Another Problem for Legal Immigration - NTAs (Removal/Deportation Despite Legal Stay)

Another Problem for Legal Immigration - NTAs (Removal/Deportation Despite Legal Stay)

July 24, 2025

Community members and our lawyer colleagues have shared their stories. It appears:



1. The NTAs are getting resolved quickly, where you are still in the grace period and/or have a B-type petition pending. Motions to terminate are working.



2. The hearing dates are also being given in a few days or weeks.



3. The percentage of NTAs is relatively small.

July 21, 2025

The landscape of U.S. immigration enforcement has undergone a significant shift, especially with the return of aggressive Notice to Appear (NTA) issuance policies under the current Trump administration. This renewed focus on initiating removal proceedings has created considerable uncertainty and heightened risk for immigrants across all visa categories.

Based on the February 28, 2025, USCIS policy memorandum (PM-602-0187) and the emerging patterns in enforcement we are witnessing, this article aims to address the most pressing questions our clients are asking about NTA policies and their far-reaching implications. Fundamentally, what we are observing is a dramatic departure from the prior administration's more restrained approach to removal proceedings. The current policy empowers USCIS to issue NTAs much more broadly, often in situations where individuals have timely filed applications pending or are otherwise within authorized periods of stay. Understanding these critical changes is paramount for anyone navigating the U.S. immigration system today.

What Happens If You Have Already Left the U.S. When an NTA is Delivered?

This question has become increasingly relevant as more individuals consider strategic departures before potential enforcement actions. The answer hinges on several critical timing factors that can determine whether you face a three-year or ten-year bar or manage to avoid significant immigration consequences altogether.

Service Requirements and Proper Notice

Under U.S. immigration law, an NTA must be properly served to officially start removal proceedings. If you departed the United States before an NTA was actually delivered to you, several important considerations come into play. Immigration courts often agree that if the government sends the NTA to an old or wrong address, and you didn't actually receive it, the case against you might be dismissed.

This becomes especially significant when individuals have moved or changed addresses while waiting for an application decision. Be mindful that simply mailing an NTA to a last known address may not count as proper service if you can show, with strong evidence, that you never received it due to circumstances beyond your control, such as an unexpected, urgent departure that prevented you from updating your address with USCIS.

The Critical Unlawful Presence Bars (Three-Year or Ten-Year)

Here is where timing becomes absolutely crucial: if you departed the United States before removal proceedings officially commenced (meaning before the NTA was actually filed with the immigration court), you may avoid triggering certain unlawful presence bars that could otherwise severely impact your future immigration options.

However, it is essential to understand that the three-year bar under Section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) only applies if you have accumulated at least 180 days but less than one year of unlawful presence. The ten-year bar applies if you have accumulated one year or more of unlawful presence. For H-1B holders, remember that the 60-day grace period means you remain in authorized status for 60 days or the time remaining on your I-94, whichever is lesser, after your employment ends or your status expires, whichever comes first. Unlawful presence only begins accruing after this grace period expires.

Let me illustrate this with practical examples:

Scenario	Status Expiration	Departure Date	Unlawful Presence Accrued	NTA Issued/Filed	Outcome/Consequence
John (H-1B)	March 1, 2025	August 15, 2025	106 days (May 1 - Aug 15)	Issued Sept 1, 2025; Filed Sept 15, 2025	No unlawful presence bar. However, John is officially in removal proceedings and must respond to avoid an in absentia removal order. He faces legal costs ($2,000-$5,000) and must proactively check EOIR status.
Maria (H-1B)	March 1, 2025	October 1, 2025	154 days (May 1 - Oct 1)	Issued Nov 1, 2025; Filed Nov 15, 2025	No unlawful presence bar. Similar to John, she is in removal proceedings and must address it.
David (H-1B)	March 1, 2025	November 1, 2025	185 days (May 1 - Nov 1)	Issued Dec 1, 2025; Filed Dec 15, 2025	3-year bar applies. Since he accrued over 180 days but less than one year of unlawful presence before the NTA was filed, he will face a 3-year bar upon attempting to re-enter the U.S. or apply for a new visa. He also faces removal proceedings.
Sarah (F-1 OPT)	January 1, 2025	Still in U.S.	181 days (as of July 1, 2025)	Delivered July 1, 2025	3-year bar applies. Sarah is in removal proceedings and has accrued enough unlawful presence to trigger the 3-year bar if she departs voluntarily. She must now appear before an Immigration Judge.
Michael (B-2)	January 1, 2025	Still in U.S.	366 days (as of Jan 1, 2026)	Delivered Jan 15, 2026	10-year bar applies. Michael is in removal proceedings and has accrued over one year of unlawful presence, triggering the 10-year bar if he departs voluntarily. He must appear before an Immigration Judge.

How to Check for NTA Issuance

If you have departed the United States but are concerned an NTA may have been issued, checking for removal proceedings can be challenging, particularly if you do not have an Alien Registration Number (A-Number).

EOIR Case Status Check - Requires A-Number:

The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) website at https://acis.eoir.justice.gov/en/ provides an automated case information system. However, it typically requires your A-Number to access your case information.

Who Typically Has an A-Number?

USCIS assigns A-Numbers primarily to individuals who:

• Apply for a green card (Adjustment of Status or Immigrant Visa).

• Are granted certain types of work authorization (e.g., F-1 Optional Practical Training (OPT) Employment Authorization Document (EAD), asylum-based EADs).

• Have been placed in removal proceedings.

• Are granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS) or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

Many H-1B workers who are simply laid off and file change of status applications may not have an A-Number unless they have a prior history with the immigration system that triggered its assignment.

Alternative Methods to Check for an NTA:

Method	Description	Pros	Cons
Contact Immigration Courts Directly	You can try calling immigration courts in the area where you last lived in the U.S.	Direct, potentially quick if you get through.	Requires multiple calls, may not yield reliable info due to privacy/volume.
Attorney Assistance	An experienced immigration attorney can often check multiple court systems and USCIS databases.	More efficient, access to specialized resources, legal expertise.	Involves attorney fees.
FOIA Request (Form G-639)	File a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with USCIS and EOIR to get your records, including any A-Number or NTA.	Official record of all information.	Typically takes 8+ weeks, which may be too long if an NTA has already been issued.

The Discovery Problem: This creates a significant gap in the system. The very individuals most likely to receive surprise NTAs (e.g., H-1B workers who are laid off and file change of status applications) are often the same people who cannot easily check whether removal proceedings have been initiated against them.

Be aware that if an NTA was issued but you departed before receiving it, you may not become aware of the removal proceedings until later, when applying for a new visa at a U.S. consulate abroad. By then, you may already have an in absentia removal order against you, which significantly complicates future immigration benefits and may lead to a permanent bar from the U.S.

Burden of Proof Considerations

The burden is on you to establish that the NTA had not yet been filed with the immigration court by the time you departed the U.S. The immigration court's record will generally indicate when the NTA was actually filed, and this filing date will be controlling. This makes precise documentation of your departure date absolutely critical. Keep airline tickets, boarding passes, passport stamps, and any other evidence of your departure.

As a practical matter, if you departed before the NTA was filed and believe you did not receive proper notice, consult with an immigration attorney immediately about challenging the proceedings based on improper service and lack of jurisdiction.

Receiving an NTA Despite Having a Pending Change of Status Petition

This situation appears to be becoming alarmingly common under the current administration, and it often represents an improper issuance in accordance with USCIS's own policy guidelines. If you receive an NTA despite having a pending, timely-filed change of status petition, you may be facing what we refer to as an "inappropriate NTA issuance."

USCIS Policy Violations

The February 28, 2025, policy memorandum (PM-602-0187), titled "Issuance of Notices to Appear (NTAs) in Cases Involving Inadmissible and Deportable Aliens" (https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-alerts/NTA_Policy_FINAL_2.28.25_FINAL.pdf), states that NTAs should generally only be issued "upon issuance of an unfavorable decision on a benefit request" where the individual is not lawfully present. However, recent cases demonstrate USCIS improperly issuing NTAs to individuals who remain in authorized periods of stay, including those with:

• Pending change of status applications: For example, an H-1B worker who timely filed an I-539 application to change status to B-2 visitor within their 60-day grace period, but receives an NTA before a decision is made on the I-539.

• Pending Adjustment of Status (I-485) applications: Individuals who have filed for a green card and are in a period of authorized stay while their I-485 is pending, but receive an NTA due to a perceived prior status violation or other issue.

This contradicts USCIS's own guidance, which states that properly filed applications for change of status or adjustment of status toll the accrual of unlawful presence. In other words, if you have a properly filed, non-frivolous application pending, you should be considered in "authorized stay" for unlawful presence purposes. Despite this, we are seeing a significant volume of NTAs. According to USCIS's own news release from June 12, 2025, their "screening and vetting efforts have led to approximately 1,840 NTAs a week" since February 2025. Many of these appear to be issued in circumstances that raise serious questions about adherence to stated policy.

Immediate Actions You Should Take If You Receive an NTA with a Pending Application:

Action	Why It's Important
Consult with an Immigration Attorney	Your first and most critical step. An attorney can assess the NTA's validity and develop a strategy tailored to your situation.
Document Everything	Preserve all evidence: filing dates, proof of mailing, receipt notices, and the NTA's issuance date and delivery method. This evidence is crucial for your defense.
File a Motion to Terminate (if appropriate)	Your attorney may file a motion with the Immigration Court to end the proceedings. This motion would argue that the NTA was improperly issued or that the court lacks jurisdiction because you were in an authorized period of stay.
Continue to Pursue the Pending Application	Do not assume your pending application (e.g., I-539, I-485) is automatically canceled. Continue to respond to any Requests for Evidence (RFEs) or other notices from USCIS regarding your original benefit request.
Understand Jurisdictional Shifts	Be prepared for the possibility that the Immigration Court may gain jurisdiction over your case, which could mean USCIS loses its ability to decide on your pending application.

Cost Considerations for Immigration Court Proceedings

Unfortunately, defending against removal proceedings can be a substantial financial burden. Based on current market rates for 2025, you can expect the following costs:

• Attorney Fees (Based on Our Estimates): Deportation defense ranges significantly, from $1,500 on the low end for very straightforward cases to $15,000 or more for complex litigation involving multiple hearings or appeals. More straightforward cases with clear grounds for relief typically cost between $3,000 and $7,000.

• Hourly Rates: Immigration attorneys typically charge between $150 and $450 per hour for litigation work.

• Motion Costs: Filing motions to reopen or reconsider with the Immigration Court or the Board of Immigration Appeals typically involves a government filing fee (currently $110, although waivable for those who qualify), plus attorney fees ranging from $1,300 to $2,600 or more per motion.

Strategic Consideration: While these costs are significant, the long-term consequences of not properly defending against an improperly issued NTA can be far more severe. These consequences include bars to future immigration benefits, a permanent record of removal proceedings, and the inability to return to the United States. Investing in proper legal defense is often a necessary safeguard for your future.

Does Unlawful Presence Continue to Accrue While Fighting an NTA?

This question is particularly important because continued accrual of unlawful presence during removal proceedings can trigger the three-year or ten-year bars, severely limiting future immigration options.

General Rule: Yes, Unlawful Presence Continues

Once removal proceedings commence (i.e., when the NTA is filed with the immigration court), unlawful presence generally continues to accrue while you are physically present in the United States. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has consistently held that the three- and ten-year unlawful presence bars under INA S212(a)(9)(B)(i) continue to run while a noncitizen is in removal proceedings.

This can create a particularly harsh situation where individuals are caught in a Catch-22: they often cannot leave the United States while fighting the removal proceedings (as departure could be deemed an abandonment of their case or trigger an automatic removal order), but staying continues to accumulate unlawful presence, potentially leading to more severe bars.

Important Exception for Properly Filed Applications - But There's a Catch

However, if you have a properly filed, non-frivolous application pending (such as a change of status application filed before the NTA was issued), unlawful presence may be tolled during the pendency of that application. This is based on the principle that individuals with pending applications remain in "authorized stay" for purposes of unlawful presence. However, this protection is often short-lived. The filing of an NTA with the immigration court can cause USCIS to lose jurisdiction over your pending application, leading to its termination and forcing you into removal proceedings to seek similar relief.

Critical Jurisdictional Issue: But here's where it gets complicated. If USCIS issues an NTA while your B-2 change of status application (or any other change of status, or even an I-485 Adjustment of Status application) is still pending, the NTA issuance raises serious questions about what happens to your pending application:

• Does the NTA Cancel Your Application? Generally, once removal proceedings commence (when the NTA is filed with the immigration court), USCIS loses the power to decide on your application. Change of status applications (e.g., B-2, F-1, L-1, H-4) and sometimes even I-485 applications typically fall into this category, meaning your application may be automatically terminated or denied when the NTA is filed.

• Will You Need to Re-file in Immigration Court? If your application is terminated due to the NTA issuance, you would likely need to seek similar relief in immigration court. This could involve:

  • Filing an application for voluntary departure.

  • Seeking termination of proceedings based on eligibility for the change of status or adjustment of status.

  • Pursuing other forms of relief available in removal proceedings, which may be more limited or have different eligibility criteria than those available before USCIS.

Timing is Everything: The key question is whether your application was properly filed and remained pending at the time the NTA was issued. If USCIS improperly issued the NTA while your application was still under consideration, this significantly strengthens the argument that the entire removal proceeding was improperly initiated.

Practical Implications: This jurisdictional shift means that even if you had a valid application pending, the NTA issuance could force you into the more complex, expensive, and time-consuming immigration court system to seek the same relief you were already pursuing with USCIS.

Immediate Steps if This Happens to You:

Step	What It Means
Don't Assume Your Application is Still Active	Contact USCIS immediately to determine the precise status of your pending application. Use online tools or call customer service.
Get Legal Counsel Immediately	This situation requires a sophisticated understanding of jurisdictional rules and removal defense strategies. Do not try to navigate this alone.
Document Everything	Preserve evidence of when your application was filed, any communications with USCIS, and the exact timing of the NTA issuance and its delivery.
Consider a Motion to Terminate	Your attorney may file a motion to terminate removal proceedings based on the improper NTA issuance while your application was pending.
Prepare for Immigration Court	If termination is unsuccessful, you must prepare to pursue your request in immigration court under different legal standards and procedures.

B-2 Change of Status During H-1B Grace Period: New Risks Under Current Policy

Filing for a B-2 change of status during the H-1B 60-day grace period has traditionally been a common and legally sound strategy for individuals who lose their H-1B employment. However, under the current Trump administration's aggressive NTA policy, this approach now carries significantly heightened risks that must be carefully weighed.

Legal Viability Remains Intact, But Guidance is Lacking

Let me be clear: filing for B-2 change of status during the H-1B 60-day grace period remains legally permissible and is still commonly used. The current Form I-539 filing fee is $470 for paper filing or $420 for online filing. You can include dependents as co-applicants on the same I-539 without additional government fees, making it a cost-effective option for families. However, it is crucial to note that, unlike previous administrations, which provided more precise policy guidance on such options (as evidenced by archived USCIS pages, such as https://www.uscis.gov/archive/options-for-nonimmigrant-workers-following-termination-of-employment-0), the current administration has not issued a replacement policy. This lack of explicit, current guidance contributes significantly to the heightened risk of NTA issuance, even when the filing itself is technically permissible.

New NTA Risks Under 2025 Policy

Under the current administration's enforcement posture, there are significant new risks that did not exist under previous policies:

Risk	Explanation
Inappropriate NTA Issuance	USCIS is inappropriately issuing NTAs to H-1B workers even when they are within their 60-day grace period, have timely filed change of status applications, and have not yet received an unfavorable decision.
Policy Violations	These NTA issuances appear to violate USCIS's own policy memorandum, which generally requires an "unfavorable decision" before NTA issuance.

Practical Consequences of Improper NTA Issuance

If you are inappropriately issued an NTA while your B-2 change of status (or any other change of status, such as F-1 to B-2, or even an I-485 application) is pending, you face several serious consequences:

Consequence	Impact
Cannot Leave the United States	Once in removal proceedings, departing the U.S. could trigger additional bars to reentry and may be deemed an abandonment of your case, potentially leading to an in absentia removal order.
Unlawful Presence Accrual	You may continue accruing unlawful presence despite your pending application, potentially triggering the three-year or ten-year bars upon any future departure and attempted re-entry.
Significant Legal Expenses	As previously outlined, removal defense can incur thousands of dollars in attorney fees and court costs.
Immigration Court Backlog	Cases may take years to resolve due to the current 3.5 million-case backlog in immigration courts, which prolongs uncertainty and stress.
Long-term Immigration Consequences	Being placed in removal proceedings creates a permanent record that can complicate future visa applications and requires disclosure on DS-160 forms indefinitely.
Loss of USCIS Jurisdiction	The NTA issuance may terminate your pending B-2 application with USCIS, forcing you to seek the same relief in the more complex immigration court system with different legal standards and procedures.

Additional Critical Considerations

Employment-Based Petition Exception

The February 28, 2025, policy memorandum (PM-602-0187) states that USCIS "will generally not issue an NTA against removable aliens who are beneficiaries of an approved employment-based immigrant petition (Form I-140) unless the beneficiary is also the signatory of the Form I-129 petition." This means that employees who are not the petitioners themselves may have some protection. However, despite this general principle, reports from the immigration bar indicate that NTAs may still be issued in such cases, highlighting a potential discrepancy between stated policy and actual enforcement.

However, be aware that this exception does not seem to protect dependent family members (H-4 spouses and children). This creates a particularly troubling situation where a principal H-1B holder may be protected from an NTA, while their H-4 family members could still face removal proceedings if their status expires or is otherwise deemed problematic.

Timing is Everything

The key factor in NTA issuance under the current policy is whether the individual is "not lawfully present" at the time of an unfavorable decision. This makes timing absolutely critical for:

• Filing change of status applications well before current status expires: Do not wait until the last minute.

• Ensuring applications are properly filed and non-frivolous: Any errors or perceived lack of merit can be grounds for denial and NTA issuance.

• Maintaining detailed documentation of authorized stay periods: Keep copies of all I-94 records, approval notices, and filing receipts.

• Considering strategic departure timing in certain circumstances: In some cases, departing promptly after a denial but before NTA issuance (and before accruing significant unlawful presence) may be preferable to remaining and fighting removal proceedings. This is a complex decision that must be made with legal counsel.

Proactive Measures to Protect Yourself

Based on current enforcement patterns, I recommend the following proactive measures:

1. File Early, Always: Submit applications for extensions or changes of status well in advance of your current status expiration dates. Aim for several months, not just days or weeks, if possible.

2. Document Everything, Meticulously: Maintain detailed records of all filing dates, proof of mailing (certified mail, return receipt requested), receipt notices, approval notices, and all communications with USCIS. Keep digital and physical copies.

3. Understand Your Status and Grace Periods: Know precisely when your authorized stay ends and when any grace periods expire. Do not rely on assumptions.

4. Monitor Your Case Status Regularly: Use USCIS online tools to check the status of all your pending applications. If you have an A-Number, regularly check the EOIR case status system as well.

5. Seek Immediate Legal Consultation: When facing potential denials, receiving an unexpected NTA, or if your employment ends, consult with an experienced immigration attorney immediately. Do not delay.

6. Consider Alternatives to Staying: If your status is expiring and you have no clear path to extend or change status, explore options for timely departure to avoid accruing unlawful presence and potential NTA issuance.

7. Address Changes Promptly: File Form AR-11, Alien's Change of Address Card, within 10 days of any move. This is crucial for receiving official notices.

8. Educate Your Employer (if applicable): If you are an H-1B worker, ensure your employer understands the implications of petition withdrawals and the importance of timely communication regarding employment changes.

Administrative Errors and Automated Systems

Some recent NTA issuances appear to result from administrative errors or automated systems flagging withdrawn petitions without proper legal analysis of the individual's overall immigration situation. For example, we have seen cases where employers withdraw H-1B petitions for legitimate business reasons, but automated systems generate NTAs without considering whether the individual has other authorized status or pending applications.

These improper issuances may be successfully challenged, but they require immediate legal intervention to prevent the individual from being swept into removal proceedings unnecessarily.

What This Means for Your Immigration Strategy

The current NTA policy represents a fundamental shift in immigration enforcement that requires a complete recalibration of immigration strategy. What was once considered routine—such as filing change of status applications and remaining in the United States during application processing—now carries significantly heightened risks.

For Individuals Currently in the United States:

If you are currently in the United States on any nonimmigrant status, consider the following:

• Review Your Status Expiration Dates: Ensure you have adequate time to file for extensions or changes of status well before your current status expires. Proactive planning is your best defense.

• Evaluate Pending Applications: If you have applications pending, understand that even properly filed applications may not fully protect you from NTA issuance under current enforcement policies.

• Prepare for Multiple Scenarios: Have contingency plans for both favorable and unfavorable decisions on your applications, including understanding the timing implications for potential departure.

For Employers and Petitioners:

Employers must also adapt to this new reality:

• Proactive Planning: Work with employees well in advance of status expiration dates to ensure timely filing of extensions or new petitions.

• Withdrawal Considerations: Before withdrawing petitions, consider the potential NTA implications for the beneficiary and their family members. Consult with immigration counsel before taking such actions.

• Documentation: Maintain detailed records of all petition filings, withdrawals, and related decisions to assist employees in defending against improper NTA issuances.

Recent Precedents: The F-1 Visa Revocations and the "Stay and Fight" Dilemma

In a similar context of aggressive enforcement, the Trump administration recently undertook actions that directly impacted thousands of F-1 international students. In April 2025, the administration revoked the student status of approximately 1,700 to 1,800 F-1 visa holders across more than 260 U.S. colleges and universities, often citing minor infractions or alleged criminal offenses without clear due process. This action left many students in limbo, with some even facing arrest. (Source: Al Jazeera, "US revokes nearly 1,700 student visas: Who are the targets?", April 18, 2025; The Texas Tribune, "More than 250 international students' immigration statuses revoked across Texas universities," April 9, 2025 (https://www.texastribune.org/2025/04/09/texas-universities-international-students-legal-status/))

However, when these actions were challenged in federal courts, the government largely settled or lost these cases. For instance, a U.S. District Judge issued a nationwide injunction in May 2025, halting the administration's efforts to terminate the legal status of thousands of international students without due process, leading to the restoration of many affected visas. (Source: CBS News, "Federal judge stops Trump administration from terminating certain international students' legal status," May 22, 2025; The Independent, "Federal judge blocks immigration authorities from revoking international students' legal status," May 22, 2025 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/trump-california-san-francisco-oakland-immigration-and-customs-enforcement-b2756273.html)

This raises a critical question: Does this outcome indicate it makes sense to stay and fight rather than leave? We cannot definitively say. While the government did back down in these specific F-1 cases, many of the students who chose to leave the U.S. without a fight have since been unable to secure new student visas. The negative mark on their record, even if arguably improper, can lead to future visa denials at U.S. consulates abroad.

Can the same thing happen with work visas, such as H-1B and L-1? It is less likely, as these visas are generally considered "stronger" than F-1 visas, often involving employer sponsorship and a clearer demonstration of nonimmigrant intent. However, the greater challenge arises if you are outside the USA and the government illegally denies your future work visa. In such scenarios, it is significantly more difficult to fight and win against the consulates than it is against USCIS if you are already present in the U.S.

This difficulty stems from the doctrine of consular non-reviewability. This long-standing legal principle in U.S. immigration law generally holds that decisions made by U.S. consular officers abroad regarding visa applications are not subject to judicial review by U.S. federal courts. While there are very limited exceptions (e.g., if the denial is based on an unconstitutional statute or a clear procedural error), the practical reality is that challenging a consular officer's decision from outside the U.S. is an uphill battle, often leaving applicants with little recourse other than to reapply or seek alternative immigration pathways. This contrasts sharply with challenging USCIS decisions from within the U.S., where avenues for administrative and judicial review are more robust.

In-U.S. vs. Abroad: Challenging Visa Issues

Situation	Where You Are	Ease of Challenge	Reason (Brief)
USCIS Decision (e.g., NTA, application denial)	Inside the U.S.	More Feasible	More avenues for administrative review and federal court challenges.
Consular Visa Denial (e.g., at embassy/consulate)	Outside the U.S.	Much More Difficult	Doctrine of Consular Non-Reviewability limits judicial review; fewer formal appeal options.

Conclusion: Navigating Uncertainty with Informed Decision-Making

The current NTA policy creates a challenging and often daunting environment for immigrants and their families. While the policy itself may be subject to legal challenges or future modifications, individuals facing immigration decisions cannot afford to wait for policy clarity that may never fully materialize.

The key to navigating this environment is understanding the new risks, making informed decisions based on current realities, and working with experienced legal counsel who can help identify improper NTA issuances and mount effective challenges when appropriate. This aggressive enforcement posture represents a significant departure from prior practice and may evolve as cases work through the courts and as administrative practices are challenged. However, the immediate reality is that individuals must navigate this system as it exists today, not as we might hope it will become.

As always, each case is unique, and the considerations outlined in this article should not be used as a substitute for individualized legal advice. If you are facing any of the situations described above or have concerns about your immigration status, consult with an experienced immigration attorney who can evaluate your specific circumstances and provide guidance tailored to your situation. The immigration system has always required careful navigation, but the current environment demands even greater attention to timing, documentation, and strategic planning. By understanding these new realities and working with knowledgeable counsel, individuals can still successfully navigate the system while protecting their long-term immigration goals.

This article reflects immigration law and policy as of July 2025. Immigration law is subject to frequent changes; therefore, readers should consult with qualified legal counsel for advice specific to their situations.