Related videos:
The United States government is preparing a change in immigration policy that could make it harder to obtain residence cards (green cards), asylum, parole, and other statuses for immigrants from countries included in President Donald Trump's travel ban, a list that includes Cuba.
According to internal drafts from the Department of Homeland Security cited by The New York Times, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) would begin to consider so-called "country-specific factors" —the same ones underlying the travel ban— as "significant negative factors" when evaluating applications.
The change would affect applications for residence permits, asylum, parole, and other statuses that require "discretionary analysis," meaning a review in which an official weighs positive and negative factors before approving an immigration benefit.
The new regulation would not apply to citizenship applications and is still in the drafting stage.
The measure would represent a significant expansion of the government's campaign to tighten immigration from countries that, according to Washington, lack reliable systems for document verification or cooperation in security matters.
In the drafts, the agency notes that some states do not share sufficient background information and that, in other cases, local authorities lack the adequate capacity to issue passports or other documents, which would affect USCIS's confidence in the validity of those records.
The debate is framed within the travel ban signed by Trump in June, which affects 12 countries, primarily in Africa and the Middle East.
The order prevents citizens from Cuba, Afghanistan, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen from traveling to the United States.
Additionally, it imposed partial restrictions on nationals from seven other countries: Burundi, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela, whose citizens are not allowed to enter permanently or obtain certain visas.
Trump defended the travel ban by stating that a recent terrorist attack highlighted “the extreme dangers” of allowing foreigners who —in the view of the White House— have not been properly vetted, asserting that individuals from certain countries pose a higher risk of overstaying their visas.
The administration has introduced, however, some exceptions: holders of valid visas, legal permanent residents, athletes traveling to the United States for the 2026 World Cup or the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics, as well as Afghans who meet the requirements for the Special Immigrant Visa program for having collaborated with the U.S. government during the war in Afghanistan, are exempted.
An attack on legal immigration?
Experts in immigration policy cited by the Times believe that the proposal represents a significant shift.
Doug Rand, a former senior official at USCIS during the Biden administration, described it as "absurd" for something to be applied to a person "based on their country" and referred to it as "a radical change."
In his view, this represents an escalation of the Trump administration's attack on legal immigration, as it would affect individuals who have already passed national security checks and legally reside in the United States.
Former official Michael Valverde, who worked for over two decades at USCIS, recalled that the agency has always dealt with documents that are difficult to validate due to originating from countries with weak security practices, but he emphasized that it is unprecedented for these difficulties to become a formal negative factor in applications.
He warned that it will be crucial to see if the applicants can truly overcome that "negative factor" or if, in practice, it turns into a de facto ban for those coming from the specified countries.
Analyst Sarah Pierce, who previously worked at USCIS and is now the director of social policy at the Third Way think tank, stated that “there’s no way this policy won’t increase denials” and that it jeopardizes the notion of a fair and impartial review of those cases.
According to Pierce, it is legitimate for the government to assess whether there is sufficient information to conclude that an applicant does not pose a security risk, but he questioned the pre determination of that judgment "simply because someone is from a certain country," which could lead to legal challenges based on nationality discrimination.
More controls and fewer means of protection
The plan is presented as part of a broader initiative by the administration to restrict legal immigration avenues.
Last month, the government reduced the number of refugees it would accept this fiscal year and denied entry to thousands of people fleeing war and persecution, while reserving spots for South African afrikaners, mostly white.
Meanwhile, USCIS has expanded investigations into social media and checks for “anti-American activities” for certain applicants of immigration benefits, including those seeking green cards.
The agency reported that in fiscal year 2025, it had completed 12,502 individual verifications on social media.
According to the drafts cited by the Times, the same "negative factors" linked to the country of origin would also apply to asylum applications and humanitarian parole, which could seriously close or hinder avenues of protection for individuals who are already within the United States and who until now relied on an individual assessment of their cases.
Rand emphasized that the change aims to "reach into the interior of the United States and alter the established expectations" of those who are already in the country with legal status.
The draft itself acknowledges that USCIS does not know how the new policy would affect denial rates, although several experts predict a significant increase in rejections and a flood of lawsuits.
Pierce argued that the rule would be particularly vulnerable because, unlike the entry ban at the border, it would apply to individuals who are already within the United States, creating a distinct legal gray area compared to traditional travel bans.
For now, the plan remains in draft phase, but if confirmed, it would represent a further tightening of U.S. immigration policy, with a direct impact on applicants for green cards, asylum, and other benefits, whose outcomes could increasingly depend on the country of their birth.
Filed under: