The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has issued an Interim Final Rule (IFR) that removes the long‑standing requirement that R‑1 nonimmigrant religious workers who have exhausted the maximum five‑year period in R‑1 status must spend one full year abroad before becoming eligible to return in R‑1 classification.

Under the IFR, an R‑1 nonimmigrant who has spent five continuous years in the United States must still depart the country. That requirement remains unchanged.

However, DHS has removed the mandatory one‑year physical presence abroad before readmission. Now, once a new R‑1 petition is approved, the religious worker need only to depart the United States, apply for a new visa stamp (if necessary), and may immediately apply for readmission to the United States and begin a new initial period of stay.

Admission remains subject to all applicable eligibility and admissibility requirements, but religious workers are no longer required to remain abroad for any minimum period of time.

This change represents a significant shift from prior practice. Previously, the one‑year absence often disrupted religious staffing, delayed important ministries, and created burdens for both workers and their organizations.

The rule does not remove the maximum five‑year stay limitation for R-1 workers. R-1 workers who have reached their five-year maximum period of stay must depart the United States. Extensions of stay are not permitted beyond this limit. Any subsequent admission following departure is treated as a new period of R-1 stay, subject to the statutory maximum.

This regulatory update streamlines the process for returning R‑1 nonimmigrants and reduced operational disruptions for faith communities.

Please contact a Jackson Lewis attorney with any questions.

On Dec. 31, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California vacated the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) decisions to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Honduras, Nicaragua, and Nepal, finding that the terminations violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The court concluded that DHS failed to conduct an objective assessment of country conditions and did not consult with other federal agencies. National TPS Alliance, et al. v. Noem, et al., No. 25-cv-05687 (N.D. Cal.).

As background, the National TPS Alliance and other individuals (the plaintiffs) filed a lawsuit on July 7, 2025, after DHS announced the termination of TPS for individuals from Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua. Their legal status and work authorization were set to end within 60 days of the DHS announcement. TPS terminations would have resulted in the loss of legal status and work authorization within 60 days, and approximately 60,000 individuals were expected to be impacted. The plaintiffs argued that the TPS terminations were preordained decisions, not based on current country conditions, and that the terminations deviated from prior agency practice without explanation. DHS provided only a 60-day transition period, in contrast with long-standing agency practice of providing at least six months.

In its Dec. 31, 2025, decision, the court sided with the plaintiffs, stating, in light of the procedural failures, the TPS terminations for Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua were arbitrary and capricious agency actions under the APA. As a result, the terminations for Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua were deemed unlawful and vacated.

Still, DHS has continued to move forward with TPS terminations for other countries. Most recently, on Jan. 13, DHS announced the termination of TPS for Somalia. It concluded that country conditions have improved such that Somalia no longer meets the statutory requirements for TPS. Under the announcement, Somalia’s TPS designation is set to expire on March 17, 2026, impacting approximately 1,100 current TPS beneficiaries, with an additional 1,400 applications pending as of early December 2025. DHS indicated that Somali nationals with other lawful status may remain in the United States, while others were encouraged to depart the country following the end of TPS protections.

DHS is expected to appeal the California district court’s decision vacating the TPS terminations for Honduras, Nepal, and Nicaragua. In the meantime, employers and TPS beneficiaries should be aware that TPS policy continues to shift rapidly and remains the subject of ongoing litigation. Please feel free to reach out to Jackson Lewis attorneys as we closely monitor further developments.

The Department of State is expected to pause consular immigrant visa processing for nationals of 75 countries starting Jan. 21, 2026, according to multiple public reports. This development represents a significant expansion of the Trump Administration’s efforts that include more intensive screening and review of overseas visa applicants.

The government reportedly is undertaking a wide‑ranging reassessment of consular processing procedures, including fraud‑prevention practices, national‑security vetting, and public‑charge review standards. The countries expected to be affected span multiple regions. Consular posts within these jurisdictions will likely suspend scheduling and adjudication of immigrant visa interviews until new protocols are finalized.

This anticipated pause follows the Administration’s implementation of Presidential Proclamation 10998, which imposed full or partial visa‑issuance restrictions on 39 countries effective Jan. 1, 2026. Although this proclamation restricted both immigrant and certain nonimmigrant visa categories for designated nationalities, the expected Jan. 21 action reaches a far broader group and halts immigrant visa processing entirely at impacted consulates.

Full list of the countries impacted:

  1. Afghanistan
  2. Albania
  3. Algeria
  4. Antigua and Barbuda
  5. Armenia
  6. Azerbaijan
  7. Bahamas
  8. Bangladesh
  9. Barbados
  10. Belarus
  11. Belize
  12. Bhutan
  13. Bosnia
  14. Brazil
  15. Burma
  16. Cambodia
  17. Cameroon
  18. Cape Verde
  19. Colombia
  20. Cote d’Ivoire
  21. Cuba
  22. Democratic Republic of the Congo
  23. Dominica
  24. Egypt
  25. Eritrea
  26. Ethiopia
  27. Fiji
  28. Gambia
  29. Georgia
  30. Ghana
  31. Grenada
  32. Guatemala
  33. Guinea
  34. Haiti
  35. Iran
  36. Iraq
  37. Jamaica
  38. Jordan
  39. Kazakhstan
  40. Kosovo
  41. Kuwait
  42. Kyrgyzstan
  43. Laos
  44. Lebanon
  45. Liberia
  46. Libya
  47. Macedonia
  48. Moldova
  49. Mongolia
  50. Montenegro
  51. Morocco
  52. Nepal
  53. Nicaragua
  54. Nigeria
  55. Pakistan
  56. Republic of the Congo
  57. Russia
  58. Rwanda
  59. Saint Kitts and Nevis
  60. Saint Lucia
  61. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
  62. Senegal
  63. Sierra Leone
  64. Somalia
  65. South Sudan
  66. Sudan
  67. Syria
  68. Tanzania
  69. Thailand
  70. Togo
  71. Tunisia
  72. Uganda
  73. Uruguay
  74. Uzbekistan
  75. Yemen 

Jackson Lewis attorneys will continue to monitor developments and provide updates as further implementation guidance is issued.

The U.S Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit agreed on Jan. 5, 2025, to fast-track the appeal of the recent federal court ruling upholding the Trump Administration’s imposition of a $100,000 fee on certain H-1B visa petitions.

On Dec. 24, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia upheld the legality of the $100,000 H-1B visa fee requirement. The requirement was introduced through Presidential Proclamation on Sept. 19, 2025. The lower court concluded that the Trump Administration’s imposition of the fee falls within the broad authority Congress delegated to the executive branch and the president to restrict the entry of noncitizens into the United States.

The plaintiffs, U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Association of American Universities, appealed the lower court’s decision and requested the process be expedited in light of the upcoming annual H-1B registration and lottery in March, a once-per-year opportunity for U.S. employers to register for H-1B sponsorship. In agreeing to fast-track the case, Court of Appeals set an expedited schedule under which appellants must file their appellate brief by Jan. 9, 2026, and the Trump Administration must respond by Jan. 30, 2026, with oral arguments expected in Feb. 2026.

Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security announced a final rule on Dec. 29, 2025, that it will apply a new “Weighted Selection Process” for the FY 2027 H-1B visa registration and lottery.

Jackson Lewis attorneys will continue to monitor the lawsuit and provide timely updates.

Please reach out to your Jackson Lewis attorney with any questions regarding the impact of the $100,000 fee or the upcoming changes to the H-1B cap lottery process. Our attorneys are available to advise and strategize on these developments.

U.S. consulates abroad have recently begun postponing a wide range of H‑1B and H‑4 visa interviews, resulting in significant delays in visa processing. Consulates in India have been among the most affected, as India remains the largest source of H‑1B visa holders worldwide.

Beginning in the second week of December, applicants with interviews scheduled between Dec. 15 and Dec. 26 began receiving unexpected rescheduling notices. These changes occurred shortly before the implementation of new “online presence review” requirements on Dec. 15. In response to the updated procedures, U.S. consulates in India cancelled existing appointments and issued new dates set far into the future.

To support the expanded vetting process, the Department of State now instructs all applicants for H‑1B and H‑4 visas, as well as applicants in the F, M, and J nonimmigrant categories, to adjust the privacy settings on all social media accounts to “public.”

The Department explains that it uses all available information when screening visa applicants to identify individuals who may be inadmissible to the United States. Applicants who may be inadmissible may present national security or public safety concerns. The online presence review now applies to all H‑1B professionals and their dependents, in addition to students and exchange visitors who were already subject to such review.

On Dec. 9, the U.S. Embassy in India publicly advised applicants not to appear for their previously scheduled interviews if they had received a rescheduling email. The Embassy cautioned that applicants who attempted to attend based on their original appointment date would not be admitted, even if they had already traveled to another city for the interview.

The new vetting procedures increased the time required for each applicant, which has resulted in fewer interviews being conducted each day. Reportedly, appointments that had been secured well in advance have now been rescheduled to dates between March and June 2026. Some applicants have even received new appointments scheduled for October 2026.

As of Dec. 17, some applicants have reported limited success in obtaining emergency appointments. Certain H‑1B applicants with children have received expedited appointments after explaining that their child would miss school due to the rescheduling. Others have attempted to request medical exceptions.

The expanded review requirements could continue to affect visa processing timelines in the months ahead.

Jackson Lewis attorneys will continue to track updates. Applicants or employers with questions regarding visa processing changes should contact their Jackson Lewis attorney.

A federal judge has granted the Trump Administration’s motion for summary judgment and upheld the legality of the $100,000 fee requirement for certain H-1B visa petitions. Chamber of Commerce of the USA v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:25-cv-03675 (D.D.C. Dec. 23, 2025).

President Donald Trump’s Sept. 19, 2025, Presidential Proclamation, “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers,”introduced a new $100,000 fee requirement for new H-1B petitions for foreign workers outside the United States.

This court’s decision was in response to an Oct. 16, 2025, lawsuit the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Association of American Universities filed challenging the legality of the Proclamation, questioning the Administration’s authority to levy the $100,000 fee, and arguing that the fee would cause significant and potentially irreparable harm to American businesses.

In upholding the legality of the Proclamation, U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell determined the Administration’s imposition of the $100,000 fee was within the broad power Congress delegated to the executive branch and the president to restrict entry of noncitizens into the United States.

As a result of the court ruling, the new H-1B fee remains in effect.

Two additional lawsuits challenging the legality of the Proclamation are pending. The first is an Oct. 3, 2025, lawsuit a coalition of immigration advocacy organizations and affected employers filed in federal court in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The second is a Dec. 12, 2025, lawsuit a coalition of 20 states filed in federal court in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

Please reach out to your Jackson Lewis attorney with any questions regarding the impact of the $100,000 fee.

Takeaways

  • DHS announced in a final rule that it will apply a new H-1B selection process, replacing the random lottery, to allocate cap-subject H-1B visas beginning with FY 2027.
  • Registrants submitted under higher wage levels will have a better chance of being selected, with positions under the highest wage level having a four times higher chance of being selected.

DHS has announced a final rule that replaces the usual randomized selection lottery H-1B cap selection process for one favoring higher-skilled and higher-paid foreign professionals. The “Weighted Selection Process for Registrants and Petitioners Seeking to File Cap-Subject H-1B Petitions” final rule is scheduled to be published on Dec. 29, 2025, and go into effect Feb. 27, 2026.

DHS noted the final rule is set to go into effect in time for the FY 2027 registration.

The rule implements a weighted selection process to “prioritize the allocation of visas to higher-skilled and higher-paid aliens to better protect the wages, working conditions, and job opportunities for American workers.” DHS also stated the rule will further “strengthen the integrity of the H-1B nonimmigrant visa program,” consistent with its other changes, such as the $100,000 H-1B visa fee.

The final rule uses a selection process that gives registrants greater odds based on the highest Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) wage level assigned for the position. The higher the OEWS wage level the more entries into the selection pool.

Under the new system, when the number of H-1B registrations exceeds the number of available H-1B visas (85,000), each unique beneficiary will be entered into a lottery with weighted odds as follows:

  • Registrations assigned a level IV wage will be entered into the pool four times.
  • Registrations assigned a level III wage will be entered into the pool three times.
  • Registrations assigned a level II wage will be entered into the pool two times.
  • Registrations assigned a level I wage will be entered into the pool one time.

The selection process will use wage data gathered at the registration stage, DHS stated; and employers must submit additional data, including the SOC code, area of intended employment, and the highest wage level the proffered wage meets or exceeds. For beneficiaries working in multiple locations, or in multiple positions if the registrant is an agent, the registrant must select the lowest corresponding OEWS wage level the beneficiary’s proffered wage will equal or exceed. If the beneficiary’s proffered wage is expressed as a range, the registrant must select the wage level the lowest wage in the range will equal or exceed.

Geographic wage differences remain. DHS rejected proposals to normalize wages nationally or adjust for cost-of-living beyond existing OEWS methodology. Employers in lower-wage locations may face structural disadvantages in selection odds.

In addition, employers should be aware that for selected petitions, USCIS will be requiring evidence of the basis of the wage level selected and focusing on discrepancies between the representations made during registration and the substantive material and explanation in the petition. Inconsistencies or false statements could lead to requests for evidence, denials, or referrals for enforcement.

The new H-1B cap selection system drastically alters the likelihood of individuals being selected. Employers should begin reviewing their visa employees and strategizing well in advance of the upcoming H-1B cap season.

Jackson Lewis attorneys are available to advise and consult on the upcoming changes to the H-1B cap lottery process.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has announced that Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Burma (Myanmar), Ethiopia, Haiti, and South Sudan will end in early 2026.

Employers of TPS beneficiaries from affected countries should closely review the timelines and automatic Employment Authorization Document (EAD) extensions, summarized below in order of termination date.

Employers must ensure EADs of TPS beneficiaries are reverified for I-9 purposes and I-9 forms reflect the current expiration date for the relevant TPS program.

EADs based on TPS have A12 or C19 classification codes on the front of the card.

South Sudan

Termination date: Jan. 5, 2026

EADs with the following expiration dates are automatically extended through Jan. 5, 2026.

  • Nov. 3, 2025
  • May 3, 2025
  • Nov. 3, 2023

Burma

Termination date: Jan. 26, 2026

EADs with the following expiration dates are automatically extended through Jan. 26, 2026.

  • Nov. 25, 2025
  • May 25, 2024
  • Nov. 25, 2022

Haiti

Termination date: Feb. 3, 2026

EADs based on Haiti TPS with the following expiration dates are automatically extended through Feb. 3, 2026.

  • Feb. 3, 2026
  • Aug. 3, 2025
  • Aug. 3, 2024
  • June 30, 2024
  • Feb. 3, 2023
  • Dec. 31, 2022
  • Oct. 4, 2021
  • Jan. 4, 2021
  • Jan. 2, 2020
  • July 22, 2019
  • Jan. 22, 2018
  • July 22, 2017

Ethiopia

Termination date: Feb. 13, 2026.

EADs based on Ethiopia TPS with the following expiration dates are automatically extended through Feb. 13, 2026.

  • Dec. 12, 2025
  • June 12, 2024

TPS beneficiaries from Burma, Ethiopia, Haiti, and South Sudan should consult with immigration counsel to explore options for maintaining lawful status and work authorization.

There are several lawsuits currently pending in federal district and circuit courts seeking to prevent the termination of the TPS programs outlined above.

Jackson Lewis attorneys will continue to monitor these developments. If you have questions related to TPS programs or I-9 compliance, please reach out to your Jackson Lewis attorney.

Takeaways

  • Illinois employers may not rely solely on SSA “no-match,” IRS discrepancy notices, or similar third-party notifications to take disciplinary or termination action.
  • Employers must meet strict notice, timing, and communication requirements, including providing employees an opportunity to respond and to involve a representative.
  • Employees, the attorney general, and designated advocacy organizations may bring civil actions.

Illinois has enacted a significant expansion of the Right to Privacy in the Workplace Act, imposing new substantive and procedural requirements on how employers must respond when they receive notices reporting discrepancies in an employee’s Social Security number, Individual Taxpayer Identification Number, or other identifying information.

While the notices themselves are not new, Illinois SB 2339 has established a comprehensive framework governing how employers may act upon them, with heightened litigation exposure for employers. The law takes effect immediately. It reflects a broader state-level policy shift toward protecting workers, particularly immigrant workers, from premature or unfounded employment consequences.

Prohibition on Adverse Employment Action Based Solely on Third-Party Notices

SB 2339 prohibits employers from taking adverse action (such as reduction in hours, suspension, termination, or any other form of discipline) solely because a federal agency or non-immigration entity, such as the Social Security Administration, IRS, or an insurance carrier, issues a notice indicating a discrepancy in identifying information.

This requirement aligns with long-standing federal guidance that SSA no-match letters do not constitute evidence of immigration violations.

Employers must, therefore, treat these notices as administrative matters, not as employment-authorization determinations.

Mandatory Employee Notification, Procedural Protections

Illinois now requires employers to meet specific notice and communication obligations within five business days of receiving, or deciding to act on, a discrepancy notice.

Employers must notify the employee (and any authorized representative) of:

  • The nature of the discrepancy;
  • Any deadlines imposed by federal law; and
  • Any action requested by the employer.

Employees may have a representative present at any discussions, and employers must provide the original notice upon request. These provisions are intended to prevent premature employment decisions based on incomplete or inaccurate information.

Expansion of Enforcement Mechanisms

SB 2339 authorizes multiple avenues for enforcement. Employees may bring suit directly for violations.

In addition, labor unions and qualifying nonprofit organizations may bring actions in the name of the State, and the Illinois attorney general may also intervene or prosecute claims. These mechanisms substantially increase potential exposure for employers given the possibility of concurrent interest from employees and outside advocacy groups.

Safe Harbor, Compliance Considerations

The statute provides a narrow safe harbor for employers that act in good-faith reliance on guidance from the Illinois Department of Labor or the Department of Homeland Security or that make a bona fide administrative error not affecting pay or employment. This exception is limited, and employers should not expect any reliance on discrepancy notices to fall within it.

Jackson Lewis attorneys are available to advise and consult on I-9 compliance and other workplace requirements.

Key Takeaways

  • USCIS has confirmed its Dec. 2 policy memo, which listed only a narrow set of applications, was not exhaustive and that it has expanded the pause through follow-up communications and operational practice.
  • Employers should prepare for adjudication delays, additional vetting and potential interruption of work authorization for affected employees.

Article

USCIS recently clarified that its December 2, 2025 policy — initially described as a review of green cards issued to nationals of 19 “high-risk” countries — extends much further than originally understood. A broad range of immigration benefits for individuals from these countries is now subject to adjudicative holds and heightened vetting, affecting both pending and previously approved applications.

Although the policy memo (PM-602-0192) listed only five categories of filings that would be paused — Forms I-485, I-90, I-131, I-751 and N-470 — USCIS has since made clear that the list was not intended to be comprehensive. USCIS has expanded the pause to critical employment-based and nonimmigrant benefits, including:

  • Form I-129 (H-1B and other nonimmigrant worker petitions).
  • Form I-539 (changes or extensions of status).
  • Form I-140 (immigrant worker petitions).
  • Form I-765 (EAD applications).

This expansion means that affected foreign nationals may face delays in securing or extending work authorization, maintaining nonimmigrant status or progressing in employment-based green card processes. The memo further directs USCIS to conduct “case-by-case vetting” of all paused applications and to re-review already approved benefits for affected individuals who entered the United States on or after January 20, 2021.

For employers, the immediate concern is operational disruption: Paused EAD renewals could lead to work interruptions; delayed H-1B adjudications could affect onboarding and continued employment; and immigrant visa processes may stall. Impacted employees should be prepared for significant delays and increased scrutiny.

While USCIS has not indicated how long these holds will remain in place, the scope of the expanded pause suggests that organizations employing nationals of the designated countries should audit upcoming filing needs, assess potential work authorization gaps and develop contingency plans.

Jackson Lewis attorneys will continue to monitor developments and provide updates as USCIS issues further implementation guidance.