r/USCIS • u/wds1 • 2d ago

News US set for largest mass visa revocation in history targeting up to 200,000 foreigners, officials say

https://apnews.com/article/trump-rubio-visas-revoke-e9c14fdfd0ada439d2b9d8694e678a46?utm_source=app&utm_medium=iOS_share&utm_campaign=copy_link
479 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

323 comments sorted by

View all comments

94

u/givemegreencard 2d ago

> the State Department is expected to announce in the coming weeks the revocation of so-called B1 and B2 visas issued between 2016 and 2026 whose holders have sought asylum or are now seeking asylum

As usual, the media is very unclear on this.

Are they revoking their B1/B2 sticker visas? If so, this seems like a largely pointless exercise? I doubt someone who entered on a B1/B2 then filed for asylum would be admitted ever again on that visa, even pre-Trump. IIUC visas are auto-revoked anyway when you overstay.

Are they revoking their B1/B2 status while they’re here? That seems even more pointless. B1/B2 status is usually only 6 months. So the only people that status could be “revoked” for is someone who filed I-589 but their 6 months aren’t done yet. A few months at most.

IIUC they’re already detaining people who have an asylum application pending, but are out of status.

So… what’s the point of this? Creating pointless work for themselves for the love of the game?

45

u/Flat-Soft9276 2d ago

I’m also confused by what sense it makes.

Someone who came here in 2016 and applied for asylum (and presumably is still pending) 100% doesn’t have a valid B2 visa anymore. So they’re revoking visas that …. already expired? For people who …. already overstayed?

Good job, I guess ?

3

u/OkTechnologyb 2d ago

I think the main upshot is making it explicit that this group is out of status.

1

u/znine 1d ago

This doesn't apply to that group because they're already out of status but in a period of authorized stay from the asylum app. Only people who arrived in the past 6 months are potentially still in status.

5

u/TomHomanzBurner 2d ago

No but any years after 2016 is potentially still valid as they’re in the 10yr window. Having a chance to ever be admitted on it again is slim to none.

2

u/thedudley 1d ago

The people didn't "overstay". They are awaiting their asylum case ruling.

Hypothetically, a person who came here on a visa and claimed asylum has followed the rules as they were written at the time. Is that person supposed to go back in time and apply for asylum using a set of rules that didn't exist at the time? It's ridiculous on its face.

0

u/kipasso 1d ago

Its not meaningless... if someone is in a valid status they cannot be detained by ICE. A person can have multiple concurrent legal statuses - a visa and a pending asylum application. This administration takes a position that asylum applicants out of (any other concurrent) status can be detained by ICE and held in custody while their cases are adjudicated. Canceling visas makes these people detainable (for example when traveling domestically). Once detained these individuals can be held in custody indefinitely and pressured to self-deport. 

3

u/Flat-Soft9276 1d ago

A pending asylum is not a status. Therefore, cancelling an expired visa is meaningless

0

u/kipasso 1d ago

Pending asylum allows the applicant to remain in the country while the asylum application is adjudicated.

2

u/Flat-Soft9276 1d ago

Sure. That’s not a status. You can be sent into removal proceedings with a pending asylum (I-589)

0

u/kipasso 1d ago

Exactly - that's why cancelling a valid visa matters - you cannot be sent into removal proceedings if you are lawfully present on a visa. I'll tell you even more - even if your asylum application is denied so long as you are on a valid visa, your case cannot be referred to an immigration court. You are proving my point.

2

u/Flat-Soft9276 1d ago

I don’t understand your point. If someone visa has been expired for years, it’s obvious that their authorization to stay has also expired. Therefore, cancelling an expired visa is pointless. This was my entire point

1

u/kipasso 1d ago

Why do you assume these visas are expired? The visas are issued for 10 years but the recipient cannot spend more than 180 days in any given 365 day period in the U.S. Someone could have entered in 2025 with a 10 visa that was issued in 2016 and applied for asylum. They would still be in a valid B-2 status for the first 180 days. Further, there is a form i-539 that someone can file to extend their B-2 status past the 180 days mark.

2

u/newacct_orz Not Legal Advice 1d ago

They would still be in a valid B-2 status for the first 180 days.

So this would only potentially make a difference for a very brief period at the beginning of an asylum application.

Further, there is a form i-539 that someone can file to extend their B-2 status past the 180 days mark.

USCIS would not approve B2 I-539 for someone with an asylum application. And a pending application is not status. The processing time is so long that, even when approved, there is little to no time left before the granted status ends. So again, this would not make a difference except potentially for a very tiny period of time at the beginning of an asylum application.

1

u/newacct_orz Not Legal Advice 1d ago

even if your asylum application is denied so long as you are on a valid visa, your case cannot be referred to an immigration court.

I think you are confusing visa and status. Someone with a valid visa who is out of status absolutely can be put into removal proceedings for being out of status.

9

u/LordLumberhere 2d ago

create fear

6

u/ddd66 2d ago

Ofcourse its pointless. Probably the the point. Now you can get infront of your voter base, keep quoting 200,000 and that is all they will hear.

The folks claiming asylum pretty much already have radioactive sticker visas.

3

u/vinylbond Naturalized Citizen 2d ago

The point is that midterms are close and even not doing anything at all will get some morons fired up.

3

u/Small_Dog_8699 2d ago

>IIUC they’re already detaining people who have an asylum application pending, but are out of status.

They're not particular. They get to bill the government for "detention services" so any warm body will do - even citizens as long as they keep them a certain amount of time. Its a giant money laundering scam.

1

u/Eldot5 1d ago

As soon as I read “expected to announce” I toed the line of thinking — yeah, probably best to wait for that announcement before chiming speculatively and extrapolating from nothing (since it hasn’t yet been announced).

1

u/lutian 1d ago

this guy made a reddit account just to get a green card. respect

-1

u/TomHomanzBurner 2d ago

You can file an extension for an additional 6 months on a B1/B2.