Legal Updates

USCIS Issues Policy Memo on Adjustment of Status Including Apparent Sweeping Change; More Than Two Weeks Later Many Questions Remain Unanswered

On Friday, May 22, 2026, USCIS issued a policy memo asserting that Adjustment of Status under section 245 of the INA is “a matter of discretion and administrative grace not designed to supersede the regular consular processing of immigrant visas.” The memo instructs adjudicators to assess each case under a totality‑of‑the‑circumstances framework, weigh all favorable and adverse factors, and approve only where the applicant’s equities justify a favorable exercise of discretion. In a press release, a USCIS spokesperson stated, “From now on, an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances.” 

More than two weeks after the Policy Memo was issued, there are still many unanswered questions. On Friday, May 29, press outlets reported that USCIS was apparently walking back the new policy, claiming there was no major change from the discretion immigration officers have long held. A USCIS spokesperson stated that the policy “will not prevent any alien from obtaining a green card who legitimately and properly qualify”; however, USCIS has not issued official guidance regarding any change in position.

Based on our recent experience with other sweeping changes (such as the $100k fee for H-1B visas) announced by the Administration, it will take several weeks before the meaning, and all its ramifications become clear. As we learn more, we will be sending updates.

Please click here for a helpful client flyer explaining the policy and its potential effects on adjustment of status applications.

TPS Extends Temporary Protected Status for Lebanon and El Savador

On May 29, 2026, DHS published a notice automatically extending the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designation for Lebanon, along with associated employment authorization, through November 27, 2026. There is no requirement for current TPS beneficiaries to re-register to maintain their TPS or to extend the validity of their EAD. As proof of continued employment authorization through Nov. 27, 2026, beneficiaries may show the following documentation to an employer:

• A TPS-related EAD with a Category of A12 or C19 and a “Card Expires” date of May 27, 2026.
• A copy of the Federal Register notice announcing the automatic extension.

On April 28, 2026, DHS updated its website to clarify that EADs issued to TPS beneficiaries from El Salvador with an expiration date of March 9 2025, are automatically extended through July 22, 2026. Employers that have employees with EADs based on El Salvador TPS with an expiration of March 9, 2025 should note that, as of April 28, 2026, their work authorization is automatically extended through July 22, 2026. Covered EADs include those that have the notation A12 or C19 under Category with a “Card Expires” date of March 9, 2025.

Contact us with questions about TPS and work authorization.

USCIS Updated its TPS Yemen Website Pages to Extend EADs

On May 1, 2026, a federal judge in New York blocked the Trump administration from ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for more than 2,800 individuals from Yemen. The judge stated that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed with claims that the termination of TPS for Yemen violated the Administrative Procedure Act. On May 4, 2026, USCIS updated the TPS website to state that the “validity of Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) issued under the TPS designation of Yemen with an original expiration date of March 3, 2023, September 3, 2024, and March 3, 2026, is extended per court order.”

USCIS has clarified that when completing the Expiration Date (if any) fields on Form I‑9, employees should enter “as per court order” in Section 1 and employers should enter “July 1, 2026” in Section 2 (or Supplement B), along with a note in the Additional Information box. When completing a case in E‑Verify for a new employee, employers should use the “July 1, 2026” expiration date from the completed Form I‑9.

Contact us with questions about TPS and work authorization.

USCIS Rule Raises Stakes for Signature Defects in Immigration Benefits Requests

On May 11, 2026, USCIS published an interim final rule (to take effect on July 10, 2026) codifying the agency’s authority to deny, rather than reject, immigration benefit requests found by USCIS to contain invalid signatures. When a case is denied, as opposed to rejected, USCIS keeps the filing fees, and the petitioner must file a new petition. According to the interim final rule, adjudicating officers decide whether to reject or deny based on factors such as how much time and effort has been spent on the case, whether the signature defect appears to be an error versus a pattern of noncompliance, and the nature of the signature issue itself. 

It should be noted that while a scanned copy of a wet signature is acceptable, a digital signature is not. However, it can be difficult to tell the difference. It is not unusual for USCIS to issue a Request for Further Evidence (RFE) asking the petitioner to prove that a signature is original. The interim final rule makes it clear that, under these circumstances, an officer has discretion to deny the case without first issuing an RFE. 

Contact us with questions about signatures on petitions.

What You Need to Know About Employment Authorization Documents

EADs, or work permits, are crucial to employers and foreign national employees alike. The attached client flyer contains helpful basic information about topics such as what is considered “work”, EAD validity periods, and renewals. Click here to read the flyer.

District Court in Rhode Island Vacates USCIS Policies That Paused Adjudications of Certain Benefit Requests

On June 5, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island vacated several USCIS policies, including its Benefits Hold Policy, Global Asylum Hold Policy, Comprehensive Re-Review Policy, and Country-Specific Factors Policy. These policies had imposed an indefinite hold on processing immigration benefits for noncitizens from the 39 travel ban countries. The court found the policies violated the Administrative Procedure Act, stating, in part, “USCIS’s actions are contrary to law and arbitrary and capricious. 

This decision will likely be appealed by the government; we will be reporting developments as they emerge.