On July 27, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published an interim final rule that will fundamentally reshape the way many affirmative asylum applications are handled in the United States. Effective July 28, asylum officers may now refer certain cases straight to immigration court without conducting the traditional non-adversarial interview. The rule applies when an applicant filed more than one year after entering the country, failed to appear for a scheduled interview, or when an officer believes the claim is clearly frivolous or filed solely to obtain an Employment Authorization Document. USCIS Director Joseph Edlow framed the measure as a backlog-reduction tool, noting that the affirmative inventory exceeds 1.4 million cases. By eliminating interviews for an estimated 444,000 pending matters, the agency projects savings of 1.3 million officer-hours over the next two fiscal years. DHS contends the change will also deter “loophole” filings made only to secure work permits. Immigrant advocates and former officials argue the opposite. They warn that shifting cases into an already over-burdened immigration-court system—now topping three million proceedings—will lengthen adjudications, increase detention, and strip applicants of the more protective, interview-based process Congress envisioned. Doris Meissner, former INS Commissioner and now at the Migration Policy Institute, called the move “a fast track to denial” that sacrifices fairness for speed. She also noted that asylum interviews, unlike court hearings, do not require government trial attorneys, making them both faster and cheaper. For employers and global mobility managers, the rule has immediate practical implications. Foreign nationals whose I-94 or visa status is lapsing may no longer be able to rely on a pending asylum interview to maintain work authorization; instead, they could find themselves in removal proceedings, where employment permission is harder to obtain. Companies should audit their foreign-national workforces and identify employees whose lawful status depends on pending asylum filings; contingency plans—such as alternative visa categories or overseas assignments—may now be required. Human-resources teams should also prepare for longer employment-verification gaps and potential travel restrictions for affected staff. The interim rule is open for public comment until September 25, 2026, but it took effect immediately. Litigation is expected. Until courts weigh in, mobility stakeholders must assume the policy is operative and adjust compliance protocols accordingly.
Source: Los Angeles Times
