Legal Groups Seek Emergency Motion to Halt ICE Detention of Immigrant Teens

Advocacy groups have filed an emergency motion to enforce a court ruling that prohibits ICE from detaining immigrant teens in adult facilities, highlighting the need for safer alternatives.

Washington, D.C. — The American Immigration Council and the National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) have filed an emergency motion aimed at enforcing a 2021 court ruling from the Garcia Ramirez v. ICE case. This ruling prevents the 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 was filed after reports surfaced indicating that ICE had resumed transferring immigrant children who entered the United States alone into adult detention facilities upon their 18th birthday, 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,” stated 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 operated 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 approach acknowledges that children require care and support, not punitive measures.

According to the Garcia Ramirez ruling, which resulted from extensive litigation by the NIJC and the Council, ICE must consider placing these youths in the least restrictive settings, such as alternative-to-detention programs, 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,” remarked 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 a program that offers financial incentives to 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, reunite 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 only compounds their trauma in a cruel and unnecessary way.”

The court has granted the emergency motion, reinforcing the need for compliance with the established legal framework regarding the treatment of unaccompanied immigrant minors.

Source: Original article

Immigrants With Health Conditions Face Visa Denials Under New Guidance

Foreigners applying for U.S. visas may face rejection due to certain medical conditions, including diabetes and obesity, under new guidance from the Trump administration.

Foreign nationals seeking visas to reside in the United States may be denied entry if they have specific medical conditions, such as diabetes or obesity, according to a directive issued by the Trump administration. This guidance, released in a cable sent to embassy and consular officials, has raised concerns among immigration advocates and health experts.

The directive instructs visa officers to consider a broader range of health-related factors when evaluating applicants. This includes assessing the likelihood that an applicant might become a “public charge,” meaning they could potentially rely on government resources due to their health issues or age. The new criteria represent a significant expansion of the health considerations that have traditionally been part of the visa application process.

Historically, visa applicants have undergone health screenings for communicable diseases, such as tuberculosis, and have been required to provide vaccination histories. However, experts argue that the latest guidelines give visa officers increased discretion to deny applications based on a wider array of medical conditions. This change is seen as part of the Trump administration’s broader efforts to limit immigration and enforce stricter policies regarding those living in the U.S. without authorization.

The cable emphasizes that visa officers must consider an applicant’s health status, stating, “You must consider an applicant’s health.” It lists several medical conditions, including cardiovascular diseases, respiratory diseases, cancers, diabetes, metabolic diseases, neurological diseases, and mental health conditions, as factors that could lead to significant healthcare costs.

With approximately 10% of the global population affected by diabetes and cardiovascular diseases being the leading cause of death worldwide, the implications of this guidance could be far-reaching. The directive also highlights obesity as a condition that can lead to other health issues, such as asthma and high blood pressure, further complicating the assessment of potential immigrants.

The cable encourages visa officers to evaluate whether applicants have the financial means to cover their medical expenses without relying on U.S. government assistance. It raises questions about whether applicants can afford long-term care throughout their expected lifespans without seeking public cash assistance or institutionalization at government expense.

This new directive appears to conflict with the Foreign Affairs Manual, which outlines that visa officers should not reject applications based on hypothetical scenarios. Charles Wheeler, a senior attorney for the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, expressed concern over the potential for bias in these assessments, noting that visa officers are not medically trained and should not be making predictions about future medical emergencies or costs.

The guidance also requires visa officers to consider the health of an applicant’s family members, including children or elderly parents. Questions posed in the cable include whether dependents have disabilities or chronic conditions that could hinder the applicant’s ability to maintain employment.

Currently, immigrants must undergo a medical examination by a physician approved by a U.S. embassy. This includes screenings for communicable diseases and inquiries about drug or alcohol use, mental health conditions, and violence history. Additionally, applicants must provide proof of vaccinations against infectious diseases such as measles, polio, and hepatitis B.

However, the new guidance expands the criteria for evaluation, prompting immigration lawyers like Sophia Genovese from Georgetown University to express concern. She noted that the directive encourages visa officers and examining physicians to speculate on the potential costs of an applicant’s medical care and their ability to secure employment based on their medical history. This could lead to significant challenges for applicants during their consular interviews.

The implications of these changes could affect countless individuals seeking to immigrate to the U.S., particularly those with pre-existing health conditions. As the Trump administration continues to implement stricter immigration policies, the impact on public health and the lives of potential immigrants remains to be seen.

According to KFF Health News, the new guidelines represent a significant shift in how health considerations are integrated into the visa application process, raising concerns about equity and access for those with medical conditions.

Source: Original article

U.S. Launches 175 Investigations into H-1B Visa Potential Abuse

The U.S. Department of Labor has launched 175 investigations into potential H-1B visa abuses, emphasizing a commitment to prioritizing American workers and holding employers accountable.

The U.S. Department of Labor has ramped up its efforts to address potential abuses of the H-1B visa program, confirming the initiation of 175 active investigations into suspected violations. This move underscores the agency’s commitment to prioritizing American workers and addressing longstanding issues within the program.

In a recent post on social media platform X, the Labor Department highlighted its determination to enforce regulations more stringently, stating that it will hold employers accountable for any misuse of the H-1B visa. “For decades, DC bureaucrats looked the other way as companies abused the H-1B visa and sold out the American Worker,” the department stated. “POTUS and Secretary LCD are bringing this to an end, holding employers accountable for their abuse and ensuring American jobs go to American workers.”

Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer has emphasized that safeguarding American workers is her top priority under President Donald Trump’s administration. She announced the launch of Project Firewall, an initiative designed to combat widespread H-1B visa misuse and ensure that U.S. workers are prioritized for available jobs. “That’s why we’re taking action through Project Firewall to hold companies accountable for rampant H-1B abuse and ensure Americans are put first in the hiring process,” she stated.

In an interview with Fox News, Chavez-DeRemer revealed that she personally approved all 175 investigations, marking a significant shift in the Labor Department’s approach to oversight. “We want to make sure these companies are not abusing,” she said, indicating a hands-on approach to the enforcement of H-1B regulations.

Just two days prior to the announcement, Deputy Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling criticized Senate Democrats for allegedly obstructing President Trump’s “America First” agenda. He urged lawmakers to cease “playing politics” with the livelihoods of American workers, further emphasizing the administration’s focus on protecting domestic employment.

The investigations are primarily aimed at uncovering misuse of the H-1B visa program, particularly cases where employers may have underpaid or manipulated over $15 million in worker wages. Early findings from the investigations have revealed concerning patterns in how the visa program has been utilized.

Officials from the Labor Department have reported widespread irregularities in the use of the H-1B visa program. In several instances, foreign workers, including those with advanced degrees, were allegedly compensated far less than what their employers had certified in official filings. Such practices not only exploit visa holders but also contribute to wage suppression for American workers.

Additionally, investigators discovered that some companies delayed reporting the termination of H-1B employees, resulting in inaccurate employment records that remained on file for weeks or even months. A review of Labor Condition Applications (LCAs)—documents that must be filed prior to hiring an H-1B worker—revealed further red flags, including fake or non-existent job locations, mismatched salaries, and positions that did not align with what was promised in the paperwork. In some cases, job postings appeared to be generic templates, lacking relevance to the actual work being performed.

These findings indicate systemic flaws in the management of the H-1B program, prompting the Labor Department to adopt a more aggressive enforcement stance to protect both U.S. and foreign workers from further exploitation.

Project Firewall, launched in September, represents the Labor Department’s most assertive effort to close loopholes and address misuse within the H-1B system. This initiative followed President Trump’s imposition of a $100,000 fee on H-1B visa applications, a measure aimed at discouraging what the administration describes as mass applications for low-cost foreign labor.

The H-1B program is widely utilized across various sectors, including technology, engineering, and healthcare, to attract highly skilled professionals from abroad, with Indian nationals constituting one of the largest groups of recipients. According to the White House, the new measures are designed to prevent companies from inundating the system with “cheap labor” petitions and to ensure that American workers remain competitive in the job market.

Officials assert that the initiative is part of a broader strategy to restore public confidence in the visa process and guarantee that U.S. jobs are prioritized for U.S. citizens. Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer has stated that the department is committed to deploying “every resource” available to combat H-1B program abuse and will continue to strengthen oversight under President Trump’s leadership.

Source: Original article

Nearly Two-Thirds of Young Americans Contemplate Moving Abroad Due to Stress

Nearly two-thirds of young American adults are considering relocating abroad, driven by rising national stress and societal challenges, according to a recent survey by the American Psychological Association.

As the United States faces increasing societal pressures, nearly two-thirds of young American adults have contemplated moving abroad. This trend reflects a deep unease with the current state of the nation. Data from the American Psychological Association’s 2025 Stress in America survey reveals that 63% of adults aged 18 to 34 and 53% of parents have seriously considered leaving the United States due to various national challenges.

The survey, conducted from August 4 to 24, 2025, involved over 3,000 participants and highlights a nation grappling with heightened anxiety about its future. Approximately 75% of respondents reported feeling increased stress regarding the country’s trajectory compared to previous years. Political tensions remain a significant stressor, affecting 76% of adults, a figure that has remained consistent since before the 2024 election. This indicates that the concerns of many Americans extend beyond typical partisan politics.

When asked to describe the current American identity, respondents frequently used terms such as “freedom” (41%), “corruption” (38%), “opportunity” (37%), and “division” (36%). The impact of societal division is felt on a personal level, with 62% of respondents acknowledging it as a significant source of stress. Those who feel stressed by division report much higher rates of isolation, feeling left out, and lacking companionship compared to those less affected.

Loneliness is a pervasive issue, impacting half of American adults. Over 54% reported feelings of isolation, while 50% stated they often feel left out, and another 50% indicated they lack companionship at times. The need for emotional support is on the rise; 69% of adults admitted to requiring more support in the past year than they received, an increase from 65% the previous year. Among those burdened by division-related stress, 75% felt their emotional needs were unmet.

The correlation between loneliness and chronic health problems is striking. Eighty percent of those experiencing severe loneliness also live with chronic illnesses such as depression, anxiety, or chronic pain, compared to lower percentages among those who report less loneliness. Additionally, stress stemming from political and societal division manifests physically, with 83% of those stressed by division reporting symptoms like anxiety, fatigue, or headaches in the past month, compared to 66% among those less affected.

This pressure seeps into daily life, leading to increased impatience, arguments with family, cancellations of social plans, and difficulties in making future plans. Despite feelings of division and struggle, Americans hold mixed views about progress. Two-thirds believe they have more opportunities than previous generations, yet nearly as many feel their generation has faced sacrifices not previously experienced.

Technological anxiety adds another layer to these worries, particularly concerning artificial intelligence. Currently, 57% of adults cite AI as a source of stress, a significant rise from 49% in 2024. Students are particularly affected, with 78% reporting AI-related stress, nearly double from the previous year. Young adults and parents across age groups also report growing anxiety related to AI developments. Misinformation is another increasing source of stress, cited by 69% of adults, up from 62%.

Other significant sources of worry remain stable, including the economy (75%), financial issues (66%), U.S. politics, housing affordability, and mass shootings (each at 65%). Yet, amidst this turmoil, most Americans feel they retain some control over their personal lives. Seventy-seven percent are confident they can influence their futures, and 74% believe their dreams remain achievable. An even higher 84% think they can create a fulfilling life, albeit perhaps differently than previous generations.

However, 85% identify barriers obstructing their goals, and 26% are uncertain or pessimistic about achieving their aspirations. Those who doubt their future prospects experience intense mental health strains, with 89% reporting stress linked to these concerns.

Meaning and purpose primarily stem from relationships, with 92% of respondents identifying connections as central to life satisfaction. Family is paramount for 77%, followed by friendships, romantic partnerships, and pets. Health and well-being also rank highly at 59%. Conversely, while 69% of workers find their jobs stressful—the highest level since the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic—only 46% say their work adds meaning to their lives, highlighting a growing dissonance between stress and fulfillment.

Looking ahead, financial security is the top personal goal for 64% of respondents, followed by maintaining or improving health (60%) and spending quality time with loved ones (53%). Despite anxieties about the future of America, 65% of adults feel a personal responsibility to help shape the nation’s path, a sentiment that is even stronger among parents. Overall, 73% believe they can contribute to steering the country toward a better future.

The survey paints a picture of Americans navigating multiple crises—political division, social isolation, technological anxiety, and economic uncertainty—while yearning for connection and purpose. Although many young people and parents seriously contemplate leaving the country, a resilient majority still believes in their ability to build meaningful lives and effect positive change. The question remains how this optimism will endure amidst mounting pressures.

Source: Original article

DHS Ends Automatic EAD Extensions, Impacting Indian-American Communities

A recent rule change by the Department of Homeland Security has left many visa-dependent professionals, particularly Indian women on H-4 EADs, facing uncertainty and potential job loss.

In a significant shift that has left many work-based visa holders in the United States anxious, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced late last week the termination of automatic extensions for employment authorization documents (EADs). This change affects most noncitizens who must file timely renewal applications to maintain their employment status in the country.

Under the new rule, noncitizens seeking to renew their EADs will no longer receive an automatic extension of their employment authorization or EAD validity while their renewal applications are being processed by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). DHS claims that this policy aims to improve screening and vetting processes to reassess an individual’s eligibility before extending their work authorization. However, experts argue that the ruling poses significant financial risks to individuals and could adversely impact the U.S. economy.

Immigration attorney Emily Neumann expressed her concerns, stating, “If proper vetting was actually the issue, why has USCIS been waiting until people renew their EADs to complete a screening? USCIS can review an alien’s background at any point. This just harms the people who are actually following the law and are not a security threat.”

The abrupt implementation of this rule, with only a 24-hour notice, has already begun to affect individuals on the ground. Mani S., a software professional on an H-4 EAD, shared her distress: “Both my H-4 and EAD extensions are filed. I received the receipt in September, a month before this ruling came in. But I am confused; even though I applied for an extension before the ruling date, my EAD has already expired. Does this mean I cannot work? I have been trying to seek opinions from legal experts, and I am told that I need to wait to get a new EAD card before I can start working. This means that one fine day I woke up to joblessness.”

Statistics indicate that a significant number of H-4 EAD holders are Indian women, who are directly impacted by this ruling. While some may overlook the contributions of immigrants to the American economy, immigration consultant Netra Chavan emphasizes the vital roles H-4 EAD holders play. “H-4 EAD holders are often more than just contributors to the workforce; many are passionate professionals dedicated to making a real difference. They can be self-employed, creating jobs, or serve their local community, filling essential gaps in America’s job market, like special needs teachers. Very often, they also drive scientific discoveries, advance technology in IT, and serve in countless other vital roles. Losing their ability to work abruptly wouldn’t just affect their careers; it would challenge employers to find similar replacements.”

As a result of this swift rule change, thousands of H-4 EAD holders are now left scrambling for clarity regarding their next steps. For those who require extensions in the near future, the specter of forced unemployment looms large. Srija K., who works in the tech sector, expressed her confusion: “The rule left me wondering, as my EAD is valid until May 2026, but my I-94 is valid until a later date. Does that mean I stop working once my EAD expires or my I-94? I quickly booked an online consultation with an attorney, and I was told that I can only work until my EAD expiration date. This means I need to plan now, because I may lose my ability to work next year. I hope it’s temporary, but with increased paperwork for the employer too, the situation becomes very precarious. Will they be willing to hold the work until their employee navigates the changing rules?”

DHS implemented this interim final rule without prior notice, public comment, or a delayed effective date, citing urgent national security and public safety reasons. The agency stated that immediate implementation is necessary to enhance the vetting and screening of foreign nationals and that the rule relates to immigration policy affecting foreign affairs. Consequently, DHS waived the usual 30-day waiting period, making the rule effective immediately.

For H-4 EAD holders who need an extension, Chavan advises, “As per USCIS’s ‘Check Case Processing Times,’ currently, for H-4 applicants filing with an EAD, 80% of cases are completed within four months. This applies to both the Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status (Form I-539) at Service Center Operations (SCOPS) and to the Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) filed alone, indicating relatively swift processing for the majority of applicants.”

She adds, “If an H-4 applicant files their H-4 extension and/or EAD renewal up to 180 days before the current status or EAD expires, they are already taking the recommended steps to avoid any employment gaps. In that case, the new DHS rule ending automatic extensions starting October 30, 2025, should not directly affect them, because their work authorization will continue as long as USCIS adjudicates the timely-filed applications while maintaining valid underlying status.”

However, complications arise if USCIS processing times extend beyond the expiration of the EAD for H-4 holders, potentially leading to unintended employment gaps. Chavan notes, “In such cases, applicants may need to challenge the ended rule in court or seek administrative relief, presenting themselves as impacted parties to argue for reinstatement of automatic extensions or other remedies to protect their ability to work legally.”

Source: Original article

Trump’s Second Term Could Bring Major Immigration Overhaul

New report reveals that the Trump administration’s recent immigration policies threaten the foundations of American democracy through extreme measures and a radical overhaul of the 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 significant transformation of the U.S. immigration system that poses a serious threat to the foundations of American democracy. While some voters may have endorsed a tougher stance on immigration during the election, the report illustrates how the administration’s extreme actions extend far beyond mere policy changes; they undermine the rule of law itself.

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

Among the administration’s actions are severe restrictions on who can enter the United States, the removal of legal protections for those already residing in the country, and an unprecedented increase in enforcement measures. In the process, the Trump administration has dismantled long-standing legal safeguards, disregarded 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.”

The report outlines several key findings that underscore the administration’s aggressive approach to immigration:

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 who attempt to approach a port of entry are often turned away, and in some instances, those who win their cases remain detained indefinitely.

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. Tens of thousands of approved refugees are left stranded abroad.

Mass revocation of legal status. The administration has aggressively revoked humanitarian parole and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for over a million individuals within just six months, stripping them of work permits and forcing many into undocumented status.

Weaponizing bureaucracy. Legal immigration pathways are being obstructed by significant fee increases, processing freezes, and opaque barriers that make it nearly impossible for lawful applicants to obtain or maintain their status.

A maelstrom of fear and chaos. The administration’s aggressive enforcement tactics have instilled fear among immigrants of all legal statuses, leaving them anxious about their daily safety in the United States. Anyone can be targeted for arrest, detention, and deportation, regardless of their legal status, and these actions can occur in places such as churches, schools, and courthouses.

A radical reorganization of law enforcement resources. The Trump administration is establishing an unprecedented, cross-agency immigration operation that draws resources from various federal and state law enforcement agencies and the U.S. military, prioritizing immigration enforcement above all other public safety and law enforcement 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, setting the stage for a dramatic 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 also includes powerful firsthand accounts from individuals affected by these policies. Ilia, a nonbinary Russian dissident, won their asylum case but remained in detention for over a year without a release date. Axel, a DACA recipient and youth leader, is leaving his job to return to school amid uncertainty regarding his legal status. Beatriz, an immigrant lawyer, has encountered cases that remind her 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 change due to legal challenges, the administration’s broader 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 seeing 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, along with interviews featuring experts and individuals impacted by these policies.

Source: Original article

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

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

WASHINGTON, DC — A new report released today by the American Immigration Council outlines the extensive economic and humanitarian consequences of the Trump administration’s travel ban, implemented in June 2025. This ban restricts immigration from 19 countries, and its effects are already being felt across various sectors.

In 2022, nearly 300,000 individuals from these affected countries entered the United States, contributing significantly to the economy by filling essential jobs and generating approximately $715.6 million in 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,” stated Nan Wu, research director of the American Immigration Council.

According to data from 2023, of the 300,000 individuals 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 sparked immediate and widespread public backlash, the 2025 iteration has seen a more subdued response. This is largely attributed to its gradual implementation and the introduction of expanded exemptions. However, the report emphasizes that the damage caused by this version of the ban is no less 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.”

Reports indicate that the administration is contemplating the addition of 36 more countries to the travel ban. Should this occur, tens of thousands more individuals from those nations could be prohibited from entering the United States, further exacerbating the economic, social, and diplomatic fallout.

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

Yemen

Visas sharply restricted:

Venezuela

Burundi

Cuba

Laos

Sierra Leone

Togo

Turkmenistan

The implications of this travel ban extend beyond individual hardship; they pose a significant threat to the U.S. economy and its global standing. As the situation evolves, the American Immigration Council continues to advocate for policies that promote inclusivity and economic growth.

Source: Original article

Over 100,000 South Asian Families Face Job Loss After EAD Changes

More than 100,000 South Asian families face potential job loss as the Department of Homeland Security eliminates the 540-day automatic extension for Employment Authorization Documents (EAD).

On Thursday, a significant change in immigration policy was announced that has left many South Asian families in distress. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has officially removed the 540-day automatic extension for Employment Authorization Documents (EAD), a lifeline that many had relied upon to maintain their employment status while waiting for renewals.

This decision, effective October 30, 2025, means that any EAD renewal filed on or after this date will not receive any grace period. As a result, if an individual’s EAD card expires, their job is at risk, along with their family’s financial stability and future plans.

The 540-day extension was initially introduced to alleviate the burden on legal workers, particularly those from South Asian countries such as India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, as well as others from around the world. This policy was championed by advocates who aimed to “Save 1 Million Families” by extending the auto-renewal period from 180 to 540 days. The extension was signed into law on May 3, 2022, and had provided crucial support to approximately 1.2 million legal workers while the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) processed their applications.

However, the recent decision by the DHS has left many individuals anxious about their futures. A software engineer from Hyderabad, a nurse from Kerala, a data scientist from Colombo, and an ERP developer from Dhaka have all reached out with the same urgent concern: “If USCIS takes eight months to process my renewal, will I lose my job, my health insurance, and my child’s school?” The unfortunate answer is yes, unless they filed their renewal before the October 30 deadline.

Among those affected are over 100,000 Indian H-4 spouses, recent OPT STEM graduates from prestigious institutions, and Nepali TPS nurses who played a vital role in healthcare during the COVID-19 pandemic. The impact of this policy change is not just theoretical; it translates into real financial losses for families. For instance, if a card expires on March 1, 2026, and an application is filed on November 3, 2025, the average processing time of 7.5 months could result in a gap of 106 days without income, amounting to a staggering loss of nearly $30,000 for a single family. When multiplied across 100,000 households, this could mean a total economic impact of approximately $3 billion.

The implications of this policy change extend beyond immediate job loss. Families may face severe financial strain as mortgages stall, children may have to switch schools, and remittances to aging parents in their home countries could dry up. Additionally, many individuals may find their driver’s licenses expiring, as these are often tied to EAD status in 17 states. Employment gaps could also jeopardize green card applications, leading to potential denials based on “public charge” criteria.

In light of these challenges, advocates are urging affected individuals to take immediate action. They recommend filing the I-765 application online as soon as possible, as waiting until the previous timeline of 180 days early is no longer sufficient. Individuals are encouraged to document their application receipt and communicate with their employers about potential unpaid leave. Financial planning is also critical, with suggestions to save at least three months’ worth of expenses in a separate account designated for EAD gaps.

Despite the grim outlook, there remains a thread of hope. The USCIS still has 22,000 unused H-1B visas available this year, and there are bipartisan efforts in Congress to address the backlog of applications. Community support continues to be a vital resource, with many South Asian volunteers coming together to provide assistance and solidarity during these trying times.

As families navigate this new reality, it is crucial to remain proactive and connected. The immigrant community has historically shown resilience in the face of adversity, and this situation is no different. By filing early, planning carefully, and leaning on community networks, families can work to protect their futures one renewal at a time.

Source: Original article

Nearly Half of 2025 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 $8.6 trillion in revenue and employing over 15 million people worldwide.

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 more than 15.4 million people globally. This data underscores the vital role that immigrants play in fostering innovation, driving economic growth, and creating jobs 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,” stated Nan Wu, director of research at the American Immigration Council.

Companies founded by immigrants or their children are transforming 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 highlight the significant impact of these immigrant-founded companies:

In fiscal year 2024, the Fortune 500 companies established by immigrants or their children generated $8.6 trillion in revenue, which, if compared to national GDPs, would rank as the third-largest economy in the world.

These companies employ over 15.4 million people, 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 appearing on the Fortune 500 list for the first time 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,” remarked Steve Hubbard, senior data scientist at the American Immigration Council.

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

Source: Original article

MAGA Supporters Claim Immigration Influenced Mamdani’s NYC Mayoral Victory

Social media reactions to Zohran Mamdani’s election as New York City mayor reveal a surge of criticism from MAGA supporters, who attribute his victory to rising immigration and demographic shifts.

Following the election of Zohran Mamdani as the new mayor of New York City, social media has been buzzing with reactions, making #NewYork one of the top trending hashtags. Among the most vocal are MAGA supporters, who have expressed their discontent by claiming that increasing immigration and changing demographics significantly influenced Mamdani’s victory.

One of the posts gaining traction on X, formerly known as Twitter, encapsulated the outrage among conservative users. “New York elected a Muslim who supports aborting babies with a heartbeat, arms, fingers, and toes. Virginia elected a man who fantasized about killing conservatives and their babies. Violence is officially normalized in the Democrat Party. Pray for America,” the user wrote, reflecting the tone of anger circulating in right-wing circles.

In recent discussions on X, several users have pointed to demographic data to illustrate what they perceive as a troubling trend. A notable thread by commentator Matt Walsh stated, “A third world communist won in New York because New York is a third world city now. This is mass migration working exactly as intended.”

Another user, William E. Wolfe, expressed a more dire sentiment, writing, “It’s incredibly important to understand that Mamdani was not actually elected mayor of the historic American city that we know as ‘New York’… And his election is not the beginning of the end for NYC—it’s a death certificate. Finally, it’s a reminder that everything right now inescapably comes back to immigration.” Wolfe’s comments suggest that he believes unchecked immigration will continue to reshape the political landscape in ways detrimental to traditional American values.

These posts exemplify a broader narrative among certain social media users, who intertwine demographic statistics with pointed rhetoric. They argue that immigration and demographic shifts are directly responsible for the Democratic Party’s electoral success. The underlying message suggests that the Democratic Party, with the aid of immigration, is intentionally reshaping the electorate to its advantage. Many users express alarm, framing these changes as an existential threat to what they consider traditional American identity.

Mamdani’s victory speech has further fueled this discourse. In a clip shared widely on social media, he stated, “New York will remain a city of immigrants, a city built by immigrants, powered by immigrants, and as of tonight, led by an immigrant.” This statement has been met with mixed reactions, with some conservative users interpreting it as a sign of cultural decline.

In the wake of Mamdani’s election, X has seen an influx of videos and images that convey a sense of despair among conservative users. One particularly striking image reads, “RIP NYC: Founded 1624, Died 2025,” suggesting that the city’s identity has been irrevocably changed. Accompanying posts lament the perceived “death” of New York, framing Mamdani’s election as a final blow to what they view as the city’s traditional culture and values.

Some users have taken the anti-immigration narrative even further, linking Mamdani’s win to the influence of foreign-born and female voters. One user wrote, “Zohran Mamdani won New York City’s mayoral race thanks to super-blocs created by women voters and foreign-born voters. Noticing patterns? We need our Gen Z native-born MEN to realize that now is their time to restore order and Christian Patriotism. Christ is King.” This rhetoric illustrates how some users perceive immigration and demographic change as a direct threat, calling for action from native-born citizens.

Another user amplified the anti-immigration sentiment by sharing a poll that suggested most of Mamdani’s voters had lived in New York for less than five or ten years. “People born in New York overwhelmingly rejected him. They remember,” the user claimed. Such posts frequently attack immigration and the influence of newcomers, framing Mamdani’s victory as evidence that recent arrivals are reshaping the city’s political landscape.

Taking the rhetoric a step further, Gabe Guidarini, Vice President of College Republicans America, made a historical reference, stating, “Demography is destiny. Thanks, Ronald Reagan!” By invoking Reagan, Guidarini linked current demographic changes and Mamdani’s victory to the long-term effects of the 1965 immigration reforms, suggesting that shifts in population composition were an inevitable factor shaping electoral outcomes today.

The 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act, enacted under President Lyndon B. Johnson, reshaped U.S. immigration by prioritizing family reunification and ending quotas that favored Northern and Western European immigrants. This act opened U.S. immigration to a more diverse array of countries, significantly altering the immigrant population.

In response to the new realities created by the 1965 Act, Ronald Reagan’s 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act offered amnesty to millions of undocumented immigrants and introduced employer sanctions to curb illegal hiring. Together, these legislative measures set the stage for the modern U.S. immigration system, balancing legal pathways with regulatory oversight.

The discourse surrounding Mamdani’s election underscores the deep divisions in American society over immigration and demographic change. As social media continues to amplify these sentiments, the implications for future elections and cultural identity remain a topic of intense debate.

Source: Original article

U.S. Department of Labor Restarts H-1B and PERM Application Processing

The U.S. Department of Labor has resumed processing Labor Condition Applications for H-1B visas and PERM labor certifications following the end of the recent government shutdown.

After a government shutdown caused by a lapse in federal funding, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has officially resumed processing Labor Condition Applications (LCAs) for H-1B visas and PERM labor certifications. The Office of Foreign Labor Certification (OFLC) announced that its Foreign Labor Application Gateway (FLAG) system is now fully operational.

This resumption allows employers to file new applications, track current submissions, and receive updates on pending cases. The critical restart of the FLAG system lifts a pause that began around September 30, 2025, which halted services for several weeks.

During the shutdown, employers were unable to submit new applications or amendments, resulting in a significant backlog of cases. With the system back online, employers can now submit LCAs for H-1B, H-2A, H-2B, and PERM certifications necessary for sponsoring foreign workers for both temporary and permanent employment.

However, officials have cautioned that processing times may be slower than usual due to the accumulated backlog, particularly for applications filed prior to the shutdown. This delay has significantly impacted industries that heavily rely on foreign talent, such as technology and healthcare.

Many Indian nationals, in particular, are facing extended wait times as a result of the shutdown. The DOL has committed to providing ongoing updates and technical assistance to help stakeholders navigate the resumption of services smoothly. They emphasize the importance of patience as the OFLC works to return to full operational status.

As the situation continues to evolve, employers and applicants are encouraged to stay informed about processing times and any further developments from the DOL.

Source: Original article

Congressional Leaders, Including Ami Bera, Call for Reconsideration of H-1B Restrictions

U.S. lawmakers, including Representative Ami Bera, are urging President Trump to reconsider recent restrictions on H-1B visas, citing potential negative impacts on the economy and U.S.-India relations.

In a recent letter to President Donald Trump, U.S. Representative Jimmy Panetta, along with Congressmen Ami Bera, Salud Carbajal, Derek Tran, and Congresswoman Julie Johnson, has called for the reversal of the September 19 Proclamation that limits H-1B visas. The bipartisan group of lawmakers expressed concern that these restrictions could adversely affect the relationship between the United States and India, as well as diminish America’s competitive advantage in technology and innovation.

Representative Ami Bera, a senior Indian American member of Congress and a long-time proponent of stronger ties between the U.S. and India, underscored the importance of H-1B professionals in bolstering the U.S. technology sector. “Our economy thrives on global talent and innovation,” Bera stated. He cautioned that restrictive visa policies could jeopardize both American leadership in the tech industry and the partnership with India.

Panetta shared similar sentiments, describing the H-1B program as essential for maintaining America’s leadership in technological innovation, particularly in light of the rapid advancements in artificial intelligence. He noted that nearly 75 percent of current H-1B recipients originate from India and urged the administration to expand the program rather than restrict it to foster continued growth in high-tech industries.

The lawmakers highlighted that many of the most successful companies in America were founded or led by individuals who were once H-1B visa holders. These entrepreneurs continue to contribute to job creation and economic development across the country. They argued that limiting visa availability would negatively impact local economies, particularly in areas with significant Indian American and immigrant populations that play a vital role in civic and economic life.

This appeal comes in the wake of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’s recent decision to prohibit H-1B hiring at state universities, as well as new guidance from the Department of Homeland Security regarding application fee adjustments. Despite these developments, the White House has reiterated that President Trump’s priority remains “putting American workers first.” This stance continues amid ongoing legal challenges from business groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, regarding the visa restrictions.

As the debate over H-1B visa policies unfolds, the implications for the tech industry and U.S.-India relations remain a focal point for lawmakers advocating for a more inclusive approach to immigration that supports innovation and economic growth.

Source: Original article

US Government Shutdown Halts H-1B Visa Filings, Impacting Indian Applicants

As the U.S. government shutdown continues, thousands of overseas technology professionals, particularly from India, are facing significant disruptions in H-1B visa processes and job security.

The ongoing U.S. government shutdown, now in its fifth week, has left thousands of overseas technology professionals grappling with uncertainty over stalled visa processes and potential job disruptions. Many of those affected are Indian nationals, who comprise over 70% of all H-1B visa holders in the United States.

With key federal departments unable to process Labour Condition Applications (LCAs)—the first step in H-1B filings—immigration attorneys are warning that the shutdown has effectively frozen both visa renewals and new petitions. This situation has deepened anxiety for skilled workers and their employers alike.

“Labor Condition Application (LCA) processing has stopped, forcing clients to halt H-1B filings,” said Matthew Minor, a partner at Corporate Immigration Partners based in Cincinnati. The LCA is a required certification from the Department of Labor (DOL) that employers must complete before hiring foreign professionals under H-1B, H-1B1, or E-3 categories.

With the DOL’s operations stalled, even routine applications are at a standstill. “This effectively halts all H-1B filings—new, change of employer, extension, or amendment,” noted Helene Dang, a Houston-based immigration lawyer and partner at Foster LLP. The disruption has left both companies and workers in a state of limbo.

The impact of the shutdown is particularly severe for Indian nationals, who are facing stalled career moves, delayed project starts, and growing anxiety over maintaining lawful status while their paperwork remains stuck in the system. “The problems facing H-1B workers from India are the same, regardless of which state they work in—petitions cannot be filed now because the shutdown has prevented LCAs from being processed,” explained Richard T. Herman, an immigration attorney based in Cleveland.

The shutdown has also disrupted the DOL’s core responsibilities, including certifying LCAs and determining prevailing wages—both essential steps for H-1B visa processing and employment-based green card applications. While the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) continues to operate, employers cannot proceed with filings until their LCAs are approved by the DOL.

According to Dang, the USCIS notice allowing for flexibility in late or incomplete filings under “extraordinary circumstances” offers limited comfort. “It is discretionary—meaning it is not guaranteed,” she said, emphasizing that employers and workers remain at the mercy of unpredictable timelines.

In the current climate, where Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has been actively enforcing removal powers, relying on this exception is causing significant anxiety for many H-1B workers. They are faced with the difficult choice of either departing the United States or overstaying their authorized period of stay, as noted by Becki Young, founding partner of Grossman Young & Hammond.

The ramifications of the shutdown extend beyond visa paperwork, impacting both livelihoods and business operations. “Moreover, these workers must be removed from payroll until a new H-1B petition can be filed, which disrupts U.S. business and leaves the workers without a paycheck while the shutdown is ongoing,” Young added.

Herman cautioned that the effects of the shutdown may linger well beyond the immediate crisis. “I am hearing of more companies deciding to cease immigration sponsorship in the future—whether H-1B or green card,” he said, noting that the uncertainty has made many employers hesitant to rely on foreign talent amid ongoing policy disruptions.

As the uncertainty deepens, some affected professionals are exploring alternative immigration pathways. Clients are considering options such as the EB-5 investor or EB-1C categories, according to Herman. “Some are also looking at Canada and other countries,” he added.

Unlike the H-1B, which is a temporary visa for specialized workers, the EB-5 program offers a path to permanent residency for investors who create jobs in the U.S. Similarly, the EB-1C visa allows multinational companies to transfer senior executives or managers to their U.S. operations—options that are increasingly appealing amid the ongoing freeze.

The federal shutdown, which began on October 1 after lawmakers failed to reach a funding agreement, has also stalled progress for employment-based green card applicants who depend on the DOL for crucial certifications. Geetha N. Adinata, an immigration attorney based in Los Angeles, warned that the resulting delays could cause serious setbacks for those nearing the end of their visa validity. Without timely submission of the labor market test, known as the PERM application, workers risk falling out of status.

As the situation continues to evolve, the future remains uncertain for many skilled workers navigating the complexities of U.S. immigration policy.

Source: Original article

Little Jaffna: The Intersection of Immigration and Memory in Europe

In *Little Jaffna*, Lawrence Valin’s debut film explores the complexities of Tamil-French identity through a gripping crime thriller set in Paris’s immigrant heart.

In *Little Jaffna* (2024), writer-director-actor Lawrence Valin delivers more than just a debut feature; he crafts a defiant act of representation. Set against the backdrop of the immigrant heart of Paris’s La Chapelle district, the film intricately weaves personal trauma, diasporic displacement, and systemic marginalization into the framework of a crime thriller. Beneath its gangster genre exterior, however, lies the pulse of a political film—one that interrogates the meaning of living between worlds that refuse to fully embrace you.

*Little Jaffna* served as the opening film at the recently concluded 3rd i’s 23rd Annual San Francisco International South Asian Film Festival. The crime thriller premiered at the Venice Film Festival 2024 and received a nomination for Best International Feature Film at the Zurich Film Festival.

The narrative follows Michael (Valin), a French police officer of Tamil origin, who is ordered to infiltrate a Tamil gang accused of funding Sri Lankan militants. What begins as a procedural mission evolves into an existential exploration of identity and loyalty—a metaphor for every child of migration tasked with policing their own heritage to find a sense of belonging.

Valin’s decision to center Tamil-French identity within the language of the thriller represents a radical cinematic gesture. This choice subverts the Euro-centric crime genre, redirecting its focus toward the racialized spaces that France often prefers to overlook. The vibrant neon glow of Paris is replaced with dimly lit curry shops, cramped apartments, and Tamil grocery aisles—not as exotic backdrops, but as sites of resistance and community.

The film’s bilingual script, featuring both Tamil and French, resists assimilation. By choosing not to translate everything, Valin makes a political statement: the viewer must engage actively, as the characters do not reach out to explain themselves. This approach reverses decades of colonial cinematic hierarchy, where non-white cultures were often required to justify their existence to white audiences.

*Little Jaffna* situates its moral conflict within the context of post-colonial policing. Michael’s dual role—as both an officer of the French Republic and a son of a colonized diaspora—captures the psychological violence inherent in the process of assimilation. Each undercover scene serves as an allegory for systemic surveillance, with the state’s gaze intruding into the immigrant home.

In one standout moment, Michael watches a Tamil news broadcast about the Sri Lankan war while his French colleagues joke about “foreign conflicts.” This juxtaposition is not subtle; it is a deliberate choice by Valin to emphasize that the empire never truly ended—it simply learned to disguise itself within multicultural rhetoric.

The women in *Little Jaffna* are not merely emotional anchors; they embody generational memory. Radhika Sarathkumar’s portrayal of Michael’s grandmother—a survivor of war—represents the matrilineal burden of exile. Her quiet resilience stands in stark contrast to the performative masculinity exhibited by both the police and the gang, suggesting that true endurance in diaspora spaces has always been feminine, communal, and care-oriented.

Meanwhile, Puviraj Raveendran’s character, Puvi, a charismatic gang member, critiques how marginalized men are often criminalized for seeking agency that society denies them. The film does not excuse violence; instead, it contextualizes it, compelling audiences to recognize the socio-economic roots of rebellion.

Cinematographer Maxence Lemonnier employs a dense and unglamorous palette—warm earth tones, fluorescent blues, and smoke from kitchen vents—to signal that beauty in *Little Jaffna* arises from visibility rather than polish. The community’s sights and sounds are not filtered for palatability; they demand recognition. The sound design, which mixes temple chants with sirens and news static, reflects the collision of cultures.

For audiences from marginalized backgrounds, *Little Jaffna* is not merely a representation; it is a reclamation. For everyone else, it offers an opportunity to confront how systems of race, migration, and memory intertwine, even in so-called “post-colonial” Europe.

Source: Original article

India Reports Over 2,790 Deportations from the U.S. in 2025

Over 2,790 Indian nationals have been deported from the United States in 2025 as part of intensified immigration controls and cooperative efforts between India and international authorities.

Since the beginning of 2025, more than 2,790 Indian nationals who were illegally residing in the United States have been deported back to India, according to the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA). This information was disclosed by MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal during a weekly media briefing held on October 30.

Jaiswal emphasized that authorities conducted thorough verifications of the nationality and credentials of each individual before facilitating their return to India. This process is part of a broader effort to manage illegal migration effectively.

In addition to the deportations from the United States, the MEA spokesperson noted that approximately 100 Indian nationals have also been deported from the United Kingdom this year, following similar verification procedures.

The recent deportations are indicative of ongoing cooperative efforts between Indian and international authorities to address the issue of illegal migration. Notably, the number of Indian nationals detained while attempting to enter the U.S. illegally has significantly decreased, reaching a four-year low. Customs and Border Protection reported a remarkable 62% drop in such cases between October 2024 and September 2025.

Reports have highlighted specific instances of deportations, including a group of 54 individuals from Haryana. These individuals had used the so-called “donkey route,” a notorious path often employed by traffickers, to enter the U.S. illegally before being apprehended and sent back to India.

These developments underscore the heightened enforcement measures and diplomatic coordination aimed at tackling the challenges posed by illegal crossings and visa overstays involving Indian nationals. The collaborative approach reflects a commitment to managing migration more effectively and ensuring compliance with immigration laws.

As the situation evolves, authorities continue to monitor and adapt their strategies to address the complexities of illegal migration, ensuring that both national security and humanitarian considerations are taken into account.

According to Global Net News, these actions are part of a larger framework aimed at enhancing immigration controls and fostering international cooperation in managing migration flows.

Source: Original article

U.S. Ends Automatic Work Permit Extensions for H-1B Spouses and F-1 Students

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has announced a new policy ending automatic work permit extensions for certain noncitizens, significantly affecting H-1B spouses and F-1 students.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has implemented a new policy that will take effect on October 30, 2025. This policy will end the automatic extension of Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) for specific noncitizens who are applying for renewals. The change particularly affects H-4 visa holders, who are spouses of H-1B workers, F-1 students on Optional Practical Training (OPT), asylum seekers, and others who depend on EADs to work legally in the United States.

Under the previous policy, individuals filing timely renewal applications could continue to work for up to 540 days while their renewal was being processed, thanks to an automatic extension. However, this automatic extension will no longer be available, except in exceptional cases that are explicitly outlined by law or under Temporary Protected Status provisions.

DHS has described this policy shift as a necessary measure to enhance security by increasing vetting and background checks. The goal is to better detect fraud and identify potential public safety risks. Joseph Edlow, the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), emphasized that working in the U.S. is a privilege that necessitates rigorous screening to ensure national security.

In light of this new policy, applicants are strongly encouraged to submit their renewal applications up to 180 days before their current EAD expires. This proactive approach is crucial to avoid potential gaps in work authorization, which could occur if there are delays in the renewal processing.

This sudden policy change is expected to impact thousands of foreign workers, particularly Indian nationals, who represent the largest group of H-1B visa holders and international students in the U.S. In 2024, approximately 27% of all international students in the U.S. were from India, and Indian nationals accounted for around 71% of approved H-1B visa recipients.

The decision to end automatic work permit extensions marks a significant tightening of immigration work authorization policies. This shift reverses earlier expansions made by the Biden administration during the COVID-19 pandemic, which aimed to address processing backlogs. The current administration’s focus appears to be on stronger immigration enforcement that aligns with national security priorities.

As the October 2025 deadline approaches, many affected individuals will need to navigate this new landscape carefully to maintain their work authorization and avoid disruptions in their employment.

Source: Original article

The Journey of an Undocumented Immigrant in American Hospitality

Amar Shah and Rahul Rohtagi’s short film “The Patel Motel Story” explores the transformative impact of Indian immigrants on the American hospitality industry, highlighting resilience and the reimagining of the American dream.

In the spring of 2018, Amar Shah sparked a conversation on social media that would resonate with many. His Twitter thread, which quickly went viral, addressed the backlash surrounding the character of Apu from “The Simpsons.” Shah argued that, despite the stereotypes, Apu represented the reality of countless children like him—those who grew up in immigrant families, often helping out in their parents’ small businesses.

Shah’s reflections on his childhood experiences at his father’s gas station mini-mart in rural America revealed the challenges faced by immigrant families. He wrote about the fears that accompanied working behind the counter, including the anxiety of theft or even the threat of violence. This candid portrayal of immigrant life became the foundation for a viral essay in the Washington Post and later inspired his award-winning screenplay, “Gas-N-Shop.”

Now, with his new short film, “The Patel Motel Story,” co-directed with Rahul Rohtagi, Shah turns his focus to the untold narratives of Indian immigrants who have reshaped the American hospitality landscape. This 13-minute documentary premiered at the Tribeca Festival in New York and is currently making its way through various film festivals.

In a conversation with The American Bazaar, Shah and Rohtagi shared a striking statistic: Indian Americans, despite comprising only about 1 percent of the U.S. population, own more than 40 percent of all motels in the country. This remarkable achievement is rooted in the determination of the early “Patel motel” pioneers who laid the groundwork for future generations.

Both directors have personal connections to the immigrant experience. While Rohtagi’s parents were doctors, he acknowledges that the stories of hard work and sacrifice are common among immigrant families. These early impressions fueled their passion for documenting the lives of those who have contributed to the American hospitality industry.

Rohtagi explained their inspiration for the film, noting that they grew up hearing stories from family friends and acquaintances who came from India and started small businesses, often in the motel industry. The idea of transforming these memories into a documentary took time to develop, but the two eventually recognized the importance of telling this story.

Shah and Rohtagi’s journey to create the documentary was not without challenges. They faced the difficulty of piecing together a narrative with limited documentation, relying heavily on personal anecdotes. A significant breakthrough came when they connected with historian Mahendra K. Doshi, who was researching the history of Indian immigrants in the hospitality sector. Doshi’s work, particularly his book “Surat to San Francisco,” provided crucial insights into how Patels from Gujarat began establishing their motel empire in the United States.

One of the key figures in this narrative is Kanji Manchu Desai, who is credited with laying the foundation for many families from Gujarat. According to Shah, Desai arrived in the U.S. in the mid-1930s and eventually owned the first motel operated by an Indian. His vision extended beyond personal success; he encouraged other Indians to lease motels, offering guidance and support during a time when many faced discrimination and limited access to financial resources.

Rohtagi noted that Desai’s influence was profound, as he provided handshake loans to many newcomers who were eager to start their own businesses. This support was especially crucial at a time when racism was prevalent, and many motels advertised themselves as “American owned” to deter potential customers from patronizing establishments run by immigrants.

However, Desai’s journey was not without its challenges. Rohtagi shared that he became undocumented after overstaying his visa, ultimately leading to his deportation. Despite this setback, Desai’s legacy lives on through the families he inspired, many of whom have turned their small motel operations into successful enterprises.

The documentary, while only 13 minutes long, serves as a starting point for a larger narrative that Shah and Rohtagi hope to expand into a feature film or series. They have already screened the film at various festivals, including the International South Asian Film Festival of Canada and the Tasveer South Asian Film Festival in Seattle.

Since its release, Shah has received numerous accounts from motel owners eager to share their own compelling stories. The filmmakers are excited to explore these narratives further, as they believe there are many more journeys to uncover within this rich tapestry of immigrant experiences.

For Shah and Rohtagi, “The Patel Motel Story” is not just a film; it represents a reclamation of a legacy that has quietly redefined the American dream for countless families. As they continue to share these stories, they hope to shed light on the resilience and ingenuity of those who have contributed to the hospitality industry in the United States.

Source: Original article

Indian-American Community Responds to Recent Policy Changes in Newsroom

USCIS provides a comprehensive online newsroom featuring news releases, updates, and resources related to immigration and citizenship.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) offers a dedicated newsroom that serves as a central hub for all news releases and alerts. This platform is designed to keep the public informed about various topics related to immigration and citizenship.

Visitors to the USCIS News webpage can easily search for news by topic and date. This feature allows individuals to find relevant information quickly, whether they are looking for policy updates, procedural changes, or urgent announcements regarding office closures and emergencies.

In addition to news releases, the USCIS newsroom includes a video and image gallery. This section provides visual content that showcases USCIS operations, giving the public a better understanding of the agency’s work and its impact on communities across the nation.

For those interested in data and statistics, the Immigration and Citizenship Data page is a valuable resource. It offers a variety of categories related to immigration data, enabling users to access important statistics that inform public discourse and policy discussions.

USCIS also maintains a robust social media presence. Through various social media accounts, the agency shares the latest updates and information, making it easier for the public to stay connected and informed about immigration matters.

The newsroom features recent speeches, statements, and testimonies from USCIS leadership. These documents are searchable by topic and date, providing insights into the agency’s priorities and initiatives.

For those seeking more in-depth information, the Electronic Reading Room is an essential resource. This section allows users to access information identified under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), enabling transparency and public access to government records.

USCIS also has media contacts throughout the country to handle inquiries from journalists and other media representatives. This network ensures that accurate information is disseminated to the public and that media professionals have the resources they need to report effectively on immigration issues.

Lastly, the USCIS newsroom highlights upcoming events, including local and national engagements. This information is crucial for individuals and organizations interested in participating in discussions or learning more about immigration policies and practices.

For more information and to access these resources, visit the USCIS News webpage.

Source: Original article

New Platform Reveals Details of Family Separation Chaos

Newly launched platform reveals the chaotic implementation of family separations during the Trump administration’s zero-tolerance policy, highlighting the need for transparency and accountability in immigration practices.

On October 30, 2025, the American Immigration Council unveiled a new platform aimed at analyzing records pertaining to the U.S. government’s tumultuous execution of family separations during the controversial zero-tolerance policy period under the first Trump administration.

This transparency project provides a detailed examination of what many consider to be one of the most disgraceful immigration policies in modern American history. It also highlights the responses from various stakeholders during the crisis, offering critical insights into how public resistance emerged against this harmful policy.

The project draws upon thousands of internal government emails, memos, and previously unreleased datasets obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and litigation. It reveals that the zero-tolerance policy was not merely a reactionary measure but a calculated strategy intended to deter migration by punishing families while obscuring accountability.

“Thanks to these records, we can more clearly see the inner workings of how this atrocity was carried out and the public’s struggle to obtain transparency and accountability,” said Raul Pinto, deputy legal director for transparency at the American Immigration Council. “The same disregard for oversight and human consequences that made family separation possible is now re-emerging in the ongoing mass detention and deportation efforts.”

The family separation project features interactive visualizations and declassified documents that illustrate how families were systematically erased from government databases. It also reveals how officials misled the public and how congressional oversight, along with media scrutiny, played a crucial role in bringing the policy to an end. The project includes audio recordings of actor Corey Stoll reading significant internal government emails that expose the confusion and insensitivity surrounding the policy’s implementation.

Key findings from the archive underscore the troubling realities of the family separation policy. Internal communications show that officials were aware their data on separated families was “corrupt.” Leaders within Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) expressed a lack of confidence in their own data regarding children taken from their parents, even while publicly denying any wrongdoing.

Moreover, oversight from Congress, the media, and regulatory agencies proved vital in halting family separations. However, as of 2025, critical oversight bodies such as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General and the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties have faced significant sidelining or defunding.

The records indicate that the family separation policy was characterized by intentional chaos. Confusion was weaponized to create significant delays in the reunification of children with their parents, exacerbating the trauma experienced by affected families.

“The records don’t just show government officials’ egregiousness and cruelty. They serve as a warning for our current moment of mass detention and deportation that is still seeing families separated,” Pinto stated. “These records illustrate how data manipulation and secrecy enabled systemic human rights violations during the first Trump administration. Without transparency and oversight, history will repeat itself.”

The newly created portal, a result of years of FOIA litigation by the American Immigration Council and its partners, allows journalists, researchers, and policymakers to delve into key documents and data that expose the inner workings of family separation and the failures that ensued.

Despite claims that the family separation policy ended in June 2018, hundreds of children remained separated from their parents for years, with some still not reunited. “Family separation was a national shame made possible by bureaucratic indifference to human suffering,” Pinto added. “The lesson here is clear: a collapse of oversight allows for cruelty to fill the vacuum.”

Source: Original article

Litigation Threatens USCIS Decision to End Automatic EAD Extensions

The Department of Homeland Security’s recent decision to end automatic Employment Authorization Document extensions has sparked concerns among H-4 and Adjustment of Status visa holders, prompting potential legal challenges.

As October comes to a close, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has introduced a significant policy change that has left many work permit holders in a state of uncertainty. The new rule, which takes effect on October 30, 2025, will eliminate automatic extensions for Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) across several categories, including H-4 visa holders and those applying for Adjustment of Status (AOS).

Under the existing policy, applicants seeking EAD renewals benefit from an automatic 540-day extension, allowing them to continue working while their applications are processed by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). However, with the new rule set to take effect just 24 hours after its announcement, many individuals are now facing the prospect of job loss.

The abrupt nature of this policy change has raised concerns about the lack of notice provided to those affected. Immigration attorney James Hollis, a partner and head of sports, entertainment, and business immigration at McEntee Law Group, criticized the timing of the announcement, suggesting that it could leave applicants vulnerable. “USCIS realizes that this is a potential problem with major policy announcements,” Hollis stated. “So, when they make an announcement on the morning of October 29, 2025, that any cases received on or after October 30, 2025, will have a different policy, my assumption is that they’re trying to catch people out.”

Hollis emphasized that this lack of notice means applicants who were preparing to submit their applications based on the previous rule will now have to navigate the new regulations, potentially leading to significant disruptions in their employment status.

Despite the challenges posed by this new rule, there may be a glimmer of hope. Hollis indicated that litigation challenging the rule is a possibility, with immigration attorneys already strategizing their next steps. “I would also suspect that litigation on this issue will be considered,” he noted.

The implications of this policy change extend beyond individual applicants; it poses serious financial and professional challenges for thousands seeking to renew their work permits. Attorney Kripa Upadhyay, co-chair of the Immigration & Global Mobility Practice at Buchalter, highlighted the broader impact on the workforce. “The biggest repercussion is unnecessary disruption to the workforce at a time when inflation is already high,” she said.

Upadhyay also pointed out the professional constraints that may arise from this policy shift. “Employees will be forced to face job loss once the current EAD expires and before the new one is issued. USCIS does not allow for premium processing options for EADs, and normal processing times can range from 7 to 10 months, depending on the jurisdiction of the case,” she explained.

The sudden change in policy has left many applicants confused and ineligible for benefits they had anticipated under the previous rules. Hollis elaborated on the potential consequences: “If someone has been preparing an employment authorization document extension believing that they will have a 540-day automatic extension while the application is pending, but haven’t submitted the application by yesterday night, they will now not receive the automatic extension and may be left for a period without work authorization.”

This situation could lead to job loss, difficulties in renewing driver’s licenses, and other complications for those affected.

The ruling also imposes challenges on employers, who may need to terminate employees once their current EADs lapse if the new EAD has not yet arrived. Upadhyay remarked, “For employers, this is an unnecessary disruption and adds compliance needs, as they will need to terminate employees and then rehire them, adequately documenting all of this to avoid I-9 fines.”

For those who may soon require an extension but have not yet applied under the previous rule, immigration attorney Leandro Carvalho, a partner at Dell’Ome Law Firm, advises prompt action. “They will need to file for an EAD renewal as soon as possible. If the new EAD is not issued in time, depending on the circumstances, they can try to submit an expedite request to USCIS. In any case, they will not be able to work without a valid EAD,” he said.

As advocacy groups and immigration lawyers prepare for potential litigation, those affected by the policy change are left anxiously awaiting the outcome. The resolution of this issue could significantly influence how USCIS implements future policy changes and whether advance notice becomes a legal requirement.

Source: Original article

Revised Form I-129 for Immigration Petitions Now Available

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

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 is marked with an edition date of October 23, 2014.

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

The revised Form I-129 is designed to enhance the filing process. USCIS encourages applicants to download the updated form, which includes prompts to ensure that all necessary information is provided. This improvement aims to facilitate more efficient processing of applications.

For those looking to file Form I-129, it is crucial to use the correct edition to avoid potential delays or rejections of their petitions.

For more information and to download the revised form, visit the USCIS forms website.

Source: Original article

Who Is Responsible for the $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee?

The new $100,000 fee for certain H-1B visa petitions, effective September 21, 2025, raises questions about applicability, exemptions, and payment processes for employers and foreign nationals.

The “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers” is a presidential proclamation that introduces a significant $100,000 fee for specific H-1B visa petitions submitted after September 21, 2025. This new fee is set to impact a variety of stakeholders, including employers and foreign nationals seeking employment in the United States.

On October 20, 2025, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) provided an update regarding the fee’s applicability. This update clarified who is responsible for paying the fee, the timing of the payment, and the eligibility criteria for exemptions.

The $100,000 fee will not apply to H-1B petitions filed before September 21, 2025. Additionally, petitions filed on or after this date that involve an amendment, a change of status, or an extension of status for individuals already in the United States will also be exempt, provided these requests are approved.

While USCIS did not explicitly address change of employer petitions, these typically involve status extensions and are generally considered exempt from the fee. Beneficiaries approved under these conditions will not be required to pay the fee if they later leave the U.S. and apply for a new H-1B visa or seek admission in H-1B status.

Conversely, the $100,000 fee will apply to new H-1B petitions filed from September 21, 2025, onward for foreign nationals who are outside the U.S. without a valid H-1B visa. It will also apply to petitions requesting consular notification, port of entry notification, or pre-flight inspection for beneficiaries physically present in the United States.

In situations where a beneficiary is currently in a non-immigrant status within the U.S., but USCIS denies their change of status to H-1B, the employer must pay the fee for the beneficiary to apply for the H-1B visa abroad or seek admission in H-1B status.

Exemptions to the fee have also been clarified. Contrary to previous assumptions, organizations exempt from the American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act (ACWIA) cap—such as nonprofit universities, governmental bodies, and nonprofit research institutions—are not relieved from paying the fee.

USCIS has outlined a very limited path for seeking a national interest waiver. Such waivers, granted solely at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security, are reserved for “extraordinarily rare circumstances.” To qualify, employers must demonstrate that the foreign worker’s presence in the U.S. benefits national interests, that no U.S. worker can fill the role, that the individual poses no security or welfare risk, and that imposing the fee would harm U.S. interests. Requests with supporting documentation should be sent to H1BExceptions@hq.dhs.gov, although processing timelines remain unclear.

It is important to note that the USCIS criteria for exemption are more restrictive than the broader provisions outlined in the original proclamation, which allowed for industry-wide or company-wide exemptions deemed to be in the national interest.

The payment process for the $100,000 fee requires completion online via ACH transfer to the U.S. Treasury before filing the petition. The payment portal indicates that a full refund will be processed if the application is not approved. However, it remains unclear if this refund policy applies solely to visa applications or also to petitions. There is no explicit guidance on payment timing if a change of status request is denied.

Legal challenges to the fee have already emerged. Several lawsuits have been initiated, including one filed in the Northern District of California by diverse employers, such as healthcare recruiters and unions. Additionally, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a separate suit in the District of Columbia, alleging that the fee is unlawful and detrimental to American businesses.

Given the ongoing uncertainties surrounding the fee’s implementation and the unsettled regulatory environment, foreign nationals currently in the United States should exercise caution before planning any travel abroad, especially when needing to secure an H-1B visa. The guidance is subject to change without formal rulemaking, and potential government shutdowns could limit consular services, leading to delays. Therefore, travel plans should be flexible and coordinated closely with legal counsel and employers.

Source: Original article

Nayna Gupta Discusses Deportation’s Effects on Families and Communities

Nayna Gupta, Policy Director of the American Immigration Council, testified at a Shadow Hearing 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 (WA-07). This event, 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 far-reaching consequences of current deportation practices. She articulated how these policies not only tear apart families but also destabilize entire communities across the nation. Gupta pointed out that the impact of deportation extends beyond individual cases, affecting the social fabric and emotional well-being of those left behind.

In addition to the emotional toll, Gupta underscored the systemic issues that arise from such policies. She argued that deportation practices undermine due process and fairness within the U.S. immigration system. This erosion of legal protections, she noted, contradicts the foundational values of justice and dignity that should characterize American society.

Gupta’s testimony is part of a broader commitment by the American Immigration Council to advocate for an immigration system that prioritizes family unity, safeguards due process, and upholds the principles of justice and dignity. The Council aims to foster an environment where immigrant families can thrive without the constant threat of separation.

As the hearing concluded, the urgency of addressing these issues became increasingly clear. The testimonies shared during the event highlighted the need for comprehensive immigration reform that recognizes the humanity of all individuals affected by deportation.

According to the American Immigration Council, it is essential to build a system that not only protects families but also reflects the core values that define the nation.

Source: Original article

U.S. Implements New Entry and Exit Rules for Foreign Nationals

The U.S. government has introduced new entry and exit regulations for non-citizens, including Green Card holders, aimed at enhancing border security through advanced facial recognition technology.

The United States government has unveiled new entry and exit regulations that mandate the collection of photographs from all non-citizens, including Green Card holders. This initiative, part of enhanced border security measures, was published by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in the Federal Register on Friday. The primary goal of these new rules is to leverage advanced facial recognition technology to bolster national security and combat document fraud.

According to CBP, the initiative aims to address various national security concerns, including the threat of terrorism, the fraudulent use of legitimate travel documentation, and the presence of individuals who remain in the United States beyond their authorized stay or are present without proper admission or parole.

The agency’s filing specifies that photographs and biometric data will be collected at all entry and exit points, which include airports, seaports, and land crossings. While CBP has already been gathering fingerprints and images from visa holders and certain residents, this new regulation extends mandatory data collection to all individuals departing the country.

These measures are part of a broader immigration crackdown initiated during former President Donald Trump’s administration. Although first proposed in 2021, the updated rule is set to take effect on December 26, 2025. This will grant U.S. border officials the authority to photograph non-citizens at any point of exit. Additionally, CBP plans to expand biometric data collection to include individuals who are currently exempt from such measures, such as children under 14 and adults over 79.

CBP has acknowledged the challenges associated with implementing these new systems, particularly the difficulty of executing the program without designated, secure exit lanes at various ports. However, the agency has stated that advancements in facial recognition technology now make comprehensive enforcement more feasible.

According to the Trump administration, an integrated biometric entry-exit system will assist the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in identifying visa overstays and individuals attempting to evade immigration laws. CBP plans to create galleries of images linked to individuals, utilizing passport data, border checkpoints, and travel documents to compare with real-time images at entry and exit points.

A public comment period regarding the new rule will commence on October 27. CBP anticipates that the system could be deployed nationwide within three to five years. Officials assert that this updated framework represents a significant step toward establishing a “fully coordinated” border security system.

Source: Original article

Silicon Valley’s Silence on H-1B Visas: Indian-American Perspectives

Silicon Valley leaders have largely refrained from commenting on the recent increase in H-1B visa fees, raising concerns about its impact on the tech industry.

Silicon Valley executives have remained notably silent regarding the recent hike in H-1B visa fees, a policy change that directly affects the tech industry, one of the most vulnerable sectors. As both startups and major tech firms grapple with increased costs associated with hiring international talent, the lack of public response from these influential leaders has raised eyebrows.

In stark contrast, smaller startups have been vocal about the ramifications of the H-1B fee increase, openly discussing how it has strained their already limited budgets. Many founders express that the heightened costs are forcing them to slow down hiring, rethink planned expansions, and in some cases, even consider relocating operations to countries with more favorable immigration policies. For these young companies, which heavily rely on skilled international talent, the fee increase poses a significant threat to their growth and innovation, making their concerns both immediate and urgent.

While the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has filed a legal challenge against the administration’s $100,000 fee on H-1B visa petitions, some Silicon Valley leaders have surprisingly welcomed the fee hike. Figures such as Netflix co-founder Reed Hastings, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, and OpenAI’s Sam Altman have expressed support, while others have chosen to remain silent. Tesla CEO Elon Musk, a long-time advocate for the H-1B program, has not publicly commented on the fee increase, leading to speculation about his silence, particularly following his recent fallout with former President Trump.

Atal Agarwal, founder and CEO of OpenSphere and LegalBridge, noted, “After the U.S. Chamber of Commerce lawsuit, I feel there is going to be more statement overall around this. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce usually consists of many different companies, so a joint lawsuit addresses that. Another point is – we all know the way Trump works. He is not happy with people or companies that retaliate. So, the real problem here is that companies do not want to go against him in isolation. But yes, everyone was expecting that the corporates would be more active and would issue more statements.”

In 2025, major tech companies such as Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, and Meta have significantly increased their reliance on H-1B visas, making them some of the largest sponsors of skilled foreign workers. Among these big players, JP Morgan has been one of the few to comment on the issue, while most others have opted for silence despite their growing dependence on the program. Agarwal added, “First of all, we have to realize that Silicon Valley consists broadly of two types of sectors – one, the really big tech companies that have a lot of money and often pay upwards of $300k per year to many H-1B employees. So, a $100k fee, while it bothers them, they know that they can absorb it. The other sector of Silicon Valley consists of founders who have raised VC capital or are in the early stages. These founders usually end up hiring their early employees, and often the founders themselves are immigrants who often end up using the O-1A pathway, so for them, the fee hike does not take any impact.”

JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon has been among the few industry leaders to directly address the H-1B fee hike, calling Trump’s $100,000 charge “something that came out of the blue.” He stated that the bank would be “engaging with stakeholders and policymakers” regarding the issue. In an interview with The Times of India, Dimon emphasized the importance of visas for a global firm like JP Morgan, saying, “For us, visas matter because we move people around globally – experts who get promoted to new jobs in different markets.” He also highlighted the broader implications, noting, “The challenge is that the US still needs to remain an attractive destination. My grandparents were Greek immigrants who never finished high school. America is an immigrant nation, and that’s part of its core strength.”

The approval figures underscore just how heavily these companies depend on international talent to fuel their growth. Data shared by Amanda Goodall on X indicates that Amazon Web Services led the way in 2025 with 10,044 H-1B approvals, nearly 800 more than the previous year. Microsoft and Meta followed closely with 5,189 and 5,123 approvals, both showing solid year-over-year gains. Apple also experienced an increase with 4,202 approvals, while JP Morgan Chase saw a sharp rise to 2,440, an increase of more than 700. Together, these numbers highlight a growing reliance on skilled workers from abroad, even as policy costs escalate.

Given these soaring approval numbers, the silence of most tech leaders is even more pronounced. Their companies are among the heaviest users of the H-1B program, yet they appear hesitant to speak out, possibly fearing political backlash or the risk of being blacklisted at a time when federal contracts and regulatory goodwill are crucial to their operations. For firms that depend heavily on Washington’s support—whether through infrastructure partnerships, AI research grants, or defense-related deals—the calculation may be that remaining quiet protects their interests, even if the policy directly undermines their hiring pipelines.

At the same time, if Silicon Valley giants choose to quietly accept the fee hike, they risk slowing down their hiring processes and narrowing their intake to only those skilled workers who can absorb the added costs. This selective hiring could disrupt revenue growth, stifle innovation, and ultimately harm competitiveness. Yet, despite these significant stakes, the industry’s most influential voices remain silent.

Are they working behind the scenes on a larger strategy? Will they press the Trump administration to reconsider, or simply move forward by absorbing the blow? If pressure mounts, could they follow the lead of smaller startups by relocating operations or relying more on remote talent, ironically at a time when many insist on returning to physical offices?

Source: Original article

German Chancellor Defends Comments on Migrants and Public Safety

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz defends his controversial remarks about migration, asserting that many citizens feel unsafe in public spaces due to the presence of undocumented migrants.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has reaffirmed his controversial statements regarding migration, claiming that many Germans and Europeans feel “afraid to move around in public spaces.” His comments have sparked significant backlash, particularly from various political factions within Germany.

During a recent visit to Potsdam, Merz addressed the ongoing issues related to illegal immigration, stating, “But we still have this problem in the cityscape, of course, and that’s why the federal interior minister is facilitating and carrying out large-scale deportations.”

The remarks drew criticism, with some accusing the Chancellor of harboring racist sentiments. In response to the backlash, Merz defended his position while attending a summit on the Western Balkans in London. He emphasized that migrants play a vital role in the labor market, as reported by German-based DW News.

Despite acknowledging the contributions of migrants, Merz insisted that many people in Germany and across Europe are still “afraid to move around in public spaces.” He attributed this fear to the presence of migrants who lack permanent residency, do not engage in the workforce, and fail to adhere to local regulations.

When pressed about whether he would retract his earlier statements, Merz responded, “I don’t know whether you have children. If you do, and there are daughters among them, ask your daughters what I might have meant. I suspect you’ll get a pretty clear and unambiguous answer. There’s nothing I need to retract.”

The controversy surrounding Merz’s comments has led to the creation of a petition challenging his views. Among the signatories are prominent figures such as actor Marie Nasemann and environmental activist Luisa Neubauer. Neubauer expressed her concerns on Instagram, stating, “There are approximately 40 million daughters in this country. We have a genuine interest in ensuring that our safety is taken seriously. What we are not interested in is being misused as a pretext or justification for statements that were ultimately discriminatory, racist and deeply hurtful.”

As the debate continues, Merz’s comments highlight the ongoing tensions surrounding immigration policy in Germany and the broader European landscape.

Source: Original article

Standing with Sikh Truckers to Uphold Workers’ Rights in America

The recent federal rule change affecting immigrant truckers, particularly within the Sikh community, raises significant concerns about workers’ rights and the values that underpin American society.

As the proud son of Indian immigrants who built their lives in Silicon Valley through hard work and unwavering determination, I have always believed in the American promise: that if you follow the rules, contribute to society, and pursue your dreams with integrity, this nation will welcome you with open arms. However, the recent federal rule change targeting immigrant truckers—especially those from the hardworking Sikh community—strikes at the core of that promise. It is not merely a policy adjustment; it represents a betrayal of the values that make America great.

In the aftermath of a tragic accident on a Florida turnpike, where a Sikh trucker from California was involved in a fatal crash that claimed three lives, the Trump administration has seized upon this heartbreaking incident to cast a shadow over an entire community. U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy’s sweeping restrictions now bar immigrants with temporary work authorization—such as those with pending asylum cases—from obtaining or renewing commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs). This move is not about enhancing road safety; it is a blunt instrument wielded against legal workers who have every right to earn a living.

It is essential to clarify that the Sikhs affected by this rule are not skirting the system. They hold lawfully issued Employment Authorization Documents (EADs), granted after rigorous vetting by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. These individuals have presented their asylum claims in immigration courts, attended every required hearing, and complied fully with the law. Many have passed stringent CDL exams, logged thousands of safe miles, and supported families while keeping America’s supply chains humming. For them, trucking is not just a job—it is a pathway to the American Dream, one that accommodates their faith’s sacred tenets, such as uncut hair and turbans, in a profession that values independence and resilience.

Sikh Americans have long been the backbone of the trucking industry. An estimated 150,000 Sikhs drive trucks across the U.S., with the vast majority hailing from California, where they have transformed vast farmlands and bustling ports into economic engines. This community chose trucking because it offered dignity: the flexibility to pray five times a day, the open road to reflect on their heritage, and wages to send remittances home or invest in their children’s futures. Now, with licenses expiring overnight and no grace period for renewal, thousands face job loss, financial ruin, and the dismantling of businesses built over decades.

The xenophobia fueling this policy is as predictable as it is painful. The Florida crash sparked a torrent of racist vitriol online and on the airwaves—tweets mocking turbans, slurs hurled at bearded drivers, and conspiracy theories painting Sikhs as perpetual outsiders. This is not a new phenomenon; post-9/11, Sikhs were among the most targeted religious groups for hate crimes precisely because their visible faith makes them easy scapegoats. Yet, instead of condemning bigotry, the administration has amplified it, zeroing in on California as a punching bag for its progressive stance on immigration under Governor Gavin Newsom.

However, facts do not bend to fearmongering. Data from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) paints a starkly different picture. California’s commercial fatal crash rate is nearly 40% below the national average—proof that immigrant drivers, including Sikhs, are among the safest on the road. In contrast, the ten states with the highest rates of fatal crashes are all red states: Wyoming, New Mexico, North Dakota, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, and Mississippi. When measured per 100 million vehicle miles traveled, these figures expose the hypocrisy of the current narrative. If safety were the goal, we would see nationwide reforms: mandatory advanced training, AI-assisted fatigue monitoring, and incentives for electric fleets. Instead, we are punishing a minority community that is already overrepresented in one of the nation’s deadliest jobs.

This is not a safety policy; it is immigration theater, timed to stoke division ahead of midterms and score points against “sanctuary” California. Immigrant truckers do not just drive our goods—they sustain our economy. They haul produce from the Central Valley, deliver tech components to factories, and ensure shelves remain stocked during crises. Revoking their licenses does not make roads safer; it creates chaos, shortages, and lost revenue. And for what? To appease a fringe narrative that portrays “others” as threats behind the wheel?

As someone who has championed South Asian voices in tech and politics—from advising on Indo-U.S. trade deals to mobilizing AAPI voters—I stand unequivocally with these Sikh truckers. They deserve better than abrupt edicts that ignore their qualifications and contributions. We must demand a reversal: reinstate eligibility for EAD holders who have passed CDL standards, provide transition periods for renewals, and invest in holistic safety measures that elevate everyone.

To my fellow Americans: Remember that the trucker logging miles at dawn, turban tied firm and eyes on the horizon, is as American as apple pie—or in this case, perhaps a plate of saag paneer shared roadside. Let us protect their right to work, worship, and thrive. The road ahead should be one of justice, not jeopardy.

Source: Original article

Federal Appeals Court Affirms Block on Iowa’s Anti-Immigrant Law

In a significant ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has upheld an injunction against Iowa’s controversial anti-immigrant law, SF 2340, protecting immigrant families and reinforcing constitutional limits on state power.

On October 23, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit delivered a decisive victory for immigrant communities and the rule of law by upholding an injunction that blocks Iowa’s Senate File 2340 (SF 2340). This law, described as the most severe anti-immigrant legislation in Iowa’s history, sought to criminalize the presence of certain immigrants in the state, even those who are legally authorized to be in the United States.

SF 2340 aimed to empower local officials to conduct arrests and deportations, a power that is constitutionally reserved for federal authorities. This federal oversight is crucial to maintaining a consistent national immigration policy, preventing a fragmented approach that could lead to family separations and chaos across state lines.

“This is a tremendous relief for thousands of Iowa families,” said Erica Johnson, founding executive director of the Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice (Iowa MMJ), the organization that initiated the lawsuit. “The court’s decision confirms that key members of our community should never have been criminalized simply for being here and living their lives in peace. This ruling restores a sense of safety and dignity to people who call Iowa home.”

The lawsuit, titled Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice v. Bird, was filed by Iowa MMJ alongside two individual plaintiffs, with representation from the ACLU of Iowa, the ACLU Immigrant Rights Project, and the American Immigration Council.

Under SF 2340, non-citizens who had previously been deported or denied entry to the United States would have faced criminal charges for residing in Iowa, regardless of any subsequent lawful status or federal permission to return. Additionally, the law would have allowed state and local law enforcement to arrest individuals based solely on their presence in the state and mandated state judges to issue deportation orders. Such powers are constitutionally designated to the federal government, ensuring that families are not divided by conflicting state regulations.

“SF 2340 is the worst anti-immigrant law in Iowa’s history. Today’s ruling keeps SF 2340 blocked and protects immigrants in Iowa from many serious harms: arrest, detention, deportation, family separation, and incarceration, all by the state,” stated Rita Bettis Austen, legal director of the ACLU of Iowa. “At a time when the federal government is causing so much harm to families, it’s all the more important that the state is not permitted to make things even worse. The Court reaffirmed that the Iowa legislature does not have authority to pass its own immigration laws to detain and deport people.”

The law was initially enacted on April 10, 2024, but was blocked from taking effect on June 17, 2024, leading the state of Iowa to appeal the decision. Following the recent ruling by the Eighth Circuit, the law will remain blocked as the case continues to navigate the federal court system.

“The Eighth Circuit’s decision resonates far beyond Iowa,” remarked Emma Winger, deputy legal director at the American Immigration Council. “Across the country, we’re seeing states attempt to take immigration enforcement into their own hands. This could create a reality in which a person could be welcomed in one state and arrested in the next, just for crossing a border. Under our Constitution, immigration has to be handled at a federal level so families aren’t trapped in chaos. This ruling upholds that principle.”

Spencer Amdur, senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s national immigrants’ rights project, emphasized the significance of the ruling, stating, “Today the Eighth Circuit reiterated what the Supreme Court has said for over a hundred years: States have no business regulating immigration on their own. This law would have torn families apart and denied people their right to live in this country and seek legal protections. The court was right to strike it down, just like courts have done for other laws like this around the country.”

As the legal battle continues, the implications of this ruling are expected to influence immigration policy discussions and enforcement practices not only in Iowa but across the United States.

Source: Original article

USCIS Announces New H-1B Visa Fee Structure and Exceptions

USCIS has announced new guidelines regarding the H-1B visa program, including a $100,000 fee for certain petitions starting September 21, 2025, along with specific exceptions.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has issued updated guidance concerning the Proclamation Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers. This proclamation, originally announced on September 19, is part of the administration’s ongoing reform of the H-1B nonimmigrant visa program.

Beginning at 12:01 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time on September 21, 2025, all new H-1B petitions must include an additional payment of $100,000 to be eligible for consideration. This requirement specifically targets petitions filed on behalf of beneficiaries who are outside the United States and do not currently hold a valid H-1B visa.

The new fee structure also applies to petitions that request consular notification, port of entry notification, or pre-flight inspection for individuals already in the U.S. If a petition is filed after the specified time and requests a change of status, amendment, or extension of stay, the $100,000 fee will be required if USCIS determines that the alien is ineligible for such changes. This could occur if the individual is not in a valid nonimmigrant status or if they leave the U.S. before their change of status request is adjudicated.

Importantly, the proclamation does not affect any H-1B visas that have already been issued and remain valid, nor does it apply to petitions submitted prior to the cutoff time. Holders of current H-1B visas, as well as beneficiaries of approved petitions, are not restricted from traveling in and out of the United States.

Furthermore, if a petition is filed after the deadline and requests an amendment, change of status, or extension of stay for an alien already in the U.S., the $100,000 fee will not apply if the alien is granted the requested changes. If such an alien subsequently departs the U.S. and applies for a visa based on the approved petition, they will not be subject to the payment requirement upon re-entry.

Petitioners must submit the $100,000 fee through pay.gov, adhering to the instructions provided on the platform. Payment should be completed before filing the petition with USCIS. Petitioners are required to provide proof of payment or evidence of an exception from the Secretary of Homeland Security when submitting the H-1B petition. Failure to include this documentation will result in denial of the petition.

Exceptions to the $100,000 payment can be granted by the Secretary of Homeland Security under rare circumstances. These exceptions are reserved for cases where the Secretary determines that the alien worker’s presence in the U.S. as an H-1B worker is in the national interest, that no American worker is available for the position, and that the alien does not pose a threat to national security or welfare. Additionally, it must be established that requiring the employer to make the payment would significantly undermine U.S. interests.

Employers who believe their worker meets these stringent criteria may request an exception by submitting their request and supporting evidence to H1BExceptions@hq.dhs.gov.

As the September 2025 deadline approaches, employers and potential H-1B petitioners should prepare for these changes and consider the implications of the new fee structure on their hiring processes.

Source: Original article

USCIS Clarifies $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee Requirements for Employers

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has clarified the implementation of a $100,000 fee for H-1B visa petitions, detailing who must pay and the limited exemptions available.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has recently provided much-anticipated guidance regarding the $100,000 fee imposed on H-1B visa petitions. This fee applies to petitions filed on or after September 21, 2025, for beneficiaries located outside the United States who do not currently hold a valid H-1B visa. The announcement has sparked significant discussion within immigration circles, as many visa holders express concerns about their eligibility and the implications of this new requirement.

Employers are required to pay the fee through Pay.gov, utilizing the form titled “H-1B visa payment to remove restriction.” This payment must be completed prior to submitting any petitions to USCIS. Notably, petitions filed before the September 21 deadline, as well as extensions or amendments for individuals already in the U.S., are exempt from the new fee.

While the announcement has provided some clarity, it has also raised questions about the circumstances under which exemptions may be granted. According to USCIS, rare exemptions may be available if the H-1B worker’s employment is deemed to be in the national interest, poses no security risk, and there are no qualified U.S. workers available for the position. However, immigration attorneys have criticized the “national interest” waiver as overly broad and ambiguous, suggesting that it leaves room for significant administrative discretion.

Jihan Merlin, Head of Immigration Strategy at Alma, commented on the administration’s approach, suggesting that it reflects a strategic recalibration rather than a retreat. “It’s not unraveling but it’s being narrowed in a way that seems designed to give it more of a chance to survive in court,” she stated. “By limiting it to consular petitions, the administration is aligning the policy more closely with its 212(f) authority over entry restrictions.” The true test of this strategy will come as it faces legal scrutiny.

For many current H-1B holders, the new fee and the potential for USCIS to determine ineligibility for extensions while remaining in the U.S. adds a layer of uncertainty to their immigration status. Jitesh Kumar, an H-1B visa holder, expressed his concerns, stating, “This leaves me and many others like me in a state of limbo. Since there is no clear guideline on who qualifies, we may be doing everything by the book and still discover that we’re ineligible.” This uncertainty has left many visa holders fearing the possibility of having to leave the country unexpectedly.

In terms of payment logistics, USCIS has clarified that the fee must be processed through Pay.gov before any petition is submitted. This clarification comes after confusion surrounding the payment process since the announcement of the fee by President Trump.

As for the exemptions, USCIS has specified that petitions filed before September 21, those for individuals who already hold valid H-1B visas, and approved amendments or extensions for workers within the U.S. will not be subject to the new fee. However, the criteria for the national interest waiver remain vague, leaving many in the immigration community questioning how it will be applied in practice.

Looking ahead, Merlin expressed caution regarding the potential for further easing of the fee requirements. “I don’t see the administration easing up further unless the courts step in,” she remarked. “The recent tweaks look more like a legal defense strategy than a policy reversal. If they tighten it further, it’ll be just enough to stand up in court. We’re telling companies to plan for either outcome.”

The USCIS’s recent clarifications have shed light on the $100,000 H-1B visa fee, but the ambiguity surrounding exemptions and the implications for current visa holders continue to create anxiety within the immigration community.

Source: Original article

Salesforce Proposes Streamlined Hiring Process for Immigration Officers at ICE

Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff faces criticism after proposing the use of the company’s AI technology to assist ICE in recruiting immigration officers and enhancing deportation efforts.

Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff is under fire following reports that he proposed leveraging the company’s artificial intelligence technology to support the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in its recruitment and deportation initiatives.

Internal documents obtained by The New York Times reveal that Benioff suggested using Salesforce’s AI capabilities to help ICE recruit 10,000 new agents and streamline the agency’s deportation processes. The materials included a five-page memo, a spreadsheet outlining potential opportunities with ICE, and slides detailing how AI could assist in processing tip-line reports and investigations. Salesforce confirmed the authenticity of these documents but refrained from providing detailed comments, citing the confidential nature of its contracts.

This revelation is likely to provoke further controversy among San Francisco’s liberal community, which has already expressed discontent with Benioff’s previous comments advocating for the deployment of the National Guard to address crime, drug issues, and homelessness in the city.

At this week’s Dreamforce conference, which concluded Thursday at the Moscone Center with nearly 50,000 attendees, Benioff did not address questions regarding his comments on ICE or the National Guard. His earlier endorsement of using National Guard troops to enhance public safety had already drawn criticism prior to the conference.

During a session at Dreamforce, Benioff emphasized the importance of safety, stating, “The number one thing that’s on my mind is safety. It’s all about trust and safety — it’s our highest value here.”

The U.S. government is Salesforce’s largest client, with various agencies, including the Army, Coast Guard, and Veterans Affairs, utilizing the company’s products. While Salesforce has previously collaborated with ICE under both the Obama and Biden administrations, its recent proposal to assist in scaling up enforcement operations marks a significant shift in its approach.

Benioff has positioned himself as a strong supporter of San Francisco, pledging billions to the city, including a commitment of $15 billion over the next five years. On Thursday, he also announced a $1 million donation to the San Francisco Police Department.

Salesforce’s involvement with ICE is not an isolated case among Bay Area tech firms. Recently, the White House hosted a summit with executives from OpenAI, Google, Oracle, Apple, and Meta to discuss potential collaborations on artificial intelligence and other federal technology initiatives.

The actions of Salesforce and other tech giants in Silicon Valley highlight the growing intersection between technology companies and federal policymaking. As discussions around public safety, AI regulation, and federal partnerships intensify, these engagements illustrate how influential tech leaders are shaping national priorities while navigating scrutiny and opportunities in the political landscape.

Source: Original article

Indian-American Tech Leaders Navigate H-1B Visa Changes Under Trump Administration

Several prominent Indian-origin tech leaders have navigated the H-1B visa landscape, influencing the U.S. tech industry amid proposed reforms by the Trump administration.

Several prominent Indian-origin tech leaders, including Satya Nadella, Sundar Pichai, Aravind Srinivas, Jayshree Ullal, and Arvind Krishna, began their careers in the United States on H-1B visas. These individuals have played pivotal roles in shaping the tech industry, with companies like Microsoft, Google, Perplexity AI, Arista Networks, and IBM benefiting from their leadership.

However, recent policy changes proposed by the Trump administration, such as a $100,000 fee for H-1B visa petitions and stricter eligibility criteria, have raised concerns among the tech community. These reforms could significantly impact the hiring practices of tech companies that rely on skilled foreign talent.

In response, several tech leaders have expressed their opposition to the proposed changes. Sundar Pichai has emphasized the importance of immigration in driving innovation and economic success in the U.S. Similarly, Arvind Krishna has advocated for policies that attract global talent to maintain the country’s competitive edge.

The ongoing debate highlights the critical role of immigration in the growth and sustainability of the tech industry, underscoring the need for balanced policies that support both national interests and the contributions of skilled immigrants. The voices of these leaders reflect a broader concern within the industry about maintaining an environment conducive to innovation and progress.

As the discussion continues, the implications of these proposed reforms remain to be seen. The tech industry, which has thrived on the contributions of diverse talent, faces a pivotal moment in its evolution. The outcome of this debate could shape the future landscape of technology in the United States.

Source: Original article

Supreme Court Upholds Work Rights for H-1B Spouses of Indian-Americans

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld work rights for certain spouses of H-1B visa holders by declining to review a challenge to a federal rule, affirming a previous appellate ruling.

In a significant legal development, the U.S. Supreme Court has chosen not to review a challenge to a federal rule that allows certain spouses of H-1B visa holders to work in the United States. This decision effectively upholds a 2024 appellate ruling that confirmed the legality of the program.

The case, known as Save Jobs USA v. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), was initiated by a group representing American technology workers. They argued that the DHS had overstepped its authority by extending work authorization to holders of H-4 visas, which are granted to the dependents of H-1B skilled workers. By refusing to hear the case, the Supreme Court has left the D.C. Circuit’s decision intact, allowing the rule to remain in effect.

Introduced during the Obama administration in 2015, the rule permits certain H-4 visa holders—typically spouses of H-1B workers who are pursuing permanent residency—to obtain work authorization. Proponents of the policy argue that it promotes family unity and economic stability, while critics contend that it may displace American workers.

This ruling marks the conclusion of nearly a decade of legal challenges surrounding the issue and provides clarity for thousands of families navigating the complexities of the U.S. immigration system. It also highlights the ongoing debate over employment-based immigration policies and their implications for the domestic workforce.

As the landscape of immigration continues to evolve, this decision reinforces the rights of H-4 visa holders and their families, ensuring that they can contribute to the U.S. economy while maintaining their family ties.

Source: Original article

National Immigrant Rights Groups Sue Government for ICE Arrest Records

National immigrant rights organizations have filed a lawsuit against the federal government, seeking the release of records related to ICE arrests at immigration courts and the dismissal of cases.

Washington, D.C., October 15 — LatinoJustice PRLDEF, the American Immigration Council, and Democracy Forward have initiated legal action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The lawsuit demands the release of crucial records that the government has unlawfully withheld regarding arrests at immigration courts and the dismissal of immigration cases.

Since May 20, 2025, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), along with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), has engaged in a coordinated effort to detain noncitizens who appear for hearings in immigration courts across the country.

The practice of arresting individuals who voluntarily attend their immigration court dates in search of protection raises significant concerns. Immigration courts are intended to be venues for fair hearings, not mechanisms for detention. When individuals seeking justice are arrested instead, it undermines fundamental democratic principles, discourages people from exercising their legal rights, and inflicts severe human costs.

Moreover, ICE attorneys have reportedly been requesting immigration judges to dismiss cases and transfer individuals into expedited removal processes, which offer fewer due process protections and no pathway to permanent residency. The EOIR has instructed immigration judges to grant these dismissals immediately, a move that contradicts established agency policy and longstanding practices.

To gain insight into the circumstances surrounding these arrests at immigration courts, LatinoJustice and the American Immigration Council submitted a total of 11 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests on July 28 and 29, 2025. Six requests were directed to the EOIR, while five were sent to ICE. These requests sought basic information about arrests and dismissals related to immigration courts, as well as communications among the agencies involved in these activities. The organizations also requested expedited processing for their requests.

However, the government has failed to provide timely and adequate responses to ten of these FOIA requests, violating legal requirements. The EOIR has claimed it cannot locate any guidance issued to immigration judges regarding case dismissals and courthouse arrests, despite the existence of leaked documents that contradict this assertion. Additionally, the EOIR has declined to search for records detailing its coordination with ICE, while ICE has either ignored or delayed responses to all requests directed to it.

“Our FOIA requests seek to shine a light on how ICE operates in immigration courts, where families are fighting to keep their families together and for their future,” said Rex Chen, supervising counsel for Immigrant Rights at LatinoJustice PRLDEF. “Instead of transparency, they have chosen secrecy, stonewalling, or provided inadequate responses to our request. It is unacceptable to prolong this urgent matter.”

Chris Opila, a staff attorney for transparency at the American Immigration Council, emphasized the importance of understanding the dynamics of arrests at immigration courts. “Families’ futures are on the line. That’s why we need to better understand how these arrests at immigration courts are being carried out, and the degree to which supposedly independent and neutral agencies like the EOIR are pushing a mass deportation agenda. The public has a right to know what the EOIR and ICE are doing behind closed doors,” he stated.

Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, echoed these sentiments, stating, “The public has a right to know when our government rewrites the rules to make mass arrests and deny people due process — especially inside the very courtrooms meant to deliver justice. The administration cannot hide guidance that turns immigration courts into traps and accelerates deportations without fair hearings. We will not allow these agencies to operate in the shadows. Transparency is the first safeguard against abuse of power, and we’re in court to demand accountability.”

The lawsuit aims to compel the four agencies to comply fully with FOIA and to disclose all documents responsive to seven of the requests. It also seeks the expedited release of guidance directives and correspondence between ICE and the EOIR.

LatinoJustice PRLDEF has been advocating for over 50 years to create a more just society by challenging injustices and empowering communities through advocacy and education. For more information about their work, visit www.LatinoJustice.org.

Democracy Forward Foundation is a national legal organization focused on advancing democracy and social progress through litigation, policy, public education, and regulatory engagement. More details can be found at www.democracyforward.org.

The American Immigration Council works to strengthen America by shaping perceptions and actions towards immigrants and advocating for a fair immigration system. Their efforts include litigation, research, legislative advocacy, and communications. For the latest updates, follow them on social media or visit their website.

Source: Original article

Supreme Court Provides Relief for H-4 EAD Holders Amid Uncertainty

The Supreme Court’s decision to decline a challenge to the H-4 EAD program offers temporary relief to immigrant spouses, yet experts caution that its future remains uncertain amid shifting political landscapes.

The Supreme Court’s recent decision not to hear a challenge against the H-4 work authorization has provided a moment of stability for thousands of immigrant spouses. However, experts warn that the program’s future is still closely tied to the unpredictable nature of political will.

In recent months, the immigration landscape in the United States has been tumultuous, with work visa holders facing significant uncertainty due to abrupt policy changes from the Trump administration. Amid this chaos, a cautious sense of optimism has emerged for H-4 EAD (Employment Authorization Document) holders, who are primarily spouses of H-1B visa holders.

On Tuesday morning, the Supreme Court declined to review a petition filed by Save Jobs USA, which sought to challenge a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. This ruling affirmed that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had the authority to implement the H-4 EAD rule. The news was met with celebrations among H-4 EAD holders, who viewed the decision as a protective measure for their work authorization.

Johnson Myalil, an immigration attorney based in the Washington, D.C., area, expressed cautious optimism about the ruling. “In some ways, it is good news, as it removes the uncertainty of the court invalidating the H-4 employment authorization, which is used by a substantial number of highly educated spouses of H-1B professionals—estimated to be around at least 300,000,” he stated.

Despite the positive implications of the Supreme Court’s decision, experts caution that challenges remain. Nandini Nair, an immigration attorney at A.Y. Strauss, LLC, emphasized the need for caution. “Absolutely not,” she said when asked if the decision alleviates uncertainty for H-4 EAD holders. “While the Supreme Court declined review this time, a different case with a stronger factual or procedural posture could make its way up again. The program is safe for now, but its survival depends on regulatory stability and political will.”

Nair further noted that for the H-4 EAD program to achieve true permanence, it would need to be codified by Congress rather than relying solely on regulation. “But for today, we can breathe a bit easier,” she added.

The history of the H-4 EAD program has been fraught with challenges. Introduced in 2015 during President Barack Obama’s administration, the program faced immediate opposition from Save Jobs USA, which argued that the DHS had overstepped its authority. This led to years of litigation, leaving many H-4 EAD holders in limbo as companies hesitated to hire them amid ongoing uncertainty.

Myalil remains cautious about the program’s future, stating, “We cannot rule out the possibility that immigration restriction advocates in the Trump administration may push for the cancellation of H-4 EAD through the federal rulemaking process.” However, he also pointed out a silver lining: “That process can take several years.”

Critics of the H-4 work authorization often argue that it takes job opportunities away from American workers. Yet, mounting evidence and legal testimony suggest the opposite—that H-4 EAD holders have made significant economic contributions. Nair highlighted that H-4 EAD holders are predominantly women who contribute billions in household income and tax revenue. Many work in high-demand STEM fields, launch startups, open businesses, and even employ U.S. workers.

“H-4 EADs aren’t just about helping immigrant families; they’re about unlocking untapped talent, boosting the U.S. economy, promoting equity, and stabilizing the workforce. This program has actually been a net gain for the United States,” Nair asserted.

Her argument is supported by data. A 2019 analysis by the American Action Forum, utilizing U.S. Census data, estimated that H-4 workers contribute approximately $12.9 billion annually to the U.S. GDP. This figure could rise to between $40 and $41 billion if all eligible spouses were authorized to work. A 2024 report by FWD.us found that removing current H-4 EAD holders from the workforce would shrink annual GDP by $7.5 billion and cut tax revenues by $2 billion across federal, state, and local levels.

Despite these positive contributions, the H-4 EAD program has often been unfairly criticized, similar to the H-1B visa program. This criticism often stems from widespread misconceptions about immigration’s role in the American economy. Nair noted, “They often get a bad rap because of the persistent narrative that H-1B visa holders ‘take American jobs.’ That same mindset spills over to the H-4 EAD program.”

She concluded, “The controversy isn’t really about H-4 spouses at all—it’s about the larger debate over high-skilled immigration.”

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 of 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 significant immigration raid at a Hyundai manufacturing facility in southeastern Georgia. This operation led to the detention of at least 475 workers, many of whom were South Korean nationals, with some reportedly holding legal status. This incident marks the largest worksite raid in recent history.

In the wake 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, based in Atlanta, Georgia, expressed deep concerns about the 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. She emphasized that while the raid may generate dramatic headlines, it fails to address the underlying issues within the U.S. immigration system, such as the lack of legal pathways for workers and an inappropriate focus on punishing individuals who do not pose a threat to society. “Raiding worksites isn’t reform; it’s political theater at the expense of families, communities, and our economy,” she added.

Nan Wu, the director of research at the American Immigration Council, further elaborated on the economic implications of such raids. “Immigrant workers are the backbone of our economy, filling critical labor gaps in manufacturing and beyond,” she noted. According to Wu, undocumented workers constitute 5.7% of the national manufacturing workforce, while in Georgia, they represent 6.7% of that sector. She argued that targeting worksites instead of creating pathways to legal employment is not only cruel but also 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,” Wu explained.

The American Immigration Council has made experts available to discuss the counterproductive nature of worksite raids and to propose more effective immigration solutions. The organization advocates for reforms that would create a more humane and functional immigration system, rather than relying on punitive measures that disrupt lives and communities.

This incident serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing challenges within the U.S. immigration system and the need for comprehensive reform that prioritizes the well-being of workers and the economy.

Source: Original article

Connecticut Congressman Jim Himes Backs GOPIO-CT on H-1B Visa Fees

Connecticut Congressman Jim Himes recently met with GOPIO-CT to discuss concerns over a proposed $100,000 fee increase for H-1B visas, emphasizing its potential negative impact on small businesses and the economy.

On October 9, 2025, the Connecticut chapter of the Global Organization of People of Indian Origin (GOPIO-CT) held a virtual meeting with Congressman Jim Himes (CT-4) to address the contentious $100,000 fee hike for H-1B visas, a policy introduced during the Trump Administration. The meeting included GOPIO-CT officials, representatives from GOPIO International, and business owners who would be affected by this significant change.

Dr. Thomas Abraham, Chairman of GOPIO and Trustee and Advisor to the chapter, underscored the H-1B program’s substantial contribution to the U.S. economy, noting it generates over $200 billion annually while costing only $8.5 billion. He cautioned that increasing barriers for highly skilled professionals may drive them to seek opportunities in countries such as Canada, Germany, and China, which could result in long-term economic detriment for the United States.

Mahesh Jhangiani, President of GOPIO-CT, highlighted the disproportionate impact of the fee hike on small and medium-sized enterprises, which typically lack the resources to absorb such a steep cost unlike larger corporations. He also expressed concerns regarding what he characterized as anti-India policies from the current administration.

Members of GOPIO-CT, including Prasad Chintalapudi from Panzer Solutions and Shailesh Naik of Cameron Engineers, emphasized the role of small businesses employing H-1B workers in fostering local employment and driving economic growth. They pointed out that many successful leaders in the tech industry, such as Elon Musk, Sundar Pichai, Satya Nadella, and Aravind Krishna, have benefitted from the H-1B program.

Attorney Nandita Ruchandani, representing Cameron Engineers, remarked on the critical sectors where H-1B visa holders work, including healthcare, education, engineering, and technology. She stressed that these immigrants not only contribute taxes and purchase homes but also support local communities. However, the prohibitive fee could jeopardize their employment.

Dr. S.K. Lo, Chairperson of the Asian American Unity Coalition (AAUC), also participated in the discussion, reinforcing the necessity of a collective approach to tackle these pressing issues.

Congressman Jim Himes, who is currently serving his ninth term and holds senior positions on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Financial Services Committee, expressed his full support for GOPIO-CT’s position. He acknowledged the risk of losing valuable talent and reiterated the importance of continued U.S.-India collaboration in areas such as commerce, trade, and defense.

For over two decades, GOPIO-CT has actively engaged in community programs, youth mentoring, policy discussions, and cultural initiatives. The chapter aims to promote awareness of Indian heritage while fostering dialogue and partnerships with local communities.

Source: Original article

Visa Restrictions Under Trump Administration Result in 19% Decline in International Students

In August 2025, the U.S. saw a 19% drop in international student arrivals, largely due to visa restrictions enacted during the Trump administration.

In August 2025, the United States experienced a notable decline of 19% in international student arrivals compared to the same month in 2024. This downturn is largely attributed to a series of stringent measures implemented by the Trump administration.

Among these measures were the suspension of student visa interviews and the introduction of a travel ban affecting 19 countries, primarily located in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East. This has had a particularly significant impact on India, which has historically been the largest source of international students to the U.S. The country saw a staggering 45% decrease in student arrivals.

The new vetting procedures introduced during this period require applicants to provide access to their social media accounts, further complicating the visa application process. These developments have led many prospective students to reconsider their options for studying abroad, with some choosing alternative destinations such as Germany and the United Kingdom instead.

The decline in international student numbers poses a financial challenge for U.S. universities, many of which rely heavily on tuition fees from foreign students. Experts warn that if this trend continues, it could undermine the global standing of American higher education institutions.

As the landscape of international education shifts, the long-term implications of these visa restrictions remain to be seen. Universities may need to adapt their recruitment strategies to counteract the effects of these policies and attract students from abroad.

According to Global Net News, the ramifications of these changes could extend beyond immediate enrollment figures, potentially affecting the diversity and global engagement of U.S. campuses.

Source: Original article

Will $100,000 Fee Impact H-1B Visa Status for Indian-Americans?

New regulations may impose a $100,000 fee on certain H-1B visa applications, raising questions about their impact on visa status and processing.

The recent announcement regarding a $100,000 fee for specific H-1B visa applications has sparked concern among prospective applicants and current visa holders. This fee, which is set to take effect at 12:01 a.m. EDT on September 21, 2025, is aimed primarily at H-1B workers who are currently outside the United States.

As the situation evolves, many are left wondering how this new fee will affect their visa status and application processes. The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) has reached out to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for clarification on various scenarios that remain uncertain.

According to the current guidelines, the payment of the $100,000 fee is required for new H-1B petitions filed by companies seeking to bring workers from outside the U.S. However, the requirements become less clear in other situations. For example, if a company files a new petition to bring back someone who was previously on an H-1B visa but is currently outside the U.S., the necessity of the fee is still uncertain.

In cases where an individual is applying for an H-1B visa from within the U.S., such as an F-1 student transitioning to H-1B status, the requirement for the fee is also unclear. The USCIS has yet to provide definitive guidance on these matters.

For existing H-1B visa holders, the implications of the new fee vary significantly. Those applying for an extension or renewal with the same employer do not need to pay the fee, nor do individuals transferring to a new employer while remaining in the U.S. Additionally, existing H-1B workers who travel abroad during the extension or transfer process will not be required to pay the fee, provided their petition was filed while they were still in the U.S.

Current H-1B visa holders who are outside the country and wish to re-enter the U.S. will also not be subject to the fee. This exemption applies to individuals who have been counted against the cap and are returning to the U.S. after traveling abroad.

Despite these clarifications, many questions remain unanswered. The AILA has submitted a four-page questionnaire to the USCIS, seeking further details on various aspects of the new fee, including its implications for renewals, changes of employer, amended petitions, cap-exempt petitions, extensions of stay applications, and the payment method for the fee. They are also inquiring about the status of H-4 dependents.

The Indu Law Group (ILG) notes that the situation is rapidly changing as agencies work to implement the new proclamation. As more information becomes available, it is crucial for individuals affected by these changes to stay informed and seek guidance regarding their specific circumstances.

For those with questions about how the new fee may impact their H-1B visa status, it is advisable to consult with immigration experts or legal professionals who can provide tailored advice based on individual situations.

As the deadline approaches, the uncertainty surrounding the $100,000 fee continues to generate discussions among stakeholders in the immigration community. The potential for extensions of the proclamation adds another layer of complexity to the situation, making it essential for applicants to remain vigilant and proactive in understanding their rights and responsibilities under the new regulations.

Source: Original article

Health Care Workforce Faces Challenges from Immigration Policies and Medicaid Cuts

The health care sector is experiencing significant job growth, but immigration restrictions and Medicaid cuts may threaten its future stability, according to economists and industry experts.

The health care sector has emerged as a bright spot in the U.S. economy this year, contributing nearly half of the nation’s employment gains. However, economists and experts warn that ongoing immigration crackdowns and impending cuts to Medicaid could threaten future job growth in this vital industry.

According to the latest nonfarm payroll data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, employers added 487,000 jobs from January to August, with the health care sector accounting for 48% of that growth. This translates to approximately 232,000 new jobs in health care, despite the sector employing only about 11% of the workforce.

“On the labor side, health care growth is driving the economy,” said Neale Mahoney, a professor of economics at Stanford University.

However, the potential impact of President Donald Trump’s immigration policies and cuts to public insurance programs could dampen this growth. These changes may create uncertainty in the economy and pose challenges for the GOP in the upcoming midterm elections. The health care industry is particularly reliant on foreign-born workers, and a proposed law that would reduce federal spending on the $900 billion Medicaid program is projected to result in a loss of 1.2 million jobs nationwide, according to the Commonwealth Fund.

In recent years, job growth in health care has been most pronounced in the home health sector, which has seen an increase of nearly 300,000 jobs, bringing the total to 1.82 million workers from August 2019 to August 2025. This growth is largely driven by an aging population that requires more in-home care. Job growth has also been robust in hospitals and doctors’ offices, while nursing homes and residential care facilities have experienced weaker numbers due to a shift towards home caregiving.

Some research suggests that while health care job growth is generally seen as positive, it does not always translate to economic benefits. An increase in administrative roles within health care can drive up costs without significantly improving patient outcomes. Nevertheless, health care jobs are often viewed as stable and recession-proof, making the sector the top employer in most states. Despite the growth, many areas still face a critical shortage of health care workers to meet rising demand.

Several economists have expressed concern that recent federal policy changes regarding immigration and Medicaid could hinder job growth in the health care sector.

“Health care as an industry is pretty reliant on immigrant labor,” noted Allison Shrivastava, an economist with the Indeed Hiring Lab. “It has a large share of non-native labor, so it’s going to be impacted more.”

According to 2023 Census Bureau data, approximately 18% of Americans employed in health care were born abroad. Around 5% of health care workers are non-citizens, which includes about 60,000 doctors and surgeons, 117,000 registered nurses, and 155,000 home health or personal care aides. While many of these workers are in the U.S. legally, the Census Bureau does not track how many non-citizens have authorization to live and work in the country. Nonetheless, even those with legal status may face deportation risks, as the federal government deported around 200,000 individuals from February to August, marking a significant increase from previous months.

Moreover, the perception of hostility towards immigrants may deter potential health care workers from studying or relocating to the U.S. Data from the State Department indicates that the number of immigrant visas issued from March to May fell by approximately 23,000, or 14%, compared to the same period last year. Additionally, attempts to cross the border without authorization have reportedly decreased.

Despite these challenges, Shrivastava mentioned that Indeed’s job posting data indicates a continued strong demand for doctors, particularly among employers willing to assist with visa sponsorship. However, it remains uncertain whether prospective workers will accept these offers.

This summer, Congress passed what Republicans termed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” which President Trump quickly signed into law. This legislation includes approximately $910 billion in cuts to federal Medicaid spending over the next decade, according to an analysis by the Kaiser Family Foundation based on data from the Congressional Budget Office.

The reductions in Medicaid are expected to leave millions without health insurance in the coming years. Consequently, hospitals, nursing homes, and community health centers may have to absorb more costs associated with treating uninsured patients, potentially leading to service reductions or closures.

California alone could see up to 217,000 job losses, with two-thirds of those in the health care sector, according to an analysis conducted by the University of California-Berkeley Labor Center prior to the bill’s finalization.

“It doesn’t mean necessarily that 200,000 people are going to lose their jobs,” said Miranda Dietz, interim director of the Health Care Program at the Labor Center. “Some people will lose their jobs, and in some cases, job growth won’t be as fast as anticipated.”

Adding to the complexity, Trump recently dismissed the official who oversaw the Labor Department’s statistical branch, raising concerns about the potential political influence on job data.

While it is unclear when or if the immigration actions and Medicaid cuts will impact hiring in the health care sector, there are early signs of a potential slowdown. Federal data revealed a significant decline in job openings in the health care and social assistance sector in July. Additionally, Indeed’s job posting data indicates a decline in certain health care fields, although Laura Ullrich, director of economic research at the Indeed Hiring Lab, noted that overall postings remain above pre-pandemic levels.

For the time being, job growth is expected to remain strong, particularly among nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and home health aides, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics projections.

Many health care jobs require extensive education but offer high salaries, with family physicians earning over $240,000 annually and registered nurses making approximately $94,000 per year.

Joshua Lejano, president of the Sacramento State chapter of the California Nursing Students’ Association, expressed cautious optimism about securing a job as a registered nurse upon graduation in December. He is currently completing nursing clinical rotations that provide essential real-world experience for long shifts.

Lejano noted that hospitals in his area are expanding capacity, while some veteran nurses are exiting the profession due to burnout from the COVID-19 pandemic, creating new openings. “Right now, I think the big thing is just staying on top of all the application cycles,” he said.

Health care jobs that require less training tend to offer lower pay. The median annual earnings for approximately 4.4 million home health and personal care aides were about $35,000 last year, comparable to the earnings of waitstaff, according to federal data.

The growth in health care jobs has been particularly advantageous for women, with nearly 80% of health care and social assistance workers being female, as highlighted in a recent Indeed study. This research found that female workers accounted for over a million new health care jobs in the past two years.

According to Shrivastava, the health care sector remains resilient because Americans generally do not view health care as a luxury. They continue to pay for it during both prosperous and challenging times. Health insurance costs are projected to experience their largest increase in at least five years, and health care spending often focuses on older adults, a demographic that is rapidly growing as baby boomers age. The number of Americans aged 65 and older increased from 34 million in 1995 to 61 million in 2024.

“So many of these health care jobs are to support the growing population of older Americans,” Ullrich said. “It’s not surprising that we’re seeing growth there. But I think what is surprising is how lopsided it is.”

Source: Original article

H-1B Fees Impact Universities: 25 Schools Face Financial Risks

The implementation of a $100,000 fee for new H-1B visas could significantly impact universities, prompting advisories and concerns about the future of international faculty recruitment.

The recent announcement of a $100,000 fee for new H-1B visas is poised to create challenges for universities across the United States. While the fee is not scheduled to take effect until March 2026, coinciding with the annual lottery for approximately 85,000 new H-1B visas, its implications are already being felt in academic institutions.

Jeremy Neufeld, director of immigration policy at the nonpartisan Institute for Progress, emphasizes that universities may be among the first to experience the fallout from this policy. Unlike private companies, universities and certain nonprofit organizations are currently exempt from the lottery system, allowing them to apply for H-1B visas year-round. However, they are not exempt from the new fee, which represents a significant financial burden. “The universities are on the frontlines and this is just a pure tax on their pipeline,” Neufeld stated.

Previously, H-1B fees ranged from $2,000 to $5,000, depending on the size of the employer, according to the American Immigration Council. The steep increase to $100,000 raises concerns about the ability of universities to attract and retain international talent, particularly as the Trump administration’s recent measures also propose changes to the visa lottery system that would favor older, higher-paid workers. This shift could hinder the prospects of international students earning advanced degrees in the U.S., who traditionally have relied on H-1B visas to remain in the country after graduation.

In response to the uncertainty surrounding the new visa rules, the University of Southern California (USC) has issued a travel advisory for faculty and staff on H-1B visas. The advisory recommends postponing international travel until further guidance is provided. The university’s student newspaper reported that faculty currently abroad are encouraged to return to the United States before the new regulations take effect.

“Out of an abundance of caution, all faculty and staff in H-1B status currently in the U.S. should put international travel plans on hold until they receive further guidance,” the advisory stated. “If possible, any faculty and staff in H-1B status who are currently outside the U.S. are strongly recommended to return to the U.S. before the proclamation takes effect.”

Aisling Kelliher, an associate professor in cinematic arts at USC, highlighted the importance of the American education system’s international reputation. “It’s a huge opportunity, both to come here as an immigrant and to receive an education, and then also to be able to continue as a researcher and as a teacher within the system that you’ve learned from,” she remarked.

The impact of the Trump administration’s policies on foreign student enrollment is already evident. Data from the U.S. International Trade Administration indicates that international student arrivals (excluding those from Canada and Mexico) decreased by 19% in August 2025 compared to the previous year, totaling 307,419. Similarly, July arrivals fell by 28% to 76,519. Forbes immigration senior contributor Stuart Anderson noted that some of this decline may be attributed to already enrolled students opting not to return home for the summer, as many universities advised them to remain in the U.S. to avoid potential reentry issues.

According to data from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the 25 universities that received the most H-1B visas in the first nine months of Fiscal Year 2025 included Stanford University, which granted 500 visas during this period. Notably, 36% of its graduate students are international. Washington University in St. Louis and Columbia University in New York City reported that nearly half of their graduate students (46%) are from abroad.

In light of the new fee, a lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California challenging the $100,000 charge. The plaintiffs include the American Association of University Professors, unions representing graduate students and medical residents, a church and its pastor, the recruiting firm Global Nurse Force, and an Indian postdoctoral researcher who lost her H-1B sponsorship due to the fee.

The lawsuit argues that the fee disproportionately affects workers already in the U.S. on other visas, such as F-1 student visas, who are seeking to transition to H-1B status. Even if the courts ultimately block the fee or grant exemptions for universities and nonprofits, the broader implications of the H-1B measures could still deter international faculty recruitment.

Additionally, proposed changes to student visas may restrict some graduate students from pursuing postdoctoral positions in the U.S. through Optional Practical Training (OPT). This program allows STEM graduates from abroad to work for up to three years, helping them build professional networks and transition into H-1B roles sponsored by universities or private employers.

The evolving landscape of immigration policy continues to raise concerns among academic institutions, as they navigate the challenges posed by new fees and regulations that could significantly alter the recruitment of international talent.

Source: Original article

Axel, DACA Recipient, Works to Safeguard His Community

Axel Herrera, a DACA recipient in North Carolina, faces uncertainty as local police checkpoints increase, impacting his community and prompting him to pursue further education at Yale.

Since the election of President Trump, Axel Herrera has witnessed a troubling rise in local police traffic checkpoints throughout his North Carolina community. As a DACA recipient, Axel enjoys legal protection from deportation, yet he has seen friends and family members detained or deported following random traffic stops. This has left many undocumented individuals in his community living in a state of 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 lived in North Carolina since he was seven, when his family fled Honduras in search of a better life. Achieving DACA status felt like the realization of his family’s dreams. He earned a scholarship to Duke University, becoming the first in his family to attend college, and graduated with multiple awards, 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 past few years, he has focused on registering citizens to vote, creating youth programs, and mentoring immigrants as they pursue educational and professional opportunities. “All I ever wanted was to belong, and to give something back,” he reflects.

However, the current political climate has posed significant challenges. Ongoing legal battles surrounding DACA’s validity threaten Axel’s protection from deportation. He must renew his DACA status and employment authorization every two years. Although he was able 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 get their applications processed, and the Trump administration has already deported at least one DACA recipient under the claim 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. Due to this uncertainty, Axel has decided to leave his hard-earned job and return to school. This fall, he will relocate to Yale, where he has secured 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. Many of his friends and neighbors are constantly communicating via WhatsApp, assessing police conditions whenever they leave their homes. He knows numerous young Venezuelans whose humanitarian parole has recently been revoked, rendering them unable to work or study. In the past six months, he has witnessed families torn apart by raids and deportations, or those too fearful of ICE to attend school. “I speak all the time with young people whose whole future is on the chopping block,” Axel shares.

Yet, despite his protections, Axel senses a looming threat that conditions could deteriorate rapidly. Under Trump, anti-immigrant sentiment and policies have become more entrenched. He is particularly concerned about the long-term implications of a new state law mandating that sheriffs cooperate with ICE. Axel fears for his and 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

Deaths and Disappearances in U.S. Immigration Detention Spark Concerns

Immigrant advocates are raising alarms over a humanitarian crisis in U.S. detention centers, citing alarming statistics of deaths, disappearances, and the treatment of asylum seekers.

A crisis is unfolding within U.S. immigration detention centers, with reports indicating that fifteen individuals have died and more than 1,200 are currently unaccounted for. Nearly 60,000 detainees are held behind barbed wire, according to advocates who spoke at an October 3 briefing hosted by American Community Media. They warned that the existing infrastructure may be on the brink of collapse.

The event featured a panel of lawyers and human rights experts who emphasized that the combination of a record number of detainees, along with a lack of transparency and neglect, is contributing to a growing humanitarian crisis. “This is a crisis,” said moderator Pilar Marrero. “And it is happening with diminishing transparency.”

One of the most concerning situations is at the Everglades detention center in Florida, often referred to as “Alligator Alcatraz.” Here, families and attorneys report that over 1,200 detainees cannot be located, raising serious concerns about their well-being.

Nationwide, the number of detainees has surged to nearly 60,000, the highest figure on record, with most individuals having not been convicted of any crime. This alarming trend has drawn attention to the plight of asylum seekers, who often find themselves treated as criminals.

Heather Hogan, Policy and Practice Counsel for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, shared her experiences as an asylum officer within detention centers. She described how asylum seekers are routinely subjected to harsh treatment, often waking up at 3:30 or 4:00 a.m. for interviews that could determine their futures. “By the time I interviewed them, they were exhausted and hungry,” she recounted. “These were life-altering interviews, but people had nothing left.”

Hogan recalled instances where asylum seekers arrived in shackles and orange jumpsuits, lined up in holding cells. Guards referred to them as “bodies,” and she described an incident where a man needed to use the restroom during an interview but was mocked by a guard for not locating it quickly enough. “That kind of behavior was common,” she noted.

She also highlighted the severe impact of prolonged detention on individuals already fleeing violence, stating that those at risk of suicide or LGBTQ detainees are often placed in solitary confinement, a practice that the United Nations has classified as torture. Hogan recounted the tragic suicide of a young asylum seeker in Arizona, who took her life shortly after expressing credible fears during her interview. “The safeguards just aren’t there,” she lamented.

Andrew Free, an Atlanta-based lawyer and founder of the project #DetentionKills, revealed that 22 individuals died in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody in 2025, marking the second-highest total on record. “Most of the deaths were in Florida, particularly at the Krome Detention Center,” Free stated.

He raised concerns about the accuracy of the official death toll, noting that his investigations uncovered five deaths that had not been publicly reported. “What is the true number of people dying in ICE custody?” he questioned. “I don’t know. And I don’t think anybody does.”

Free now tracks detention deaths for journalists and researchers, emphasizing that lawsuits and investigative reporting are the only reliable means to compel disclosure. “The reason we know anything about deaths in custody is because people sued,” he explained. “And reporters kept digging.”

Yannick Gill, Senior Counsel for Refugee Advocacy at Human Rights First, echoed concerns about the erosion of transparency in the detention system. He cited instances where members of Congress have been denied entry to detention centers, calling such actions unconstitutional. “It should make us stop and ask: What exactly is ICE hiding behind those walls?” he questioned.

Gill also discussed the existence of “shadow sites”—facilities not included in ICE’s public reports—where detainees often disappear from official tracking systems, leading to what he termed “enforced disappearances.” “People are simply off the grid,” he stated. “That is unacceptable in a democracy.”

Advocates argue that the harsh conditions within detention centers are not merely the result of poor management but are indicative of a deliberate strategy. “The cruelty is the point,” Hogan asserted. “Separating people from their families, traumatizing them, making conditions unbearable—that is the government’s approach now. The goal is to get people to give up their asylum claims.”

Hogan proposed that community-based case management could serve as a more humane alternative to detention, asserting that it should be rare and only used when absolutely necessary. “Instead, it has become the default,” she said.

Free added that while lawsuits may be imperfect, they can still yield significant results. He noted that during the pandemic, litigation led to the release of tens of thousands of individuals from detention, many of whom would not have survived COVID-19 if they had remained incarcerated. “Many of those people would not have survived COVID inside,” he said.

Gill emphasized the need for restored oversight, stating that Congress has the constitutional authority to enter detention centers. “Blocking that authority undermines democracy itself,” he warned.

“Immigration detention is supposed to be civil,” Free remarked. “That’s the fiction. In reality, it is indistinguishable from prison.” He concluded by stating, “This is not just about law. It’s about justice. And right now, people are dying without either.”

Source: Original article

Congressman Frank Pallone Calls for U.S.-India Talks on H-1B Visa Issues

Congressman Frank Pallone has called for early U.S.-India discussions in light of recent turmoil surrounding H-1B visa policy changes that could significantly impact skilled workers and the technology sector.

The Global Organization of People of Indian Origin (GOPIO) hosted a special webinar titled “H-1B Visa Storm: Current Challenges and Pathways Forward” on October 4, 2025. The event brought together immigration attorneys, policy experts, and community leaders to discuss the implications of recent changes to U.S. visa policies.

This webinar was organized in response to growing confusion and concern following President Donald Trump’s announcement on September 19, which introduced a $100,000 fee for H-1B visas. This fee is nearly 67 times higher than the current cost, leaving thousands of Indian professionals and U.S. employers uncertain about their futures.

Sunil Vuppala, GOPIO Associate Secretary and Webinar Chair, welcomed participants and highlighted the urgent need for clarity amid widespread misinformation. GOPIO Chairman Dr. Thomas Abraham expressed disappointment over the administration’s response to concerns raised by the organization. He emphasized that the H-1B program generates over $200 billion annually for the U.S. economy, while costs amount to only $8.5 billion.

Dr. Abraham remarked, “The U.S. technology sector thrives because of the H-1B visa program. There’s a clear link between H-1B professionals and American innovation.”

The panel discussion was moderated by New York Immigration Attorney Dilli Batta and featured experts such as David Nachman from NPZ Law Group in New Jersey, Stephanie Dy from Parikh Law Group in Chicago, and Prashanti Reddy from Reddy Law Firm in New York.

Attorney David Nachman described the new policy as a “torrential storm” for skilled workers, outlining three critical changes. First, the massive fee increase primarily affects first-time H-1B applicants outside the U.S., excluding renewals or extensions. Experts warned that this could deter global talent from seeking opportunities in the United States.

Second, proposed reforms would prioritize higher-paying jobs in the H-1B lottery system, which could disadvantage small and mid-sized firms and undermine merit-based selection. Third, enhanced compliance checks will lead to increased site visits and audits, tightening scrutiny on employers and raising operational challenges.

Attorney Prashanti Reddy noted that while renewals and amendments remain unaffected, the new policy could harm applicants in research and technology sectors. Stephanie Dy added that stricter qualification standards could make it more challenging for small firms to recruit top talent, particularly those without advanced degrees.

The panelists collectively warned that the U.S. risks losing its competitive edge in innovation if it continues to discourage skilled immigrants.

Congressman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ), who served as the Chief Guest, criticized the administration’s approach, labeling it “short-sighted and counterproductive.” He argued that instead of imposing exorbitant fees, the government should focus on training domestic talent and fostering international collaboration.

Pallone stated, “This policy shifts focus from developing local skills to simply generating revenue,” stressing that small businesses and startups would be hit hardest. He cautioned that other nations, such as Germany and China, are actively courting global professionals, potentially diverting talent away from the U.S.

The Congressman also underscored the strategic implications of alienating India, noting that India’s growing ties with Russia and China could complicate U.S. foreign policy. He urged both nations to initiate early bilateral dialogue to “remove current hiccups” and strengthen their long-standing ties.

Pallone reaffirmed bipartisan support in Congress for maintaining the H-1B program and encouraged organizations like GOPIO to continue engaging lawmakers. “Community participation and policy dialogue are vital to ensure America remains open to innovation and global expertise,” he added.

The session concluded with a vote of thanks from GOPIO General Secretary Siddharth Jain, with technical coordination provided by Vatsala Upadhyay, CEO of AI Junoon. GOPIO announced plans for continued engagement with congressional leaders on immigration and diaspora issues.

Founded in 1989, GOPIO is a non-partisan, non-profit organization with chapters in over 36 countries. It works to build bridges between the global Indian diaspora and local communities through cultural, civic, and humanitarian initiatives.

Source: Original article

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

Kaelyn’s unexpected romance with Yapa, an asylum seeker from Venezuela, has turned into a desperate fight against his deportation, leading her into significant debt for legal support.

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 demeanor. “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 as a dance blossomed into a deep friendship and romance, but it would soon lead to a desperate battle for Yapa’s freedom.

Yapa, who fled violence in Venezuela in 2022, was an asylum seeker with a legal work permit. He attended regular court hearings and worked as a delivery driver, aspiring to obtain his commercial trucking license. As their relationship grew, Kaelyn became an integral part of his life.

They celebrated Thanksgiving together, with Yapa bonding with Kaelyn’s family, even playing pool with her father. Her affection for him was evident as his sisters affectionately called her “reina,” a term of endearment meaning queen. They spent their time watching movies and overcoming language barriers with translation apps and Kaelyn’s college Spanish. Each morning, Yapa would text her to ask about her day, solidifying their connection.

Before meeting Yapa, Kaelyn rarely considered immigration policy. Originally from Connecticut, she had relocated to Wilmington for work in film location scouting. However, the political climate shifted dramatically after President Trump’s election, which sparked her concerns about the treatment 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, Kaelyn’s worst fears materialized when Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrived unexpectedly in the early morning hours while Yapa was preparing for work. Without explanation, they handcuffed him, confiscating his ID and work permit—documents that have not been returned. They provided no information about his destination, only that he was being deported.

Kaelyn was devastated when Yapa’s sister called to inform her of his detention. Just the night before, Yapa had stayed with her, and she had hoped to keep him close as a U.S. citizen, believing she could better advocate for his rights. “I couldn’t explain it, but I was so emotional,” she recalls of their final night together. “And he told me, ‘There’s no reason for them to take me.’” Now, they faced an urgent need to act to save him.

Yapa was transported to Georgia’s Stewart Detention Center, where he faced allegations of gang affiliation with the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua (TdA) during a hearing two months later. “Shocking is not even the word,” Kaelyn says, recalling her reaction. “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 the situation for immigrants like Yapa, who entered the country recently and are now struggling to secure their release from detention. Yapa could remain incarcerated for up to a year while his asylum case is pending, facing the grim possibility of deportation to a dangerous environment.

Kaelyn’s fear of the allegations against Yapa was palpable, knowing that if he were deported, he could end up in CECOT, a notorious prison in El Salvador known for its brutality. “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 reflects. The thought of Yapa, along with many other innocent individuals, being 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 to advocate for Yapa and has incurred significant debt due to legal fees. Meanwhile, Yapa is held nearly nine hours away from Wilmington, with limited access to phone communication. 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 elsewhere based on the Alien Enemies Act without allowing him a fair chance to contest the TdA allegations. While this decision brought some relief, Kaelyn’s life has been drastically altered.

Conversations with her sister now revolve primarily 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 says. “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, 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

-+=