Search results for: social media

Under a new State Department policy, virtually all visa applicants to the United States are now required to submit information about social media accounts they have used in the past five years.

Applicants for immigrant and nonimmigrant visas must use the State Department’s Consular Electronic Application Center (CEAC) to complete online forms for nonimmigrant (DS-160) or immigrant (DS-260) visas. The Department has updated its immigrant and nonimmigrant visa forms to request additional information, including “social media identifiers,” from almost all U.S. applicants.

The new visa application forms list a number of social media platforms and require the applicant to provide any account names they may have had on them over the previous five years.

US State Department Now Requires Visa Applicants to Provide Social Media Information

Applicants have the option of stating they do not use social media. However, failure to provide accurate and truthful responses in a visa application may result in denial of the visa by a consular officer. An individual’s social media footprint will provide consular officers with a snapshot of contacts, associations, habits, and preferences. Consular officers will likely look for inconsistencies and possible security concerns on a broad range of issues.

This action amplifies the measures outlined by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in its September 2017 proposal calling for the review of social media records by all immigrants. This marks a significant shift from prior policy under the Obama Administration, which asked visa applicants to submit social media records on a voluntary basis.  

In addition to their social media histories, visa applicants are now asked for five years of previously used telephone numbers, email addresses, international travel, and deportation status, as well as whether any family members have been involved in terrorist activities. 

Under the new policy, both temporary visitors and those seeking permanent residence are required to fill out the new forms. Only applicants for certain diplomatic and official visa types will be exempted from this requirement. 

Please consult your GT attorney for additional information and check back here for updates.

For more on social media and immigration policy, click here.

The Department of State (DOS) has noticed for public comment an Information Collection Review – Electronic Application for Immigrant Visa and Alien Registration  that would require immigrants coming to the United States to submit five years of social media history. This effort is viewed by many as a component of “enhanced vetting” on behalf of the Administration following domestic terrorist activities.

Continue Reading DOS Proposes Rule Requiring Review of Social Media for U.S. Immigrant and Non-Immigrant Visa Applicants

We continue to see immigration as a moving target with recent news of four cables issued by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson guiding implementation of increased security protocols and vetting for consular posts around the world. Secretary Tillerson issued initial cables March 10 and 15 in anticipation of the new Travel Ban scheduled to take effect March 16. In response to the federal court action in Hawaii staying implementation of the new Executive Order, he followed these with a third cable March 16 rescinding large portions of his initial communications. Finally Tillerson sent a fourth cable March 17 providing final revised guidance on policy for vetting identified populations and increased social media checks.

The March 17 guidance directs consular officers to identify populations “warranting increased scrutiny” and also implements a “mandatory social media check” for certain individuals based upon time spent in Islamic State-controlled territories. Although we have seen a slight increase in review of social media in recent years, it is less common than one may believe. Consular officers have indicated that they rarely engage in deep screening due the large volume of social media available and the corresponding time it takes to review the information. In addition to new social media directives, the fourth and final cable also leaves in place direction to “develop a list of criteria identifying sets of post applicant populations warranting increased scrutiny.” While a list of specific questions to ask of individuals from identified countries was rescinded with the March 16 and 17 cables so as to comply with existing law, the general directive remains.

With the exception of the two directives above, consular officials have indicated that the guidance provided in the most recent cable may not stray far from current practice, as visa applications already go through a demanding vetting process. That being said, we do anticipate these new directives will increase visa processing times in many countries. We encourage employers and those planning to travel for visa processing purposes to plan accordingly.

On Aug. 9, 2021, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that applicants filing for Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) status are now able to apply for a Social Security number (SSN) or replacement card as part of their Adjustment of Status application process. Accordingly, USCIS released a new, revised version of the Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, which incorporates additional questions necessary to apply for an SSN or replacement card. Previously, applicants were required to submit a separate application for an SSN at a Social Security office.

The new version of the Form I-485 is effective immediately and can be used in filings now. However, applicants are permitted to submit either the new Form I-485 or the previous version of Form I-485 until Oct. 13, 2021, after which all applicants will need to submit the new version of the form.

Once the Form I-485 is filed and approved, USCIS will electronically transmit the data to the Social Security Administration. The Social Security Administration will then automatically assign applicants with an original SSN, or issue a replacement card, where requested. The filing fee for Form I-485, presently $1,225.00, remains unchanged following this new development.

This expanded partnership with the Social Security Administration has been introduced by the Biden administration to expedite bureaucratic processes, eliminate extraneous steps for applicants, and enhance collaboration between agencies.

In this episode of the Immigration Insights podcast series, Kate Kalmykov, co-chair of Greenberg Traurig’s Immigration & Compliance Practice, is joined by Don Aviv, CEO of Interfor International, to tackle the evolving intersection of global mobility and security.

Together, they examine how geopolitical instability, technological advances, and regulatory changes are reshaping the landscape for businesses and individuals moving across borders.

From the heightened risks of data breaches and device searches to the growing impact of social media and AI on both immigration and corporate security, Don shares practical strategies for risk assessment, data protection, and crisis preparedness.

The conversation highlights the need for close collaboration between immigration counsel, HR, and security professionals, and emphasizes the importance of proactive planning—especially as companies navigate new markets, respond to policy changes, and protect high-value employees and sensitive information around the world.

Click here to listen to the full episode.

Part 1 provided an overview of immigration policy changes included in the Spring 2025 DHS Regulatory Agenda and included considerations for employers. Part 2 discusses potential impacts to specific industries and additional employer considerations.

Industry Impact Analysis

Technology and Professional Services 

Companies utilizing H-1B workers may face increased compliance requirements, including enhanced documentation standards, more frequent site visits, and stricter oversight of third-party placement arrangements. This is particularly relevant for consulting firms and technology companies that place workers at client sites or utilize complex corporate structures. University partnerships and research collaborations may be affected by cap exemption changes, potentially requiring institutions to compete in the annual lottery system for positions that were previously cap-exempt. Consulting and staffing firms may need to restructure their placement arrangements to comply with enhanced third-party oversight requirements, potentially shifting toward direct employment models rather than traditional consulting arrangements.

Operations and Service Industries 

Businesses employing asylum applicants should monitor employment authorization policy developments, as proposed changes may affect the work authorization status of employees with pending asylum cases. Service-intensive industries that rely on workers with various immigration statuses may need to develop contingency workforce planning strategies to address potential changes in work authorization availability. Companies with diverse immigration status workforces should conduct comprehensive reviews of their compliance procedures to prepare for enhanced enforcement activities and changing regulatory requirements.

Healthcare and Research 

Academic medical centers and research institutions may be affected by cap exemption revisions, particularly if their nonprofit or university status is modified or if affiliated organizations lose exemption eligibility. Healthcare facilities employing workers across various visa categories should assess potential impacts from proposed employment authorization changes, particularly those affecting adjustment of status applicants and temporary status holders who provide critical healthcare services. Research organizations should monitor proposed changes to nonprofit exemptions and consider how modifications to cap exemption criteria might affect their ability to recruit and retain international talent for research projects and academic positions.

Strategic Response Considerations

  • Compliance Assessment: conduct comprehensive I-9 procedure audits, review pending immigration cases, assess H-1B compliance history (especially third-party arrangements), and update employee communications about new requirements.
  • Policy Review: adjust social media and background check policies to align with new screening requirements, enhance employment authorization tracking procedures, and develop or update emergency response protocols for enforcement actions.
  • Strategic Assessment: evaluate dependency on various immigration categories, develop mitigation strategies including alternative visa options for critical employees, assess business model impacts, and create workforce diversification strategies.
  • Legal and Compliance Infrastructure: Implement enhanced case tracking systems, create regular compliance training programs, and develop procedures for monitoring regulatory changes.
  • Compliance Risk Mitigation: Maintain accurate documentation, implement robust case tracking, establish clear protocols for government interactions, and ensure consistent application of employment policies.
  • Business Continuity Planning: Develop contingency plans for workforce changes, consider alternative staffing strategies, and assess supplier/client contract implications.
  • Legal and Regulatory Monitoring: Subscribe to official government publications, participate in industry associations for information sharing, and establish internal committees for immigration policy tracking.
  • Long-Term Considerations: 
    • Monitor final rule publications and implementation timelines.
    • Assess potential legislative changes affecting employment-based immigration.
    • Consider geographic and operational adjustments based on policy changes.
    • Evaluate technology and automation investments to reduce dependency on immigration-sensitive positions.

Conclusion

The Spring 2025 DHS Regulatory Agenda introduces changes to immigration policies that affect employers across multiple industries. While some changes have already taken effect, other proposals remain under development and subject to public comment periods and potential revision.

Employers should focus on complying with existing requirements while monitoring proposed changes that may affect their operations. The regulatory environment continues to evolve, requiring ongoing attention to policy developments and proactive planning for potential impacts.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has published its Spring 2025 Unified Regulatory Agenda, outlining changes to immigration policies and enforcement procedures that may affect U.S. employers and their workforces. These regulatory developments represent a shift in approach from previous policies and require careful analysis and planning by HR departments and legal counsel.

Verified Regulatory Changes

Executive Actions Already Implemented 

Based on official government announcements, several immediate policy changes have been in effect since January 2025. Executive Order 14159 revoked previous guidance limiting immigration enforcement in certain locations, and now allows enforcement actions at all workplace locations. Additionally, new screening procedures for immigration benefit applications have been implemented, including social media review for certain categories of applicants, which may extend processing times and require additional documentation preparation.

The administration has also reinstated alien registration requirements under Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) Section 262, making compliance with these registration obligations a priority for enforcement agencies. This affects foreign nationals who may not have been subject to registration requirements under previous policies. Furthermore, new fee structures under reconciliation legislation have been implemented, including asylum application fees that became effective July 22, 2025, which adds financial considerations to immigration planning.

H-1B Program Changes Already in Effect 

H-1B and H-2 final rules took effect Jan. 17, 2025, implementing several modifications to these temporary worker programs. The most notable change was the introduction of a beneficiary-centric selection process for the FY 2025 cap season, which aimed to reduce gaming of the lottery system by focusing on individual beneficiaries rather than allowing multiple registrations. The rules also established streamlined approval processes for certain petition types, particularly for extensions and amendments where the basic circumstances remain unchanged.

Enhanced portability provisions for H-2B workers were also implemented, allowing greater flexibility for workers to change employers under certain circumstances. Additionally, all petitioners must now use the updated Form I-129 (edition 01/17/25) for any petitions filed on or after the effective date, with no grace period for the previous form version.

Proposed Regulatory Changes Under Review

H-1B Program Reform Initiative 

According to the Spring 2025 regulatory agenda, DHS proposes to “reform the H-1B program by revising eligibility for cap exemptions, providing greater scrutiny for employers that have violated program requirements, and increasing oversight over third party placements.” The stated purpose is to “improve the integrity of the H-1B nonimmigrant program and better protect U.S. workers’ wages and working conditions.”

The proposed changes would include revisions to cap exemption eligibility criteria for universities and nonprofit research organizations, potentially affecting institutions that have historically been exempt from the annual H-1B numerical limitations. Enhanced compliance review procedures may be implemented for employers with previous violations, potentially resulting in increased documentation requirements and longer processing times for companies with compliance histories. The proposal also encompasses increased documentation requirements for third-party placement arrangements, which may impact consulting and staffing companies that place H-1B workers at client sites. Additionally, expanded site visit and monitoring programs will provide immigration authorities with greater oversight capabilities over H-1B employers and their compliance with program requirements.

Employment Authorization Policy Revisions 

The agenda includes proposals affecting various categories of employment authorization that might have broad implications for employers and workers. One proposed change involves potential modifications to employment authorization eligibility for asylum applicants, which might affect workers who are currently authorized to work based on pending asylum applications. Additionally, proposed clarifications regarding discretionary employment authorization would affect multiple foreign national populations, potentially including F-1 students utilizing Optional Practical Training, individuals with pending adjustment of status applications, and various temporary status holders. These changes may alter the employment landscape for thousands of foreign national workers currently authorized to work in the United States under these programs.

Employer Considerations and Planning Needs

Enhanced I-9 and Worksite Compliance 

Employers should consider comprehensive reviews of their I-9 compliance procedures and documentation to ensure all required forms are properly completed and maintained according to current standards. This includes verifying that Section 1 of Form I-9 is completed on the employee’s first day of work, that Section 2 is completed within three business days of the employee’s start date, and that re-verification is conducted when work authorization documents expire. Employers should also prepare protocols for potential government inspections, including designating specific personnel who are authorized to interact with enforcement agents and establishing clear procedures for document production requests. [See prior GT blog posts on inspections.]

Immigration Benefit Application Considerations 

New screening requirements may affect processing times for H-1B, L-1, and other employer-sponsored petitions, which may require employers to build additional time into their planning processes. Enhanced documentation requirements for benefit applications may include more detailed job descriptions, organizational charts, and evidence of the employer-employee relationship. The implementation of social media and background review procedures means that applicants should be advised to review their online presence before filing applications, and employers should consider developing guidelines for employees regarding social media content during the application process. Premium processing availability and timelines may also be affected, as certain cases requiring enhanced security review may be excluded from expedited processing options.

Workforce Planning Considerations

Proposed H-1B reforms may particularly affect organizations currently utilizing cap exemptions, as revisions to exemption criteria may force some positions into the annual lottery system that were previously guaranteed processing. Employers with previous compliance issues should expect enhanced scrutiny of future petitions, potentially including mandatory site visits, extended processing times, and higher documentation standards.

Employment Authorization Categories 

Potential changes to discretionary employment authorization may affect various worker populations and their employers. F-1 students currently utilizing Optional Practical Training may face modified eligibility criteria or shortened authorization periods, which might impact technology companies and other employers who rely on this talent pipeline for entry-level positions. Employees with pending adjustment of status applications may encounter changes to automatic work authorization renewal procedures, potentially creating gaps in employment authorization for long-term employees awaiting green card processing. Workers in various temporary status categories, including those with Temporary Protected Status or humanitarian parole, may face enhanced eligibility requirements or modified renewal procedures. Additionally, dependent spouses with current work authorization under programs like H-4 EAD may be affected by policy modifications that might restrict or eliminate these work opportunities.

Implementation Timeline Considerations

Immediate Effect Changes 

Enhanced enforcement procedures are already operational across all DHS agencies, meaning that employers should expect immediate application of new compliance standards. New application screening requirements have begun implementation, affecting processing times and documentation requirements for current applicants. Fee changes took effect July 22, 2025, requiring budget adjustments for ongoing and planned immigration cases. H-1B final rule changes became effective Jan. 17, 2025, and apply to all petitions filed on or after that date.

Proposed Rule Timeline 

Most proposed rules undergo public comment periods, typically lasting 30-60 days, providing an opportunity for stakeholders to provide input on proposed changes. Final implementation may occur six to 12 months after proposal, though this timeline can vary based on the complexity of the rule and the volume of public comments received. Some changes may be implemented as interim final rules with immediate effect, particularly those related to national security or program integrity concerns. Court challenges or administrative delays may affect timelines, potentially extending implementation periods or requiring modifications to proposed rules based on judicial review.

On Aug. 19, 2025, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) updated its policy manual to provide guidance on how USCIS officers should exercise discretion when reviewing immigration benefit requests. Specifically, the guidance clarifies that USCIS officers will carefully consider an applicant’s entire immigration record and weigh both positive and negative factors before making a decision on whether to grant an immigration benefit. This update specifically emphasizes considerations related to any involvement in anti-American or terrorist organizations, past requests for parole, and antisemitic activity.

The updated policy also provides guidance on how USCIS officers should exercise discretion when adjudicating EB-5 investor petitions in cases involving threats to national interest, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, and criminal misuse.

Key Highlights:

  • Negative Discretionary Factors: USCIS will assign “overwhelmingly” negative weight to any past conduct supporting terrorist organizations, promoting anti-American ideologies, and endorsing antisemitic terrorism or related ideologies.
  • Anti-American Activity: USCIS has expanded social media vetting to include reviews for anti-American activity. Any support, promotion, or endorsement of anti-American ideologies or organizations will be considered an overwhelmingly negative factor.
  • Association with Terrorist or Antisemitic Groups: Any involvement with or support for terrorist organizations, antisemitic terrorism, or related ideologies will have significant negative impact.
  • Past Parole History: USCIS will consider whether prior parole requests were made in good faith and in compliance with applicable laws and policies in effect at the time.  
  • EB-5 Investor Petitions: USCIS specifically noted that it will apply discretion in cases involving threats to national interest, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, and criminal misuse. This will apply to both standalone and regional center investor petitions.

The new guidance is effective immediately and applies to all cases pending or filed on or after Aug. 19, 2025, and supersedes any related prior guidance.

For more detailed information, please refer to USCIS policy alert.

For foreign national employees and the HR professionals who support them, few immigration experiences are more frustrating than hearing the words “administrative processing” after a visa interview. This additional review step can derail carefully planned start dates, business trips, and family reunifications. Understanding what administrative processing entails and how to navigate it can help both employees and employers better prepare for and manage these delays.

What Is Visa Administrative Processing?

Administrative processing is the term used by U.S. consular posts when a visa application cannot be immediately approved at the time of interview. The Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) defines administrative processing as “clearance procedures or the submission of a case to the Department.” According to recent guidance from the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), this occurs when the FAM references “overcoming a refusal under INA 221(g) in two instances: when additional evidence is presented, or administrative processing is completed.”

A visa refusal under section 221(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) means the applicant did not establish eligibility for a visa to the satisfaction of the consular officer, as is required under U.S. law, specifically section 291 of the INA. Importantly, cases placed in administrative processing will show a status of “Refused” on the CEAC application tracking system until the processing is resolved, even though this is not a final refusal.

Limited Transparency by Design: The FAM specifically counsels consular officers not to reveal to visa applicants the specific reason for administrative processing in a given case, stating that “Posts should not inform interested persons, including attorneys, that a case has been referred to the Department for a name-check or an advisory opinion.” This inherent non-transparency can be particularly frustrating for both employees and employers trying to understand delays.

Common Triggers for Visa Administrative Processing

There are several common triggers that can lead to administrative processing:

Missing Documentation: The most straightforward trigger occurs when essential documents are missing from the application. Consular officers will provide a written notice listing required documents, which must be submitted within one year to avoid final refusal.

Further Consultation: A consular officer may determine that circumstances require further internal consultation within the mission or with the Department of State (DOS). This type of case normally requires an advisory opinion from the Office of Legal Affairs in the Bureau of Consular Affairs Visa Office and occurs when issues arise during the interview or are based on information in the record that makes it impossible to render a decision at the completion of the interview.

Database “Hits”: All visa applicants have their biographic and biometric data checked against various databases. If these checks indicate a possible match (or “hit”) to a person about whom the U.S. government holds adverse watchlist information, consular officers must “clear” the hit by seeking confirmation that the person applying for the visa is not the same person on the watchlist before issuing the visa.

Technology Alert List Concerns: Administrative processing can result from certain visa applications where the applicant’s intended commercial or academic activity triggers concerns about the possible illegal transfer of technology as defined in the Technology Alert List (TAL). When a consul encounters an applicant who intends to pursue activities in one of the areas included on the TAL, the consul must submit an inquiry to the DOS for a determination of whether the risk is significant enough to require visa denial.

Security Clearances: These involve various types of background checks, including:

  • Name checks for biometric or biographic matches to watchlists (known as “Visa Donkey”)
  • Technology-related concerns under Security Advisory Opinions involving sensitive or dual-use technology (known as “Visa Mantis”)
  • Nationality-based reviews for nationals from certain countries, particularly those from state sponsors of terrorism (known as “Visa Condor”)

Understanding Security Advisory Opinions (SAOs)

For employees in technology, research, or certain other fields, Security Advisory Opinions represent one of the most common—and potentially lengthy—forms of administrative processing. These requests for security clearances fall into several categories, commonly referred to by their internal names:

  • Visa Donkey: For name checks when database searches indicate possible matches to watchlist information.
  • Visa Mantis: For cases involving sensitive or dual-use technology concerns.
  • Visa Condor: Triggered by national security concerns, including potential terrorist activity risks. Factors leading to a Condor SAO are usually the applicant’s country of birth, citizenship, or permanent residency, especially if that country is known as a state sponsor of terrorism (these include Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Syria). Applicants typically subjected to such an SAO are those born in, or residents of, approximately 26 countries, though as the criteria are classified, the exact list of countries is not publicly available.

Additional SAO Categories: According to available sources, there are approximately 9-12 different types of SAOs, including specialized categories such as Visa Bear (for foreign government officials and international organization representatives), Visa Horse (for diplomatic visa holders of certain nationalities), Visa Pegasus (for officials of Commonwealth of Independent States), Visa Eagle (for certain nationals seeking immigrant or K visas), and Visa Merlin (for refugees and asylees). Many of these categories are designed for specific diplomatic, governmental, or refugee contexts and may be less relevant to typical employment-based cases.

The DOS claims that 80% of SAOs are cleared within two weeks, but the general expected time for a clearance is unknown. However, according to the State Department, most administrative processing, including SAOs, is completed within 60 days of the visa interview. The FBI reports that 97% of certain types of SAOs are completed within 120 days.

For employees whose work involves sensitive technology or dual-use applications, the wait time for SAOs varies between two weeks and six months, depending on how complex the case is. This process is particularly common for nationals from certain countries or those working in fields listed on the Technology Alert List.

Recent Developments Affecting Processing Times

HR professionals should be aware of recent policy changes that may impact their international workforce. On June 18, 2025, DOS instructed consulates worldwide to implement a mandatory expansion of social media vetting for all F, M, and J visa applicants (students and exchange visitors), requiring applicants to make all social media accounts public while consular officers conduct thorough reviews of their entire online presence. While this currently applies to student and exchange visitor visas, it signals an overall trend toward enhanced screening that may affect other visa categories.

What Employees and Employers Should Expect

Non-transparency Is Normal: As the AILA guidance notes, officers rarely provide specific reasons for administrative processing. This lack of information can be particularly challenging for employers trying to plan around employee availability.

Status Changes: The visa status page will show “Refused” until processing is resolved, then update to “Approved” and finally “Issued.” Most cases finish within about 60 days, but a small percentage can run several weeks to as long as 12 months.

Key Tracking Systems Used in Visa Processing

Understanding the various tracking and screening systems can help both employees and HR professionals better navigate the visa process:

CEAC (Consular Electronic Application Center): This is the primary online portal managed by DOS where applicants can track their visa application status, upload documents, and receive notifications. Both immigrant and nonimmigrant visa applicants use CEAC to monitor their cases. During administrative processing, CEAC will show a status of “Refused” until the processing is completed and resolved.

CLASS (Consular Lookout and Support System): This is the principal database system used by consular officers to perform name checks on visa and passport applicants. CLASS contains information from the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration, and Department of Homeland Security to identify individuals who may be ineligible for visa issuance or require special action. According to government reports, CLASS contained more than 42.5 million records as of 2012. However, it’s important to understand that the DOS functions primarily as a benefits agency rather than an enforcement agency. When a “hit” occurs in CLASS, consular officers typically have access only to limited summary information indicating a potential match, but not the detailed underlying records or investigations. To obtain the complete information necessary to make a final determination, the DOS must request clarification from the actual law enforcement agencies (such as the FBI, DEA, or CIA) that maintain the detailed records, which is why Security Advisory Opinions are often necessary and can take considerable time to resolve.

CCD (Consular Consolidated Database): This comprehensive database contains over 290 million passport records, 184 million visa records, and 25 million records of U.S. citizens living overseas. Through the CCD, consular officers can access an applicant’s complete visa history, including previous applications, approvals, denials, and any comments from prior consular officers.

These systems work together during the visa screening process, and understanding their roles can help explain why processing times may vary and why certain applications trigger additional review.

Recurring Processing: Some employees may be subject to administrative processing every time they apply for a visa, particularly when interagency policies require it. Review prior visa annotations to anticipate potential delays.

Practical Considerations for Managing Administrative Processing

For HR Professionals:

Plan Ahead: Build buffer time into hiring timelines, especially for employees from countries or fields more likely to experience administrative processing. Consider remote work arrangements where legally permissible while processing is pending.

Documentation Support: Ensure employees have all required documents before their visa interviews. For technology workers, prepare clear explanations of their roles that address potential dual-use technology concerns. According to State Department guidance, providing detailed company letters can significantly help in Visa Mantis situations. Companies should consider providing employees with comprehensive documentation including: detailed descriptions of the employee’s work and specific job duties; information demonstrating that any technology involved is commercially available and in the public domain; documentation showing that the Department of Commerce has determined the technology is not “sensitive” and does not require an export license; and evidence that the work has no potential dual-use concerns. Providing consular officers with complete information upfront can significantly reduce delays in visa processing times.

Start Date Flexibility: Be prepared to adjust start dates and work with immigration counsel to amend petition dates as needed.

For Employees:

Follow DOS Guidelines: Wait at least 180 days before submitting status inquiries, unless there is an emergency. After that, contact the consular post using official channels, and if no response in 30 days, follow up again.

Avoid Refiling: Submitting a new visa application while one is pending does not help and often causes additional delays.

Document Everything: Keep detailed records of all communications with the consular post and any instructions received.

When to Seek Additional Help

The AILA guidance suggests several escalation options when administrative processing extends beyond normal timeframes:

Congressional Liaison: This can be helpful in cases with long delays or compelling humanitarian concerns, but contact must come from a U.S.-based petitioner or family member.

Legal Action: In extreme cases, consider mandamus lawsuits to compel adjudication, though this should be done with experienced litigators familiar with federal court actions against the government.

Emergency Requests: For urgent humanitarian or business needs, employees may be able to request expedited processing, though approval is not guaranteed.

Prevention and Preparation

While administrative processing cannot always be avoided, taking certain steps may minimize the likelihood and impact:

Thorough Preparation: Arrive at visa interviews with complete documentation and a clear, concise explanation of the employee’s role and responsibilities.

Legal Counsel: Work with experienced immigration attorneys who can help identify potential issues and prepare appropriate responses.

Alternative Planning: For critical business needs, consider whether the work can be performed remotely or by other team members while visa processing is pending.

Regular Updates: Stay informed about policy changes that may affect processing times and requirements.

Reassurance for Employees and Employers

Despite the anxiety that administrative processing can cause, there is important reassurance to be found in the process itself. Cases are generally not sent for administrative processing unless they are otherwise approvable. As noted in AILA’s earlier guidance, administrative processing typically “signifies that the applicant has satisfied the statutory requirements for the visa… It also usually means that there is no pre-existing ground of inadmissibility against the applicant.”

Perhaps most importantly, the number of visa applicants who are actually denied visas following administrative processing is very small. While administrative processing delays are disruptive and concerning, the vast majority of cases that enter this process are ultimately approved once the additional review is completed.

Looking Forward

As security screening continues to evolve, both employees and employers should expect that administrative processing will remain a regular part of the visa landscape. Congress and U.S. security agencies view SAOs as vital to national security which make it difficult to influence the process. However, understanding the process, preparing thoroughly, and working with experienced counsel can help minimize delays and manage their impact on business operations.

Important Legal Limitation: Employees and employers should understand that visa denials are extremely difficult to redress due to the “doctrine of consular non-reviewability.” This doctrine, recently reaffirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Dept. of State v. Muñoz (2024), holds that federal courts generally lack authority to review consular decisions denying visas. The doctrine is based on Congress’s plenary power over immigration and the Immigration and Nationality Act’s failure to authorize judicial review of consular decisions. Even in the rare cases where limited review might be available (typically involving constitutional rights of U.S. citizens), the government need only provide a “facially legitimate and bona fide reason” for the denial, and courts will not look behind that reasoning.

The key is building flexibility into immigration planning while maintaining realistic expectations about timelines. For HR professionals managing global talent, this means starting visa processes earlier, building contingency plans, and working closely with immigration counsel to navigate an increasingly complex landscape.

This blog post incorporates guidance from the American Immigration Lawyers Association’s July 2025 article, “Practice Pointer: Understanding and Addressing Administrative Processing in Visa Cases.”

The U.S. Department of State (DOS) announced July 25, 2025, a significant change to its interview waiver policy effective Sept. 2, 2025. This policy revision will require most nonimmigrant visa applicants to attend in-person consular interviews, altering the visa processing landscape for HR departments and legal teams. This change arrives following a rollback that began in February 2025, when DOS reduced the interview waiver window from 48 months to 12 months, and reflects a broader policy shift toward more rigorous screening and vetting of visa applicants at U.S. consulates abroad.

Interview Waivers Eliminated for Most Business Visa Categories

Under the new policy, interview waivers will be eliminated for virtually all business/employment visa categories, including:

  • H-1B specialty occupation workers
  • L-1 intracompany transferees
  • E-1/E-2 treaty traders and investors
  • O-1 individuals with extraordinary ability
  • F-1 students
  • J-1 exchange visitors
  • All other nonimmigrant visa categories not specifically exempted

The policy eliminates the age-based exemptions that previously allowed applicants under 14 and over 79 to skip interviews. These populations will now face mandatory in-person interview requirements.

The policy also eliminates interview waivers for renewal applicants, meaning that foreign nationals with previously successful visa applications will need to appear for interviews when seeking renewals.

Remaining Interview Waiver Eligibility

The revised policy preserves interview waivers for a limited set of circumstances:

Diplomatic and Official Categories: Applicants for A-1, A-2, certain C-3, G-1 through G-4, NATO-1 through NATO-6, and TECRO E-1 visas, as well as other diplomatic or official-type visas.

B-1/B-2 Renewals with Strict Conditions: Tourist and business visitor visa renewals remain eligible for interview waivers, but only if the applicant meets all the following criteria:

  • Renewing within 12 months of the prior visa’s expiration
  • Applicant was at least 18 years old when the prior visa was issued
  • Applying in their country of nationality or residence
  • Has never been refused a visa (unless the refusal was overcome or waived)
  • Has no apparent or potential ineligibility

Applicants who meet all waiver criteria remain subject to consular discretion, meaning officers may still require an in-person interview if they feel one is necessary. This discretionary authority means that no waiver is guaranteed.

Additional Procedural Changes

The interview waiver rollback is occurring alongside other significant procedural changes that may further complicate visa processing:

Enhanced Vetting Requirements: As of June 2025, F, M, and J visa applicants must set their social media accounts to “public” to facilitate government vetting processes, adding a layer of complexity to student and exchange visitor applications.

DS-160 Timing Requirements: New rules require that DS-160 forms be submitted at least two business days before scheduled visa interviews, with exact barcode-matching requirements that could lead to appointment cancellations for noncompliance.

No Transition Period: Unlike many policy changes that include grace periods, these restrictions are being implemented with little to no advance warning, so foreign national employees and employers should keep abreast of visa processing changes.

Operational Impact for U.S. Employers: Planning Considerations

These policy changes will create operational considerations for U.S. employers who rely on foreign talent.

Extended Processing Times: Employers may expect longer visa processing times as consulates worldwide prepare for increased interview volumes. Popular business immigration posts, such as those in India, China, Mexico, and Canada, that previously processed many applications without interviews, may face backlogs. Some consulates are already experiencing lengthy wait times, which may worsen.

Immediate Disruption for Pending Applications: Reports indicate that some applicants who were previously approved for interview waivers but haven’t yet received their visas are being turned away and required to reapply for in-person appointments. DOS has not clarified whether visa application fees will be reimbursed in such cases, creating additional uncertainty and potential costs.

Recruitment and Project Timeline Adjustments: Companies may need to incorporate additional time into their hiring and project timelines to account for extended visa processing. Processing times that previously took weeks may now require months, particularly during peak application periods.

Cost and Complexity Considerations: The mandatory interview requirement will increase costs for both employers and employees, as foreign nationals may need to travel to reach the nearest U.S. consulate. For companies with employees in remote locations or countries with limited consular services, this may require additional budget planning.

Strategic Planning: Employers may need to be more strategic about visa application timing, particularly for time-sensitive business needs.

Consular Capacity Considerations: Many U.S. consulates are currently operating with staffing constraints that impact processing capacity. The increase in required interviews will affect resources that are already managing high application volumes, potentially creating extended processing timelines.

Impact on Foreign National Employees

Foreign national employees will face new requirements under this policy:

Scheduling and Travel Requirements: Employees will need to schedule and attend in-person interviews, which may require travel time and expense, particularly for those in countries with few U.S. consulates or limited appointment availability.

Family Considerations: The elimination of age-based waivers means that the elderly and children will need to attend interviews, adding complexity to family-based applications and potentially affecting families with members who have difficulty traveling.

Process Predictability: The interview requirement reintroduces variability in routine renewals, as each application will undergo individual consular officer review. This may affect employees with established work authorization who previously experienced predictable renewal processes.

Geographic Limitations: The requirement that B-1/B-2 waiver-eligible applicants apply in their country of nationality or residence may reduce flexibility for business travelers and limit “consular shopping” opportunities.

Critical Travel Risks: Foreign nationals currently in the United States on valid status but holding expired visas, or whose most recent visa was in a different classification than their current status, may face risks. These individuals will no longer be eligible for interview waivers and must attend in-person interviews abroad before re-entering the United States. Given appointment backlogs and processing uncertainties, these individuals may wish to avoid non-essential international travel until more predictable timelines resume.

Considerations for HR and Legal Teams

Companies should consider:

  • Workforce Analysis: Reviewing their foreign national workforce, identifying employees with upcoming visa renewals, and beginning to incorporate extended processing times into workforce planning.
  • Policy Updates: Updating internal policies and employee communications to reflect the coming changes and encouraging early visa renewal applications before the Sept. 2 effective date.
  • Budget Planning: Factoring additional costs and time delays into project planning and budgets for international assignments and hiring.
  • Legal Coordination: Working with immigration counsel to develop strategies for managing the transition and minimizing operational disruptions.
  • Global Conditions: Monitoring wait times at consulates.

Understanding the Broader Policy Context

This policy represents a departure from visa-processing flexibilities during the COVID-19-era . The DOS is prioritizing security concerns and returning to a traditional model where most visa applicants are required to appear in person before a consular officer, reflecting a broader policy shift toward heightened scrutiny of visa applicants.

For guidance on how these changes may affect your organization or immigration status, consult with experienced immigration counsel.