3102 West End Avenue, Ste. 400, Nashville, Tennessee 37203615-899-2866
CB Immigration registered trademarkAffirmative Immigration Law · Nashville & NationwideBook a Free Intake Call

News & Updates

Firm News & Immigration Policy Updates

Announcements from our firm, plus plain-language summaries of policy and filing-fee changes that affect our clients. General information only — not legal advice about your specific case.

Latest Updates

Sep 2026
Policy Update

Court Orders Three-Times-a-Week Reporting on Diversity Visa Processing, and Raises Contempt — With the Sept. 30 Deadline Closing

On Sept. 10, 2026, Judge Edward J. Davila issued an Order Enforcing Preliminary Injunction in Medani v. Trump, No. 5:26-cv-06332-EJD (N.D. Cal.), ECF No. 93, after the plaintiffs went back to court to enforce it. The Aug. 28 injunction had temporarily vacated three policies — the State Department's "DV Pause" and "75-Country Pause," and the USCIS Diversity Visa Hold under Policy Memorandum PM-602-0193, which we covered separately since it affects pending adjustment of status applications — and ordered the government, "to the extent practicable and in good faith," to "take all reasonable steps during the remainder of the Diversity Visa fiscal year" to reconsider applications refused solely under those policies and resume ordinary adjudication. On Sept. 8, the plaintiffs filed an emergency motion to enforce that injunction, and the order records that in its opposition brief, DOS "did not deny that it had not scheduled or conducted a single interview, or issued a single Diversity Visa, since the Court's Order." The Department said it had spent the time since the injunction developing guidance, and its counsel told the court a cable went out to consulates and embassies on the morning of the hearing. The court wrote that it was "troubled" both by the failure to schedule a single interview and by DOS's delay in responding, noting that "with each day that passes, hundreds of selectees lose their opportunity to receive a Diversity Visa before the end of the fiscal year" — by the Department's own figures, it adjudicated 6,890 Diversity Visa applications worldwide in September 2025, roughly 230 a day. The court ordered DOS to file a status report by 12:00 p.m. Pacific every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday until the end of the fiscal year, beginning Sept. 14, covering recent compliance steps, interviews scheduled and held, and visas issued and denied. It denied the plaintiffs' other requested relief for now and invited further briefing on whether there has been full compliance and, if not, whether a finding of contempt and what sanctions would be appropriate. The calendar is the whole problem. The court pointed to Goodluck v. Biden, 104 F.4th 920 (D.C. Cir. 2024), which held that a district court lacks authority to order DOS to process and adjudicate diversity visa applications past the fiscal year — while observing that Goodluck expressly did not decide whether contempt sanctions could still issue against the government. The FY-2026 Diversity Visa year ends Sept. 30, 2026, and that date is hard, not a target. As of Sept. 13, 2026, no appeal or stay has been filed. If you are an FY-2026 DV selectee still waiting on a consular interview or an adjustment of status decision, this is the window. Contact us now rather than after the end of the month.

Medani v. Trump docket (N.D. Cal.) (opens in a new tab)→
Sep 2026
Policy Update

DHS Proposes Eliminating the 60-Day Grace Period for Work-Visa Holders — Proposed Only, Nothing Has Changed

Read that first line twice, because this one is already circulating as though it were settled law. On Sept. 11, 2026, DHS published a notice of proposed rulemaking, "Eliminating the Discretionary 60-Day Grace Period," 91 FR 57807 (RIN 1615-AD22; DHS Docket No. USCIS-2026-0364). It is a proposal. Nothing in it is in effect, and the grace period is fully available today exactly as it has been. Written comments are due on or before Nov. 10, 2026. What DHS proposes is to remove 8 CFR 214.1(l)(2), which we confirmed is still current, unamended regulation. That paragraph provides that someone admitted or otherwise given status in E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, O-1, or TN classification, and their dependents, "shall not be considered to have failed to maintain nonimmigrant status solely on the basis of a cessation of the employment on which the alien's classification was based, for up to 60 consecutive days or until the end of the authorized validity period, whichever is shorter, once during each authorized validity period." In practice it is the cushion that lets someone whose job ends stay in valid status while lining up a new employer, a change of status, or an orderly departure. DHS says removing it would restore "a direct relationship between an alien's nonimmigrant status and the specific employment or activity that formed the basis of his or her admission or grant of status." Two things are worth knowing even under the current rule: DHS may already "eliminate or shorten this 60-day period as a matter of discretion," and the grace period has never authorized you to work. A proposed rule can be finalized, changed, or dropped, and any final rule would be published separately with its own effective date — we will flag it here if that happens. If you hold one of these classifications and your job is ending or looks uncertain, the conversation worth having is not about this proposal; it is that 60 days is a shorter runway than most people assume.

Federal Register: Eliminating the Discretionary 60-Day Grace Period (proposed rule) (opens in a new tab)→
Sep 2026
USCIS Fees

New 9-11 Biometric Fee Rule and a New Form I-129 Edition Took Effect Sept. 9, 2026

Two changes for employers filing H-1B and L-1 petitions landed on the same day, and both are in effect now. First, the fee. A DHS final rule, "9-11 Response and Biometric Entry-Exit Fee for H-1B and L-1 Visas," 91 FR 51360 (Aug. 10, 2026), took effect Sept. 9, 2026 and amended 8 CFR part 106. The fee is not new and the amounts did not change — $4,000 on an H-1B petition, $4,500 on an L-1 petition — but which petitions it reaches did. It applies only to a petitioner that employs 50 or more employees in the United States where more than 50 percent of those employees, in the aggregate, are in H-1B, L-1A, or L-1B status. For an employer that meets that test, the regulation now reaches essentially every H-1B and L-1 petition, including a straight extension with the same employer; the only carve-out left is an amended petition that does not seek an extension of the worker's currently authorized status. Before the rule, DHS collected the fee only where the Fraud Prevention and Detection Fee also applied — broadly, initial petitions and change-of-employer petitions. The regulation also states the fee applies to petitions filed on or before Sept. 30, 2027. Second, the form. USCIS issued a new edition of Form I-129 dated 09/09/26 and a new Form G-1055 fee schedule dated 09/09/26. USCIS will accept the prior 02/27/26 I-129 edition only if it is postmarked or electronically submitted before Nov. 9, 2026, and will reject it on or after that date. Employment petitions are not our core practice area, but edition dates and fee totals are exactly what gets a filing rejected: check the date printed on the form against uscis.gov/i-129 immediately before you send it, and confirm the total against the current G-1055 rather than an older worksheet.

USCIS: Form I-129 (current edition and fee notice) (opens in a new tab)→
Sep 2026
Policy Update

Court Temporarily Vacates the USCIS Diversity Visa Hold; DV Adjustment Cases Ordered Back Into Normal Processing

On Aug. 28, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued an order in Medani v. Trump, No. 26-cv-6332, temporarily vacating USCIS Policy Memorandum PM-602-0193 — the "DV Hold" that had stopped adjudication of adjustment of status applications filed by Diversity Visa selectees — pending further litigation. The court also certified a subclass of "all selectees and derivative beneficiaries under the FY-2026 Diversity Visa Program who are subject to the USCIS DV Hold imposed by Policy Memorandum PM-602-0193," and ordered USCIS "to the extent practicable and in good faith, to take all reasonable steps during the remainder of the Diversity Visa fiscal year to resume ordinary adjudication of plaintiffs' pending adjustment of status applications without applying" the memorandum. USCIS confirmed the order in an alert dated Sept. 4, 2026, adding that it "strongly disagrees with the Court's order but will follow its terms pending possible further judicial review." Two limits matter, and neither is small. The vacatur is temporary and expressly pending further litigation, so it can still be appealed, stayed, or reversed. And the relief is tied to the FY-2026 Diversity Visa year, which by statute closes at the end of the federal fiscal year — DV selectees remain eligible to receive a visa only through the end of the fiscal year for which they were selected. If you were selected in the FY-2026 DV lottery and your Form I-485 has been sitting without a decision, this hold is the likely reason and it should now be lifted, but the remaining window is short. Contact us promptly rather than waiting to hear from USCIS.

USCIS alert: Court Order on Diversity Immigrant Visa Program Hold Policy (opens in a new tab)→
Sep 2026
Policy Update

New DHS Rule on U.S.-Born Children of Foreign Government Employees — In Effect Now, and Partly Blocked by a Court Injunction

On Sept. 4, 2026, DHS issued an interim final rule, "Registration of Lawful Permanent Residence for Children Born to Foreign Government Employees in the United States" (RIN 1615-AD24; DHS Docket No. USCIS-2026-0496), rewriting 8 CFR 101.3. USCIS states the rule is effective Sept. 4, 2026 and applies only to children born on or after that date; children born earlier are treated under the regulations in place at the time of their birth. It was issued without advance notice and comment — DHS invoked the Administrative Procedure Act's foreign-affairs and good-cause exceptions — and comments are due within 30 days of publication. The rule does two things. First, it replaces the narrow term "foreign diplomatic officer" with a broader category, "foreign government employee," covering accredited diplomatic officers, foreign nationals employed by their own country's embassy or consulate, persons employed by a foreign government in an official capacity, and employees of international organizations that hold international-organization immunity; it then provides that a child born in the United States to such a person is not subject to U.S. jurisdiction for birthright citizenship purposes unless at least one parent is a U.S. citizen. Second, it extends to that broader group the longstanding voluntary option to register as a lawful permanent resident as of the date of birth, using Form I-485. The regulation expressly excludes a number of groups from the definition, including personal household employees of foreign officials, third-country nationals working for a foreign government, contractors outside A or G status, and foreign government employees visiting in a personal rather than official capacity. Two things deserve emphasis. DHS states in the rule that, given the injunction in Casa Inc. v. Trump, No. 8:25-cv-00201 (D. Md. Sept. 2, 2026), it "will not take actions to implement the rule specifically to any member of the certified class, or otherwise conflict with the preliminary injunction," unless the government obtains relief from that injunction. And this rule reaches a narrow population — it does not change the citizenship of a U.S.-born child whose parents are ordinary visa holders, students, workers, or people without status. It is, however, the first regulation implementing Executive Order 14418 of Aug. 6, 2026, which identifies its categories "non-exhaustively," so further rulemaking is possible. If a parent in your family works for a foreign government, an embassy or consulate, or an international organization and you are expecting a child, talk to us before assuming anything about that child's status.

USCIS alert: DHS rule for children born to foreign government employees (opens in a new tab)→
Sep 2026
Policy Update

State Department Rescheduled Immigrant Visa Appointments After the 75-Country Ruling; Court Orders a Compliance Report

On Sept. 10, 2026, the government filed a notice of appeal in CLINIC v. Rubio, No. 1:26-cv-00858-JAV (S.D.N.Y.), ECF No. 98, taking the Aug. 24, 2026 judgment — a partial judgment entered under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), since other claims in the case remain pending — to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. As of Sept. 13, 2026, the district court's own docket shows no motion for a stay pending appeal and no stay has been entered there; we have not been able to independently confirm the status of any stay request in the Second Circuit itself. Separately, the government has argued that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(a) automatically stays proceedings to enforce the judgment for 30 days after it was entered, through Sept. 23, 2026 — an argument about pausing enforcement steps, not about undoing the underlying ruling, which the State Department has told the court it treats as "fully operative." In a filing on Aug. 28, the Department also confirmed that its Bureau of Consular Affairs "is rescheduling immigrant-visa appointments" — to allow time to coordinate guidance implementing the ruling and to account for "updated procedures in applying the public-charge ground of inadmissibility." The government described that as temporary rescheduling through Aug. 31. The plaintiffs disputed both the scope and that end date, noting it did not appear in the Department's sworn declaration and that appointments scheduled after Aug. 31 were also canceled. On Aug. 31 the court granted the plaintiffs' emergency motion to enforce its judgment in part and ordered a status report. The Department filed it on Sept. 8: more than 43,000 immigrant visa applications are subject to the court's vacatur and remand, the Department has rescheduled many immigrant visa appointments globally through September 2026 as part of a training initiative and to identify affected cases, and there is "no fixed date by which reconsideration of all affected applications will be completed" — cases will move on a rolling basis, and individual applicants may be asked for updated documents, an updated medical exam, or an additional interview. If an immigrant visa interview was canceled or moved, that is not a denial and not necessarily permanent — confirm your appointment directly with the consulate, and talk to us before changing travel plans or filing anything in response.

CLINIC v. Rubio docket (S.D.N.Y.) (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Policy Update

USCIS Can Now Send Affirmative Asylum Cases to Immigration Court Without an Interview

An interim final rule, "Affirmative Asylum Referrals Without Interview" (91 Fed. Reg. 47101), took effect July 28, 2026 and is in force now. It adds 8 CFR 208.9(a)(2), which permits an asylum officer to refer an affirmative Form I-589 to an immigration judge "without conducting an interview, based on a review of the record... and other relevant evidence." The rule allows a referral without interview where the applicant is barred from applying for asylum, is barred from a grant of asylum, "does not merit a grant as a matter of discretion, or is not eligible on the merits of the claim." A related change to 8 CFR 208.19 now requires that a letter include an assessment of the applicant's credibility only "for denials" — not for referrals. USCIS has said it still offers an interview before granting or denying asylum; the practical effect for an applicant who has no other lawful status is that the case can be sent to immigration court, an adversarial forum, without the non-adversarial USCIS interview that regulations previously provided. The rule was issued without advance notice and comment, and the public comment period runs through Sept. 28, 2026. It is being challenged: on Aug. 19, 2026, four legal services organizations filed Immigration Equality v. Mullin, No. 1:26-cv-02921 (D.D.C.), raising three Administrative Procedure Act claims. Importantly, no temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction has been sought or entered in that case, so the rule remains fully in effect while the litigation proceeds. The practical takeaway has not changed but now matters much more: treat your initial affirmative asylum filing as your complete case, with all supporting evidence and declarations included at the time of filing, rather than assuming there will be an interview where you can explain or supplement it. If you have an I-589 on file or are preparing one, ask us to review what is actually in your record.

Federal Register: Affirmative Asylum Referrals Without Interview (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Policy Update

State Department Visa Bond Rule Makes Filing for Asylum a Bond Breach — In Effect, but Narrow

A State Department final rule, "Visas: Visa Bond Program" (91 FR 48757, RIN 1400-AG33), took effect Aug. 3, 2026, making permanent a pilot program that began in August 2025. It revises 22 CFR 41.11(c). Under it, applicants for B-1/B-2 visitor visas who are nationals of "covered countries" may be required by a consular officer to post a bond of up to $20,000 as a condition of the visa being issued. The rule then lists the actions that breach the bond and forfeit the entire amount, and one of them is, in the regulation's own words, "filing for asylum or any other form of humanitarian protection that is submitted on Form I-589, Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal." Several limits matter and should not be glossed over. The rule reaches only nationals of covered countries who were actually required to post a bond — it does not apply to visitors generally, and the list of covered countries is maintained by the Department on travel.state.gov and can change on 15 days' notice. The consequence is forfeiture of the money, decided by DHS under 8 CFR 103.6(c)(3) with written notice to the obligor, and that determination can be appealed; it is not a visa revocation, and it does not bar, deny, or decide an asylum application. The rule also notes that USCIS may treat the existence of a visa bond as a negative discretionary factor when it adjudicates a request to extend or change status. Separately, we want to be clear about something we have seen circulating: widely repeated reports of a mass revocation of visitor visas held by asylum applicants are not confirmed by any published rule, Foreign Affairs Manual provision, agency guidance, or court filing that we have been able to locate, and we are not treating them as established. If you hold a B-1/B-2 visa that required a bond and you are weighing an asylum filing, the financial exposure is real and specific — talk to us first so you understand what is actually at stake.

Federal Register: Visas: Visa Bond Program (final rule) (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Policy Update

Court Enjoins USCIS Hold Policies for Applicants From 39 Proclamation Countries

On Aug. 24, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California certified a class and preliminarily enjoined two USCIS policy memoranda — PM 602-0192 and PM 602-0194 — in Red Eagle Law, L.C. v. Edlow, No. 26-cv-04850-CRB. Those memos had directed USCIS to place certain applications on hold rather than decide them. The certified class covers citizens or nationals of the 39 countries named in Presidential Proclamations 10949 and 10998, and of the Palestinian Authority, who have a pending Form I-589 asylum application or another benefit application that was subject to those holds and has not yet received a final decision. USCIS acknowledged the order in an alert dated Aug. 28, 2026, stating that it "is ordered to adjudicate applications in the normal course of USCIS' process." Two limits matter: this is a preliminary injunction, not a final judgment, so it can still be appealed or modified, and it reaches the hold policies only — the underlying proclamations remain in place. If you are from one of the covered countries and your application has been sitting without a decision, this may be the reason, and it may now begin moving again. Ask us to review where your case actually stands.

USCIS alert: Recent Court Order on Hold Policies (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Policy Update

DHS Proposes a $103,265 Fee on H-1B Cap-Subject Petitions — Not Yet in Effect

On Aug. 25, 2026, DHS published a proposed rule that would add a $103,265 fee to every H-1B cap-subject petition, including those eligible for the advanced-degree exemption, on top of all other existing fees. Cap-exempt petitions would not be affected. This is a proposed rule only — the public comment period runs through Sept. 24, 2026, and no fee is owed under it today. It's separate from (and would stack on top of) the $100,000 payment under last year's presidential proclamation. We don't handle H-1B petitions as a core practice area, but if this affects an employer or employee you know, confirm the rule's actual status before acting on anything you read about it — coverage of proposed immigration rules routinely gets reported as if they were already final.

Federal Register: Fee for Certain H-1B Petitions (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Firm News

Remembering Dolly Parton, 1946–2026

Dolly Parton died August 25, 2026, in Nashville, at 80. We're a few miles from Music Row, in a state she spent her life describing to the rest of the world, and the loss is close to home. Our tribute covers her Sevier County roots, her career, and the Imagination Library — the free-book program she started in her father's honor, which now reaches children in participating communities across Tennessee and several other countries, including many of the families our own clients are building here.

Read our tribute→
Aug 2026
Policy Update

USCIS Restarts Neighborhood Investigations for Citizenship Applicants

In Policy Alert PA-2026-10, issued Aug. 25, 2026, USCIS ended the general waiver of the personal investigations authorized by INA § 335(a) — the "neighborhood investigations" legacy INS had abandoned by 1991. Unless USCIS waives it in a given case, the investigation now applies to every naturalization applicant and is generally completed before the interview is scheduled: a USCIS investigator may interview neighbors, landlords, employers, coworkers, and business associates, covering at least the five years before you filed. The guidance is effective immediately and applies to N-400s already pending, not only to new filings. USCIS also said applicants may voluntarily submit character reference letters — preferably at least two, from U.S. citizens who are not relatives — and that it weighs them when deciding whether to waive the investigation. If you have an N-400 on file or are preparing one, talk to us about whether to submit reference letters and about what the people around you would likely be asked.

USCIS Policy Alert PA-2026-10 (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Policy Update

USCIS Now Treats a Green Card as Discretionary Relief, Not a Routine Approval

In a policy memorandum signed May 21, 2026, USCIS said adjustment of status is "a matter of discretion and administrative grace," not a routine approval, and directed officers to weigh an applicant's history — including a prior overstay or unauthorized work — more heavily when deciding whether to grant it. Statutory eligibility under INA § 245 has not changed, and the memo applies to cases already pending, not just new filings. If you have a pending green card case, or any history of unlawful presence or unauthorized work, talk to us before you file or while your case is pending — a clean statutory case is no longer automatically enough on its own.

USCIS newsroom alerts (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Policy Update

Court Strikes Down the 75-Country Immigrant Visa Suspension

On Aug. 21, 2026, a federal judge ruled in CLINIC v. Rubio that the State Department's policy suspending immigrant visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries was unlawful, vacating it nationwide. Consulates are directed to resume processing and reopen cases denied solely on that basis. This ruling is separate from the travel-ban proclamations, which remain in force. The government may still appeal or seek a stay, so if this affects you or a family member, talk to us before making travel or filing decisions based on it.

CLINIC press release on the ruling (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
USCIS Fees

DHS Proposes Ending the N-400 Fee Waiver and Reduced Fee — Not Yet in Effect

DHS has proposed raising the N-400 naturalization fee from $760 to $1,330 on paper (or $710 to $1,280 online) and eliminating both the reduced-fee option and the fee waiver, with an exception preserved for military service members. The public comment period closed Aug. 24, 2026. This is a proposed rule only — no new fee or fee-waiver change is in effect yet. If you are close to filing and might rely on the reduced fee or a fee waiver, timing may matter — ask us about your specific situation.

Current USCIS filing fees (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Policy Update

DHS Rule Sets Up a Path to Mandatory E-Filing — Not a Mandate Yet

On Aug. 11, 2026, DHS published an interim final rule authorizing USCIS to require electronic filing for benefit requests that have been e-filing-eligible for at least 180 days — a threshold 22 forms already meet. The rule does not make e-filing mandatory for any specific form today: USCIS must give at least 60 days' advance notice before requiring it for a given form, and applicants who can show e-filing would cause undue hardship may request a waiver on a new Form I-936 ($25 fee, granted at USCIS's discretion, valid only 30 days). Public comments are open through Oct. 13, 2026. We're watching for a form-specific announcement and will flag it here if one is issued.

USCIS newsroom alerts (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Resources

New Form Editions Coming for the I-485, I-539, and I-765

USCIS announced that a new edition of Form I-485 dated 09/18/26 will be required starting Sept. 18, 2026, and new editions of Forms I-539 and I-765 dated 09/15/26 will be required starting Sept. 15, 2026. A further I-485 edition dated 09/04/26 was issued in early September; USCIS will accept either the 01/20/25 or the 09/04/26 edition only if the filing is postmarked or electronically submitted before Sept. 18, and will reject both on or after that date. USCIS has stated there is no grace period for any of these changes. If you are preparing a filing around that window, check the edition date printed on each form against the current version on the USCIS website immediately before you send it.

USCIS newsroom alerts (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Policy Update

New Public Charge Guidance Takes Effect Sept. 18, 2026

On Aug. 18, 2026, USCIS issued new guidance on public charge inadmissibility, implementing a DHS final rule published in the Federal Register on July 20, 2026 that rescinds the 2022 public charge rule. USCIS now applies a "totality of the circumstances" test that considers a broader range of public benefits than the prior rule, and the guidance applies to Form I-485 applications postmarked or filed electronically on or after Sept. 18, 2026. Because this is directly relevant to family-based adjustment of status, we recommend reviewing it with an attorney before you file.

USCIS public charge guidance (opens in a new tab)→
Aug 2026
Policy Update

USCIS May Now Deny Some Cases Without First Issuing an RFE

In a policy alert dated Aug. 5, 2026, USCIS said officers may deny a benefit request outright — without first issuing a Request for Evidence or a Notice of Intent to Deny — when the initial evidence does not establish eligibility. The change took effect immediately and applies to cases that were already pending. We generally recommend treating the initial filing as your one complete presentation of the evidence, rather than counting on a follow-up request to fill in gaps.

USCIS newsroom alerts (opens in a new tab)→

Your immigration journey deserves a plan, not just paperwork.

Schedule Your Intake Call
Call CB Immigration615-899-2866