Immigrants looking for legal ways to reside and work in the United States will now face new scrutiny related to their views on America, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced on Tuesday.
The agency stated that immigration officers will assess whether applicants for benefits like green cards have ‘endorsed, promoted, supported, or otherwise espoused’ views that could be classified as anti-American, antisemitic, or even extremist.
Matthew Tragesser, a spokesperson for USCIS, highlighted the importance of this directive, stating, ‘America’s benefits should not be given to those who despise the country and promote anti-American ideologies.’ Tragesser emphasized that immigration benefits are a privilege rather than a right.
Despite the announcement, the exact definition of anti-Americanism remains vague, raising concerns about how and when immigration officers will apply this new guideline in practice.
Elizabeth Jacobs, director of regulatory affairs at the Center for Immigration Studies, indicated that the announcement signals a less tolerant approach towards anti-American views in immigration decisions. She noted that the government is clearer about what behaviors and practices should be considered but stressed that discretion still exists in these decisions.
‘It’s important to clarify that the agency cannot mandate a denial; they can only suggest it be regarded as a negative factor,’ Jacobs explained.
Critics of the new policy fear it could pave the way for biased decision-making based on the subjective interpretations of immigration officers. Jane Lilly Lopez, an associate professor of sociology at Brigham Young University, raised concerns about the potential for stereotypes, prejudice, and implicit biases to influence immigration outcomes.
‘For me, the really big story is that they are opening the door for stereotypes and prejudice to take the wheel in these decisions. That’s really worrisome,’ Lopez stated.
These policy changes follow a series of updates since President Donald Trump took office, including social media vetting and new requirements for applicants seeking naturalization, which now include assessments for ‘good moral character.’ Lopez noted that this could mean applicants must provide significantly more evidence to demonstrate that they meet the new standards.
‘It means you are going to just do a whole lot more work to provide evidence that you meet our standards,’ Lopez added.
The constitutionality of the policy, particularly relating to freedom of speech for non-citizens, has sparked debate among experts. Jacobs maintains that First Amendment rights do not extend to individuals who are outside the U.S. or who are not U.S. citizens.
Conversely, Ruby Robinson, a senior managing attorney with the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, contends that the protections of the Bill of Rights apply to all individuals in the U.S. regardless of their immigration status. ‘A lot of this administration’s activities infringe on constitutional rights and do need to be resolved, ultimately, in courts,’ Robinson remarked.
Legal advocates are now advising potential immigrants to temper their expectations regarding the application process. Jaime Diez, an immigration attorney in Texas, stated, ‘People need to understand that we have a different system today, and a lot more things that apply to U.S. citizens are not going to apply to somebody trying to enter the United States.’
Jonathan Grode, managing partner of Green and Spiegel immigration law firm, noted that this policy update aligns with the Trump administration’s overall perspective on immigration. ‘This is what was elected. They’re allowed to interpret the rules the way they want. The policy for them is to shrink the strike zone. The law is still the same,’ Grode explained.
image source from：abcnews
