Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

USCIS Policy Updates: Implications for Business Immigration

Client Alert
August 20, 2025

Summary of Recent USCIS Policy Memos

In August 2025, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued three key policy updates enhancing vetting, good moral character (GMC) evaluations, and scrutiny of "anti-American" conduct in immigration adjudications. These changes emphasize national security, fraud detection, and alignment with the current administration’s defined U.S. values. These policy memos will impact employers sponsoring foreign workers, including H-1B, L-1, EB visas, adjustments, and naturalization.

  1. August 1 Policy: Reestablishing Screening and Vetting Standards
    USCIS updated its Policy Manual to clarify interview criteria for asylees, refugees, and derivatives adjusting to lawful permanent resident (LPR) status via Form I-485. Mandatory interviews are triggered by unverifiable identities, fraud indicators, FBI fingerprint hits suggesting inadmissibility, ties to state sponsors of terrorism, or national security concerns. This lowers the burden of what may be a terrorism-related ground to “an articulable concern.” The stated goal is to detect misrepresentation and public safety risks.
  2. August 15 Policy: Restoring Good Moral Character Evaluations
    This memorandum restores a holistic, totality-of-circumstances GMC standard for naturalization under INA § 316(a). Adjudicators must weigh positive factors (e.g., community involvement, stable employment) against disqualifiers (e.g., aggravated felonies, DUIs), including unlisted conduct contrary to societal norms. Rehabilitation evidence is considered, but the focus is on alignment with "average citizen" standards. No longer is the absence of negative factors enough; applicants must demonstrate positive factors. This memo is effective August 15, 2025.
  3. August 19 Policy: Considering Anti-Americanism in Benefit Requests
    USCIS now treats "anti-Americanism" as a basis for terminating or denying discretionary relief, such as employment-based visas. This sweepingly broad category defines the term as endorsing terrorist organizations, anti-American ideologies, or antisemitic terrorism. Defining “anti-Americanism” is obviously subject to the definitions of the ruling party at the time of the determination. This new policy consideration includes past compliance with immigration laws and expands social media vetting to screen for such activity. This policy is also effective immediately, applying to pending and future requests and renewal applications for those already in the U.S.

DHS References to Social Media Vetting: DHS and USCIS have integrated social media screening into immigration processes, requiring applicants to disclose handles on forms for review. Policies since April 2025 screen for antisemitism and anti-Americanism, potentially denying benefits or initiating revocations based on posts endorsing harmful ideologies. This extends to all benefit requests, including H-1B extensions and adjustments. Social media now screened for antisemitism/anti-American content.  Even  old conduct from years ago may now become relevant.

These policies signal a shift toward rigorous, ongoing scrutiny, where post-grant conduct could trigger reviews during renewals or extensions.

Key Risks and Best Practices for Employers

Risks for Current Workers:

  • USCIS may apply enhanced standards to H-1B amendments/extensions, green card renewals, or conditional LPR removals. Social media posts could flag "anti-American" issues, leading to denials or revocations.
  • Potential Outcomes: Notices to revoke status if fraud/security risks emerge, risking deportation.

Considerations for Future/New Workers:

  • Expect mandatory interviews for fraud/national security red flags in new visa applications. Anti-Americanism via social media could deny entry or visas.
  • Delays/Risks: Longer processing; denials for unverified identities or terrorism ties.

Action Steps and Best Practices:

  • Train HR on policies; audit worker files for risks (e.g., GMC issues like DUIs) before filings.
  • Monitor employees' online activity; advise against controversial posts and counsel on social media dos/don'ts.
  • Screen candidates' social media pre-hire; ensure compliance with U.S. values in applications.
  • Consult immigration counsel for filings and be proactive. Vetting can prevent issues. Stay updated: Policies apply retroactively to pending cases.

For guidance on how these updates may impact your business or immigration status, please contact BMD Member Robert Ratliff at raratliff@bmdllc.com. With over 25 years of trial experience in criminal defense and immigration law, Robert’s unique insights as a former Immigration Judge allow him to offer strategic guidance for clients facing complex immigration challenges.

ImmigrationImmigration Law
Client Alert

What Happens to a Pandemic Stimulus Payment Upon Death?

June 14, 2021On January 1, 2021, the federal government issued stimulus payments (also known as Economic Impact Payments) to American citizens – on paper. However, many of the stimulus payments were not received until several months later. Sometimes the stimulus payments did not arrive until after an individual died.Client Alert

The Masks Are Back: New OSHA Regulations for Healthcare Employers

June 11, 2021Employment Law After Hours is back with a News Break Episode. Yesterday, OSHA published new rules for healthcare facilities, including hospitals, home health employers, nursing homes, ambulance companies, and assisted living facilities. These new rules are very cumbersome, requiring mask wearing for all employees, even those that are vaccinated. The only exception is for fully vaccinated employees (2 weeks post final dose) who are in a "well-defined" area where there is no reasonable expectation that any person with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 will be present.Client Alert

New OSHA Guidance for Workplaces Not Covered by the Healthcare Emergency Temporary Standard

June 11, 2021On June 10, 2021, OSHA issued an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) for occupational exposure to COVID-19, but it applies only to healthcare and healthcare support service workers. For a detailed summary of the ETS applicable to the healthcare industry, please visit https://youtu.be/vPyXmKwOzsk. All employers not subject to the ETS should review OSHA’s contemporaneously released, updated Guidance on Mitigating and Preventing the Spread of COVID-19 in the Workplace. The new Guidance essentially leaves intact OSHA’s earlier guidance, but only for unvaccinated and otherwise at-risk workers (“at-risk” meaning vaccinated or unvaccinated workers with immunocompromising conditions). For fully vaccinated workers, OSHA defers to CDC Guidance for Fully Vaccinated People, which advises that most fully vaccinated people can resume activities without wearing masks or physically distancing, except where required by federal, state, or local laws or individual business policies.Client Alert

Employer Liability for COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects

June 9, 2021As employers encourage or require employees to obtain a COVID-19 vaccine, they should be aware of OSHA recording obligations and potential workers’ compensation liability. Though OSHA has yet to revise its COVID-19 guidance in response to the latest CDC recommendations, OSHA has revised its position regarding the recording of injury or illness resulting from the vaccine. Until now, OSHA required an employer to record an adverse reaction when the vaccine was required for employees and the injury or illness otherwise met the recording criteria (work-related, a new case, and meets one or more of the general recording criteria). OSHA has reversed course and announced that it will not require recording adverse reactions until at least May 2022, irrespective of whether the employer requires the vaccine as a condition of employment. In its revised COVID-19 FAQs, OSHA states:Client Alert

The New Rule 1.510 - Radical Change for Summary Judgement Procedure in Florida

June 8, 2021In civil litigation, where both sides participate actively, trial is usually required at the end of a long, expensive case to determine a winner and a loser. In federal and most state courts, however, there are a few procedural shortcuts by which parties can seek to prevail in advance of trial, saving time, money and annoyance. The most common of these is the “motion for summary judgment”: a request to the court by one side for judgment before trial, generally on the basis that the evidence available reflects that a win for that party is legally inevitable and thus required. Effective May 1, 2021, summary judgment procedure in Florida has radically changed.
Older posts
Newer posts