Full Analysis Summary
US immigration policy changes
The Trump administration’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) reduced the maximum validity of employment authorization documents for refugees, approved asylum seekers, and people with stayed deportations from five years to 18 months.
USCIS director Joseph Edlow framed the change as a public-safety measure following the Nov. 26 shooting in Washington.
Edlow said shorter permits will allow repeated screenings to ensure newcomers do not threaten public safety or promote "anti-American ideologies."
The report also notes the administration recently suspended immigration applications, green card processing, and naturalization access for citizens of 19 countries already under travel restrictions.
It also recalls President Trump’s campaign pledge to deport millions of undocumented migrants and his stated intention after the shooting to "stop immigration permanently from all Third World countries."
USCIS policy context
USCIS's rationale, as reported, links the rule change directly to a security incident.
Edlow cited the Nov. 26 attack on two National Guard members by a foreign national admitted under the prior administration and presented shorter EAD durations as a way to increase recurring screening opportunities.
The policy explicitly names refugees, approved asylum seekers, and people with stayed deportations as affected categories, suggesting the administration intends routine re-vetting rather than a single long-term clearance.
An Al-Jazeera report places this administrative change alongside other recent moves, such as suspending immigration-related applications and access for citizens of 19 listed countries, signaling a coordinated restrictive stance.
Shortening EAD impacts
If implemented, shortening EAD validity from five years to 18 months would create more frequent administrative touchpoints for refugees and asylum-approved migrants, increase USCIS oversight, and potentially cause recurring uncertainty about employment authorization.
Al-Jazeera frames this as part of a broader tightening of entry and settlement pathways, including recent suspensions affecting nationals of several countries, and links it rhetorically to Trump's earlier public commitments to drastically cut immigration and stop migration from what he described as 'Third World' countries.
Without fuller reporting from other outlets in the set, impacts such as processing delays, legal challenges, or humanitarian concerns are presented here only as plausible consequences rather than documented outcomes.
Coverage and source limitations
Coverage limitations and source differences matter for how readers interpret this policy.
Al-Jazeera's West Asian perspective presents explicit quotes from a named official and ties the change to a pattern of restrictive immigration measures, stressing political context and affected countries.
The Hindu's provided metadata is insufficient to determine whether that outlet would offer a different framing, local implications, or further details; that absence creates ambiguity and prevents a fuller multi-source comparison.
Because the current corpus includes substantial reporting only from Al-Jazeera, alternative perspectives (for example, U.S. mainstream outlets, government press releases, or advocacy groups) are not present here and would be needed to fully map legal, humanitarian, and administrative responses.