Trump Administration Places Indefinite Hold on USCIS Asylum and Green Card Applications From Travel Ban Countries

On December 2, 2025, the Trump administration placed a hold on all asylum applications filed with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), and it also paused applications for permanent residence (green card) and other immigration applications filed by individuals from 19 “Travel Ban” countries, according to the Asian Law Caucus resource page.

“On December 2, 2025, the Trump administration placed a hold on all asylum applications filed with U”

Asian Law Caucus

The same page says that on December 16, 2025, the Trump administration expanded the ‘Travel Ban’ to include an additional 20 countries.

Asian Law Caucus

It further states that on January 1, 2026, the administration expanded the pause on immigration applications to include individuals from all 39 countries listed in the 'Expanded Travel and Immigration Ban.'

The Asian Law Caucus page describes USCIS policy memos issued on December 2, 2025 and January 1, 2026 that “place an indefinite hold on all ‘benefits requests’ made by immigrants from countries named in the Expanded Travel and Immigration Ban.”

It also says those memos “require USCIS to re-review benefits requests that were already approved for immigrants from countries named in the Expanded Travel and Immigration Ban, if the immigrants entered the U.S. on or after January 20, 2021.”

The page adds that USCIS “require[s] USCIS to review of all policies, procedures, and screening and vetting processes for benefit requests for individuals from countries named in the Expanded Travel and Immigration Ban.”

On March 30, 2026, USCIS announced it would lift its pause on processing applications from “thoroughly screened asylum seekers from non high-risk countries,” while the page notes USCIS “has not made clear which countries are considered ‘high-risk.’”

The Asian Law Caucus page draws a line between asylum applications filed with USCIS and those handled in immigration court, stating that “No, the hold only applies to asylum applications filed with USCIS by individuals who are not in removal/ deportation proceedings and who are from ‘high-risk’ countries.”

It explains that asylum applications filed only with USCIS are called “affirmative” asylum applications, while “Immigration judges can still grant asylum to individuals who filed asylum applications in immigration court,” which it calls “defensive” asylum applications.

Asian Law Caucus

The page also says, “Nothing in the policy suggests that USCIS will refuse to accept new asylum applications,” but it adds that “during the ‘hold’ or ‘pause’ USCIS will not make decisions on these applications.”

It advises that to obtain asylum “it is important that you apply within one year of your last entry to the U.S.,” while noting that “for most people the USCIS memo does not waive the deadline.”

The resource page further says that USCIS “has not yet provided any written guidance on this policy change” and that USCIS “has not made clear which countries are considered ‘high-risk.’”

In parallel, Politico reports that USCIS introduced a policy in December pausing renewals for people from the banned countries, and that “Now, many doctors’ visas are expiring, and doctors are being forced off the job.”

Politico describes how the travel ban “doesn’t apply to visa holders already in the U.S., but USCIS introduced a policy in December pausing renewals for people from the banned countries,” which it says is leaving doctors “unable to renew their visas.”

The Politico piece also quotes a lawyer, Samantha Wolfe, saying, “Every health care client that I work with is experiencing more barriers to hiring than a year ago in a system that’s already overburdened and has struggled to hire,” tying the policy to hiring barriers for hospitals.

It adds that a Pennsylvania doctor from Nigeria said, “It’s like being on the bench of a team, watching everyone play, and you can’t play.”

A separate analysis from migrationpolicy.org frames the USCIS and travel-ban changes as part of a broader effort to restrict legal immigration, saying that “Trump Restrictions on Legal Immigration Could Sharply Reduce U.S. Population Growth.”

“Skip to Main Content POLITICO Pulse Delivered daily by 10 a”

Politico

It says the administration’s changes include “Travel bans and restrictions imposed on nationals of 39 countries,” “Pauses in permanent visa issuance affecting 75 countries,” and “A $100,000 application fee for H-1B high-skilled workers,” alongside “Diversion of staff from processing immigration applications to revetting recipients.”

The migrationpolicy.org piece links these measures to a strategy that it describes as “a comprehensive strategy to reduce legal immigration across much of the spectrum,” and it says the administration’s actions “reflect instead a worldview that sees immigrants of all statuses as a threat to the country’s very fabric.”

It also points to State Department visa issuance data, stating that “State Department visa issuance data for January through September 2025 already showed a slowdown in legal immigration levels compared to the prior year.”

The analysis says “The decline seen in temporary and permanent visa issuance came even before the expanded travel ban, 75-country visa pause, H-1B fee, and other changes had taken full effect.”

It reports that “Student (F-1) visa issuance fell by almost half between June-September 2024 and June-September 2025,” and it adds that “visas for other family-sponsored immigrants fell by 30 percent.”

For permanent visas, it says “issuance for immediate relatives of U.S. citizens was 10 percent higher in January-September 2025 than in the same period of 2024.”

The migrationpolicy.org piece also describes earlier enforcement and humanitarian changes, including that “On his first day back, Trump imposed a temporary pause on refugee resettlement,” and that the administration later resumed processing at “the lowest level since the start of the modern refugee system in 1980, with just 100,034 resettlements in fiscal year (FY) 2024.”

It further says that humanitarian parole programs created by the Biden administration were stopped, and that those programs “permitted the entry of more than 1.7 million people.”

Politico reports that “Thousands of doctors from countries on the Trump administration’s travel-ban list are stuck in visa limbo,” and it says they are “already living and working in the country but unable to renew their visas because U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has put visa renewals for those countries on hold.”

It specifies that the doctors are from 39 countries, “including Cuba, Nigeria and Venezuela,” and it says President Donald Trump has cast nationals of those countries as security risks.

Asian Law Caucus

The article describes the impact on hospitals and staffing, stating that “Foreign doctors often fill critical roles in rural and underserved communities where American doctors are in short supply,” and that doctors “now find themselves with no clear path forward because USCIS has withheld visa renewals.”

Politico quotes Samantha Wolfe, saying, “Every health care client that I work with is experiencing more barriers to hiring than a year ago in a system that’s already overburdened and has struggled to hire,” and it adds that “The doctors said months have passed without updates on their applications.”

It also says some doctors reported that USCIS requested additional documents, “including years’ worth of pay stubs or further proof of their medical licenses.”

A Pennsylvania doctor from Nigeria is quoted saying, “You have a bunch of physicians, well-trained, who are just sitting at home doing nothing,” and another line from the same doctor says, “It’s like being on the bench of a team, watching everyone play, and you can’t play.”

Politico also provides institutional context, stating that “USCIS is funded by processing fees and remains open even as the Department of Homeland Security is shut down as a result of Congress’ budget impasse.”

It quotes Matthew Tragesser, a USCIS spokesperson, saying the Biden administration failed to adequately screen foreigners, requiring more scrutiny on “countries with poor records on their citizens.”

The article adds that “In February, each group argued that doctors with foreign medical” as it describes pressure from the American Medical Association and the American College of Physicians on DHS to act.

Across the sources, the same policy changes are framed through different lenses, with Asian Law Caucus emphasizing the mechanics of USCIS holds and the lack of clarity about “high-risk” countries, while migrationpolicy.org emphasizes broader population-growth and legal-immigration impacts, and Politico emphasizes on-the-ground effects on foreign doctors.

“We use cookies to broadly understand traffic to this website”

migrationpolicy.org

Asian Law Caucus says USCIS “has not made clear which countries are considered ‘high-risk’” and that it “has not yet provided any written guidance on this policy change,” even as it notes USCIS lifted the pause for “thoroughly screened asylum seekers from non high-risk countries” on March 30, 2026.

Asian Law Caucus

Migrationpolicy.org, by contrast, frames the policy as part of a comprehensive reduction strategy, describing “Travel bans and restrictions imposed on nationals of 39 countries” and “Pauses in permanent visa issuance affecting 75 countries,” and it argues the measures suggest “a comprehensive strategy to reduce legal immigration across much of the spectrum.”

Politico highlights a narrower operational consequence, reporting that USCIS “introduced a policy in December pausing renewals for people from the banned countries,” and that “Now, many doctors’ visas are expiring, and doctors are being forced off the job.”

The divergence also appears in how each source treats accountability and rationale: Asian Law Caucus provides policy language about holds and re-review, while Politico quotes Matthew Tragesser that the Biden administration failed to adequately screen foreigners, requiring more scrutiny on “countries with poor records on their citizens.”

Migrationpolicy.org describes the administration’s actions as reflecting “a worldview that sees immigrants of all statuses as a threat to the country’s very fabric,” rather than as a security-only measure.

In terms of next steps, Asian Law Caucus says the information is “not legal advice” and urges readers to “contact an immigration attorney,” while it also says the page should be revisited because “this is an evolving area of law.”

Politico adds that lawmakers’ pleas “haven’t moved the agency to speed up renewal processing,” and it reports that doctors face “no clear path forward because USCIS has withheld visa renewals.”

Taken together, the sources show a policy landscape where USCIS pauses and holds are central, but where the practical effects and interpretive emphasis differ sharply by outlet.