limits and the existing backlog.

While some family-based visa categories have seen minimal progress with queues advancing by a month, the employment-based visa categories largely remain stagnant. Notably, Indian applicants in high-demand professional fields are particularly affected by these persistent backlogs.

In a modest development, the August bulletin indicates that the employment-based second preference EB-2 visa for Indian nationals has advanced by around one month, a slight but meaningful improvement for many applicants waiting in line. Conversely, other significant employment-based categories, like EB-3 for India, remain static, further highlighting the ongoing challenges faced by Indian professionals striving for green cards.

EB-2 and EB-3 are critical categories for employment-based green cards that allow foreign nationals to secure permanent residency in the United States through their professional work. EB-2 is intended for those with advanced degrees or exceptional ability in fields like science, arts, or business. EB-3 caters to skilled workers with at least two years of experience, professionals with a bachelor’s degree, and individuals in unskilled positions requiring less than two years of training. Despite differences in eligibility and processing times, both categories offer pathways to a green card.

The bulletin similarly outlines a stagnant situation for Chinese applicants in employment-based categories. For family-based immigration, however, some categories continue with gradual progress, offering slight relief to families prolonged by extensive visa wait times.

Applicants must consider the “dates for filing” section in the bulletin, which indicates the earliest time they can submit applications for status adjustment or an immigrant visa, based on their visa category and country of origin. The “final action dates” signal when a visa number becomes available, permitting an application to be approved, thereby leading to permanent residency.

To apply in August 2025, applicants need a priority date that precedes the date listed for their respective visa category and country of chargeability in the bulletin, confirming their eligibility to proceed. The final action dates are crucial to processing green card applications as they dictate when a case can be approved, affecting the wait time for obtaining a green card.

Doug Rand, a former senior official at USCIS during the Biden administration, commented on the situation: “There are two very different backlogs at play. USCIS and the State Department have administrative backlogs, which are cases ready to process as soon as possible. But the visa bulletin reflects a statutory backlog—Congress imposed annual limits on green cards back in 1990, and this has created huge bottlenecks that the executive branch can’t fix on its own,” according to Newsweek.

U.S. Introduces Visa Integrity Fee for Non-Immigrants

The newly enacted “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” introduces a $250 “visa integrity fee” for most non-immigrant U.S. visas, significantly increasing costs for applicants.

The U.S. has established a $250 “visa integrity fee” for non-immigrant visa applicants as part of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” otherwise known as H.R.-1. This fee will come into effect in fiscal 2026 and applies to most categories of non-immigrant visas, including B-1/B-2 for tourism and business, F and M for students, H-1B for workers, and J for exchange visitors.

According to Fragomen, a U.S.-based immigration firm, President Donald Trump signed H.R.-1 into law on July 4. The legislation also involves additional non-waivable travel surcharges, such as a $24 I-94 fee, a $13 Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) fee for Visa Waiver Program travelers, and a $30 Electronic Visa Update System (EVUS) fee for certain Chinese nationals with 10-year B-1/B-2 visas.

These changes mean that a B-1/B-2 visa for Indian nationals, currently costing about $185, could see its cost rise to approximately $472 when factoring in the $250 integrity fee, $24 I-94 fee, and $13 ESTA fee. The total cost of a B-1/B-2 visa for Indian nationals may increase to nearly two-and-a-half times the current amount due to the new surcharges.

The law allows for future fee increases through regulation, which advocates claim will enhance compliance and reduce visa overstays. The initial $250 fee set for fiscal 2025 could be higher if adjusted by the Department of Homeland Security. From 2026 onward, the fee will be indexed to inflation, rising annually according to changes in the Consumer Price Index.

Additional fee increases include a $1,000 charge for asylum applications and parolees, a $500 fee for Temporary Protected Status, a $100 annual charge for asylum seekers with pending cases, and a $1,500 fee for adjusting to lawful permanent resident status.

Diplomatic applicants categorized under A and G are exempt from this fee. The legislation stipulates in 14 instances that the fee “shall not be waived or reduced.”

The possibility of a refund exists for applicants who comply with visa conditions, though it requires submitting documentation such as timely departure records or proof of status adjustment. Refunds will not happen automatically; the Secretary of Homeland Security may provide reimbursement after the visa’s validity period expires if compliance can be demonstrated. Otherwise, the fee is to be transferred to the U.S. Treasury’s general fund.

Additionally, the U.S. is considering a significant change to its visa policy by imposing fixed stays for F, J, and I visa holders, a move that could impact over 420,000 Indian students. In June, the U.S. Embassy in India mandated that Indian applicants for F, M, or J student visas must set their social media accounts to ‘public’ before their visa interviews.

These developments underscore the evolving landscape for non-immigrant visas in the U.S., driven by efforts to ensure integrity and compliance, though they present potential financial and procedural hurdles for applicants worldwide.

Source: Original article

Indian-Americans Abandon Green Cards Within Six Years: US Report

Indians are expeditiously transitioning from green card holders to U.S. citizens, completing the process in just under six years on average.

Recent data from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) indicates that Indian nationals are rapidly advancing through the naturalization process, becoming U.S. citizens in an average of 5.9 years, significantly quicker than peers from other countries. This figure sits comfortably below the national average of 7.5 years for obtaining U.S. citizenship after acquiring a green card.

In comparison, Mexican nationals, who represent the largest group in terms of overall naturalizations, face a wait period of nearly 11 years. While they lead in sheer numbers, Indians are swiftly progressing through the citizenship process. The USCIS stipulates that to become a U.S. citizen, an individual must have been a permanent resident for at least five years, or three years in cases where the residency is marriage-based.

The path to citizenship is relatively direct for many non-resident Indians (NRIs). After five years of permanent residency, candidates are eligible to take the English and civics test required for naturalization. The success rate for first-time test-takers is notably high, with nearly 90 percent passing on their initial attempt.

Interestingly, this trend is not limited to any particular demographic within the Indian community in the United States. The median age for NRIs obtaining citizenship is 42, and women constitute about 55 percent of the applicants. While the stereotype of tech workers dominates the narrative, this data suggests a broader cross-section of the Indian diaspora is pursuing citizenship.

The drive towards acquiring U.S. citizenship is spurred by several factors, including visa uncertainties and the complexities surrounding H-1B visas, which have been exacerbated by political climates, particularly under the Trump administration. For many, U.S. citizenship represents more than just legal security; it offers the freedom to change jobs without visa constraints and removes the looming threat of deportation.

Ultimately, for Indians, the American dream transcends the attainment of a green card. With the assurance that only an American passport can provide, citizenship is seen as the ultimate goal, offering unparalleled safety and stability.

Top American Immigrant Billionaires in 2025

America’s wealthiest immigrants, a group now numbering 125 individuals hailing from 41 countries, collectively hold $1.3 trillion in assets, reflecting their significant impact and presence in the nation’s economic landscape.

Emerging from humble beginnings, billionaires like Steven Udvar-Hazy exemplify the transformative journey many immigrants undertake when they move to America. Having arrived from Hungary as a child, Udvar-Hazy began his life in the U.S. packing boxes in a Manhattan warehouse for 30 cents an hour at age 14. Today, he stands as a pioneer in the airplane leasing industry, illustrating the stark contrast between his early life experiences and his present achievements.

Udvar-Hazy speaks to the unique mindset immigrants possess, having left behind totalitarian or hardship conditions in their home countries. “When you get out of that situation and come to America, you have a completely different value system,” he explains, highlighting the stark differences in motivation and appreciation compared to those born and raised in the U.S.

This perspective isn’t limited to Udvar-Hazy. Immigrants comprise a record 14% of America’s nearly 900 billionaires, according to Forbes’ latest list. These 125 foreign-born citizens collectively represent 18% of the $7.2 trillion in total billionaire wealth in the United States.

Remarkably, three out of the top ten richest people in America are immigrants. Elon Musk tops the list as both America’s and the world’s wealthiest individual, with an estimated net worth of $393.1 billion. Born in South Africa, Musk’s journey brought him to the U.S. via Canada as a college student. Google cofounder Sergey Brin follows as the second richest immigrant, worth approximately $139.7 billion. His family’s immigration from Russia to escape anti-Semitism played a crucial role in his path to success.

Jensen Huang, cofounder and CEO of Nvidia, stands as America’s third richest immigrant, with a net worth of $137.9 billion. Born in Taiwan and later relocated to Thailand, Huang was sent to the U.S. at age nine to flee social unrest. His story is among many from Taiwan, which ties with Israel for the second most billionaire immigrants in the U.S., witnessing an increase from 4 to 11 Taiwanese billionaires since 2022. Notably, Huang’s cousin, Lisa Su, CEO of AMD, has also entered the billionaire ranks, one of 17 female billionaire immigrants, compared to 10 two years ago.

The latest list also showcases new faces like Maky Zanganeh, who hails from Iran. As co-CEO of Summit Therapeutics, Zanganeh was propelled into the billionaire classification after the company’s stock skyrocketed by nearly 200%, driven by a promising lung cancer drug candidate. She emphasizes the adaptive mindset necessary for immigrants, stating, “In business, you must stay sharp, evolve constantly, and be resilient.”

India has made a significant contribution, displacing Israel as the birth country of the most billionaire immigrants in the U.S., with a total of 12 individuals. Recent additions from India include Sundar Pichai, CEO of Alphabet; Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft; and Nikesh Arora, CEO of Palo Alto Networks.

These stories highlight not only the diverse origins of America’s wealthiest but also underscore the entrepreneurial spirit and determination that define many immigrants’ successes.

Indian H-1B Worker Cautions on US Property Purchase Risks

With interest rates on the rise, job insecurity, and changing immigration policies, an H-1B visa holder in the U.S. has ignited a debate, urging fellow Indians to reconsider buying a house.

An H-1B visa holder in the United States has sparked significant discussion on Reddit, cautioning others against purchasing property under the current economic conditions. The user’s post, shared on the subreddit r/h1b, carries the straightforward headline: “Please don’t buy a house in this environment. Just my advice of course.”

The Reddit user argues that, given the present market conditions, renting often appears to be a more financially prudent choice. This viewpoint is grounded in several factors currently affecting potential homebuyers, particularly those on visas, who might face additional challenges and uncertainty.

Rising interest rates are a primary concern, with potential homeowners facing higher mortgage costs that could stretch finances too thin. The user also points out job insecurity as another critical factor. Many individuals on visas are employed in sectors that could be vulnerable to economic shifts, which might jeopardize their financial stability and, in turn, their ability to maintain mortgage payments.

Adding to the financial considerations are the complexities of immigration policies, which continue to evolve. These policies can have far-reaching implications for those on work visas, further complicating decisions about long-term investments like homeownership.

The Reddit post outlines how, under these conditions, the traditional wisdom of purchasing a home as a secure investment might not hold true for everyone. Instead, renting provides more flexibility, enabling individuals to adapt more quickly to changing personal and financial circumstances.

This discussion comes at a time when potential homebuyers, particularly those on work visas, need to navigate a complex landscape of economic and policy-related challenges. By sharing their perspective, the user has encouraged others to carefully assess their situations and consider whether entering the real estate market is the right decision at this time.

Original insights like those shared on Reddit provide a valuable perspective for many, especially those facing similar situations, underlining the importance of community discussions in navigating today’s uncertain economic environment, according to Business Today.

Supreme Court to Decide on Birthright Citizenship Issue

The legal battle over President Donald Trump’s executive order aiming to restrict birthright citizenship could soon return to the U.S. Supreme Court after a federal judge blocked the order’s implementation nationwide.

A judge in New Hampshire on Thursday issued a preliminary injunction against President Donald Trump’s executive order that sought to end birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to parents without legal status. This decision halts the enforcement of the order across the country.

Judge Joseph LaPlante, appointed by former President George W. Bush, granted a preliminary injunction and certified a class-action lawsuit regarding all children potentially impacted by the order. This ruling arrives shortly after the Supreme Court’s decision in Trump v. CASA, which limited judges’ ability to issue nationwide injunctions but did not resolve the constitutionality of Trump’s order itself.

The concept of birthright citizenship is rooted in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which grants American citizenship to anyone born on U.S. soil, including children born to undocumented immigrants.

In his order, Judge LaPlante expressed little hesitation in determining that an injunction was necessary. “Respondents’ arguments about irreparable harm remain unconvincing to the court,” LaPlante wrote, highlighting the constitutional concerns surrounding the rapid implementation of such a policy. He stated that acting without legislation and national debate could cause irreparable harm to thousands who would otherwise be entitled to citizenship.

Renowned immigration law expert Stephen Yale-Loehr told Newsweek that while the injunction is a critical step, it is a preliminary finding that allows the case to proceed as a class action. He noted that it does not resolve the essential questions concerning the executive order itself, emphasizing that a final decision might not reach the Supreme Court until next year.

In a statement made on the Bloomberg Law podcast, Jonathan Adler, a constitutional law professor at William & Mary Law School, speculated that the Trump administration will likely challenge the class certification of the case. He suggested that the matter may end up before the Supreme Court, anticipating that five justices might be ready to rule on the order’s merits.

Cody Wofsy, the deputy director of the ACLU’s Immigrant’s Rights Project, described the ruling as a significant victory, asserting that it upholds the intended constitutional protection of citizenship for all children born in the U.S. He underscored the importance of preserving these citizenship rights against presidential overreach.

Conversely, White House spokesman Harrison Fields affirmed that the Trump administration plans to actively contest what he called the obstructive actions of district court judges undermining policy objectives set by President Trump.

Judge LaPlante’s decision includes a seven-day stay, allowing the government time to appeal the ruling. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court concluded its opinions for the 2024-25 term in late June, and the upcoming term will commence in October, with emergency order applications being considered at any point.

According to Newsweek, the legal trajectory related to this executive order remains unsettled as the battle over birthright citizenship persists.

US Imposes $250 Visa Fee for Tourists, Students from 2026

Indian nationals traveling to the United States will face a significant increase in visa-related costs starting in 2026, as part of a broad immigration overhaul under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Indian nationals traveling to the United States for tourism, education, or temporary work will soon face a significant increase in visa-related costs.

Beginning in 2026, a new $250 “Visa Integrity Fee” will be levied on most non-immigrant visa categories under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1), which was signed into law by U.S. President Donald Trump on July 4.

The surcharge will apply to B-1/B-2 tourist and business visas, F and M student visas, H-1B work visas, and J-1 exchange visas, among others. Only diplomatic visa classes (A and G) are exempt.

The fee will be collected by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) at the time of visa issuance and is framed as a refundable security deposit. To be eligible for a refund, travelers must comply with all visa conditions—such as departing the U.S. within five days of expiration or adjusting their immigration status legally—and submit the required documentation.

The $250 charge is in addition to existing costs. The current $185 Machine-Readable Visa (MRV) application fee remains unchanged, but applicants will also be required to pay a $24 I-94 surcharge for entry/exit tracking.

Those using the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) or Electronic Visa Update System (EVUS) will incur additional fees of $13 and $30, respectively. For Indian travelers, the total cost of obtaining a U.S. visa could rise to approximately $480, effectively doubling current expenses.

The new surcharge is part of a broader immigration overhaul under the One Big Beautiful Bill, which allocates $150 billion through 2029 for expanded immigration enforcement.

The legislation increases funding for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), expands detention infrastructure, accelerates deportations, and limits asylum access. These measures will be partially funded through higher visa fees and a new 1 percent tax on foreign remittances, according to the Immigration Advocacy Project.

While the DHS maintains that the Visa Integrity Fee will promote compliance and deter overstays, critics argue that the fee disproportionately burdens applicants from countries like India, which sees high demand for U.S. visas. Education providers, technology employers, and travel industry representatives have warned that the increased financial burden may discourage students and skilled workers from choosing the U.S.

Estimates suggest that the new visa and related fees could generate $64 billion through 2034, contributing to federal tax and enforcement funding—but at a substantial cost to immigrant communities.

Source: Original article

India Sees 27% Decline in US Student Visas Since COVID

The issuance of student visas to Indian nationals for studying in the United States experienced a notable 27 percent decline between March and May this year, representing the slowest start to the visa season since the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The latest statistics from the U.S. State Department reveal that 9,906 F-1 visas were issued to Indian students during the referenced period. This marks a significant decrease from the 13,478 visas granted in the same months the previous year, and an even lower figure than the 10,894 visas issued in 2022, when international travel had only recently resumed.

The months from March to May typically witness a surge in visa processing as students gear up for the Fall semester, which generally commences in August or September. However, this year’s downturn coincides with a renewed immigration crackdown under the Trump administration, characterized by the introduction of more rigorous screening procedures for international students.

In late May, the U.S. State Department issued a directive halting new interview scheduling for F, M, and J visa applicants. This suspension of appointments, which lasted from May 27 to June 18, was a global measure as embassies were instructed to adhere to the newly implemented protocols.

The directive, endorsed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, sought to enforce mandatory social media scrutiny. Visa applicants were required to disclose their social media profiles from the preceding five years, a mandate that has stirred concerns among prospective students about processing delays and potential backlogs.

The U.S. Embassy in New Delhi issued public advisories urging Indian visa applicants to comply with these new conditions. Meanwhile, the policy adjustments have led to visa cancellations across at least 32 states in the U.S. Reports indicate that some of these cancellations involved Indian students and were associated with involvement in pro-Palestinian protests or previous legal infractions, such as DUIs, although in several cases, the reasons for cancellation were not explicitly communicated.

In response to the augmented scrutiny, many students have taken proactive measures to sanitize their digital footprints. This includes removing sensitive posts, unfollowing accounts, and tightening privacy settings in an effort to mitigate the risk of visa rejection under the expanded vetting processes.

Despite the current slowdown, Indian students continue to represent the largest cohort of international students in the United States. According to Open Doors 2024, Indian students overtook their Chinese counterparts during the 2023–2024 academic year, becoming the top contributors to the foreign student population.

Nevertheless, the overall trend for 2024 has been one of decline. From January to September of the previous year, Indian students were granted 64,008 F-1 visas, a decrease from 103,000 in 2023 and 93,181 in 2022.

Source: Original article

Immigration Officials Warn Green Card Holders of New Risks

Green card holders in the United States have been cautioned that their legal status could be at risk if they have a criminal record and violate immigration laws.

Federal authorities have issued a warning to green card holders, noting that the U.S. government has the power to revoke legal residency for those who break and abuse national laws. A statement from Customs and Border Protection (CBP) emphasized that lawful permanent residents arriving at U.S. ports of entry with previous criminal convictions could face detention before removal proceedings.

The advisory comes amid heightened immigration enforcement under the Trump administration, which has vowed to deport millions of undocumented immigrants as part of a stringent deportation strategy. The administration has labeled anyone present in the country illegally as a “criminal.”

In addition to focusing on undocumented individuals, the government’s rigorous operations have also subjected immigrants with valid visas and green cards to detention. Various reports have highlighted numerous instances of green card holders being ensnared in immigration raids.

Reports from the Office of Homeland Security Statistics estimate that 12.8 million lawful permanent residents, or green card holders, were living in the United States as of January 1, 2024. The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has stated that lawful permanent residents who breach immigration laws could lose their status and face deportation procedures.

Amelia Wilson, an assistant professor at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law and director of the Immigration Justice Clinic, underscored that there are defined legal protections in place to prevent abrupt revocation of a green card holder’s status. “The law contained within the Immigration and Nationality Act is clear,” Wilson explained to Newsweek. “The Department of Homeland Security cannot unilaterally ‘revoke’ a permanent resident’s status. There is a process the agency must follow, including serving the individual with a ‘Notice of Intent to Rescind,’ at which time that individual is entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge.”

Under the Trump administration, agencies such as CBP, USCIS, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have embarked on comprehensive social media campaigns. These campaigns encourage undocumented immigrants to self-deport, highlight criminal arrests, and maintain a significantly larger online presence than in previous administrations.

The administration is also taking action to revoke visas of foreign students allegedly involved in pro-Hamas activities, demonstrating, and distributing flyers on college campuses. This move is part of a broader executive order aimed at combating antisemitism and targeting supporters of extremist groups. The expanded crackdown includes immigration enforcement against pro-Palestinian activists holding green cards.

Several high-profile detentions have occurred, such as the case of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist and Columbia graduate student, who was arrested at his university-owned apartment.

Wilson pointed out that during these proceedings, it falls upon the government to prove by clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence that a permanent resident should lose their status. “At that point, it is the immigration judge—and only the immigration judge—who can effectively strip an individual of their green card,” Wilson added.

Public officials have echoed similar sentiments about enforcement. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated on social media: “We will be revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in America so they can be deported.” In another statement, USCIS noted that “Green cards and visas will be revoked if an alien breaks the law, supports terrorism, overstays their permitted visit time, performs illegal work, or anything else that violates the terms on which we granted them this privilege or compromises the safety of our fellow Americans.” Additionally, CBP reminded green card holders that having a criminal history does not constitute exemplary behavior for lawful permanent residents, emphasizing that possessing a green card is a privilege, not a right.

Source: Original article

-+=