What Do Employers Need to Know About the New DHS Alien Registration Requirement?
As further implementation of the January 20, 2025 Executive Orders, DHS recently published an interim final rule regarding the requirement that certain non-citizens register with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The new rule went into effect on April 11, 2025.
The rule is intended to encourage registration for non-immigrants who lack legal status in the U.S. The following non-citizens are considered pre-registered and no action is needed: permanent residents, those with Employment Authorization Documents (EADs), those on sponsored work visas who have an I-94, their family members who have a valid I-94, and a few other categories. See our checklist below for more details.
Employers do not need to take any action at this time other than to continue to have an I-9 on file for all new hires and reverify the I-9 of any employee that has expiring work authorization.
Sheppard Mullin Checklist – DHS Alien Registration Requirement (ARR)
Date: Effective April 11, 2025.
Main Purpose: The new online filing is intended primarily to track individuals who entered the U.S. without inspection.
Exempt from the Online Filing: The registration requirement is aimed only at individuals who are not in the country legally and are not otherwise registered with the U.S. Government. Therefore, exempt individuals include non-citizens who are lawful permanent residents (LPRs), those who have an I-94, those who have an EAD work permit, or those who have an EOIR Immigration Court case. These people were “registered” at the time they entered the U.S., received their EAD work permit, or were placed in removal proceedings.
Canadians: Canadians entering by land generally do not receive an I-94 and if they stay more than 30 days, they are subject to the rule.
How to File: Must file online using Form G-325R. The form asks a for detailed biographic history. See: https://www.uscis.gov/alienregistration
Fee: There is no filing fee, as reflected on the G-325R.
No Attorneys: Attorneys cannot use their online account to assist their clients with registering.
Biometrics: Registration will trigger a biometrics appointment, which does not incur a fee at this time.
Children: Parents must register on behalf of children under the age of 14.
Penalty: Failure to register or produce proof of registration can lead to a misdemeanor conviction, with up to six months of imprisonment and/or a civil fine of $5,000.
Change of Address: All non-citizens must update their address whenever they move. This can be done online at https://www.uscis.gov/addresschange. The same penalties that apply to failing to register, also apply to a non-citizen’s failure to update their address upon moving.
All Non-Citizens Must Carry Papers: Non-citizens who are 18 years of age and older and have an I-94 or EAD work permit must carry this proof on their person at all times, in the unlikely event they are asked by a DHS agent for proof of lawful status. While this requirement is not new, it is being enforced more aggressively.
Additional information about the new DHS alien registration requirement can be found on USCIS’s website: https://www.uscis.gov/alienregistration.
Listen to this post
DHS Revokes Legal Status, Sends Parole Termination Notices to CBP One App Users in United States
On April 11, 2025, DHS sent a Notice of Parole Termination to individuals who utilized the Biden-era online appointment CBP One App to enter and stay in the United States on Humanitarian Parole while applying for asylum.
Previously, after attending an appointment at the U.S.-Mexico border, individuals were paroled into the United States for an initial period of two years. Once in the United States, individuals were eligible to apply for work authorization. Approximately 900,000 individuals entered the United States using the CBP One App. DHS has not revealed how many individuals have received the April 11, 2025, termination notice.
The termination notice directs individuals who have not obtained an immigration status other than parole to depart the United States within seven days or risk removal.
The notice states that recipients can utilize the new CBP Home App to arrange for their departure from the United States.
The announcement is the most recent of several DHS decisions terminating other programs including Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Venezuelan and Haitian nationals, and the CHNV Humanitarian Parole program. Termination of TPS and CHNV parole have been temporarily enjoined as part of ongoing federal litigation. Judge Edward Chen, a district court judge in the Northern District of California, has issued a ruling halting the termination of Venezuela TPS. In response to the ruling, DHS has announced that Venezuela TPS has been automatically extended until Oct. 2, 2026, for individuals who registered under the 2023 designation, and until Sept. 10, 2025, for individuals who registered under the 2021 designation. Judge Indira Talwani, a district court judge in the District of Massachusetts, has issued a ruling halting the termination of Humanitarian Parole for citizens of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, also known as the CHNV program. Accordingly, an individual’s parole can only be terminated prior to their expiration date based on a case-by-case review.
Individuals paroled into the United States under the CBP One App who are not otherwise covered by the ongoing Venezuela or Haitian TPS or CHNV litigation should consult with an immigration attorney before making plans to depart the United States.
May 2025 Visa Bulletin – No Change from April, Except EB-3 India
The State Department has published the May Visa Bulletin. Except for modest progress in two India categories, EB-3 Professionals and EB-3 Other Workers, priority dates do not advance from April.
Below is a summary that includes Final Action Dates and changes from the previous month, but first – some background if you are new to these blog posts. If you are an old hand at the Visa Bulletin, feel free to skip the next paragraph.
The Visa Bulletin is released monthly by the US Department of State (in collaboration with US Citizenship and Immigration Services). If your priority date (that is, the date you got a place on the waiting list) is earlier than the cutoff date listed in the Bulletin for your nationality and category, that means a visa number is available for you that month. That, in turn, means you can submit your DS-260 immigrant visa application (if you’re applying at a US embassy abroad) or your I-485 adjustment of status application (if you are applying with USCIS). If you already submitted that final step and your category then retrogressed, it means the embassy or USCIS can now approve your application because a visa number is again available.
Now for the May VB – Very little progress, but at least no retrogression (or even predictions of retrogression):
As noted above, only India makes gains in May, and only in two categories:
EB-1 halts at February 15, 2022, and EB-2 at January 1, 2013
EB-3 Professionals and EB-3 Other Workers advance 2 weeks to April 15, 2013
No changes for China:
EB-1 remains stuck at November 8, 2022
EB-2 sticks at October 1, 2020
EB-3 Professionals remains at November 1, 2020
EB-3 Other Workers stalls at April 1, 2017
Likewise, no changes in All Other Countries:
EB-1 remains current
EB-2 stalls at June 22, 2023
EB-3 Professionals stays at January 1, 2023
EB-3 Other Workers remains at May 22, 2021
NOTE 1: USCIS will accept I-485 applications in May based on Final Action Dates, not the more favorable Dates for Filing chart.
Termination of Humanitarian Parole for Citizens of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela Blocked by Federal Court
U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani issued an order on April 14, 2025, blocking DHS’s March 25, 2025, decision to terminate Humanitarian Parole for individuals from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela paroled into the United States under the CHNV program. The judge also certified the case as a class action.
The CHNV program allows approximately 450,000 people to live and work legally in the United States. On March 25, 2025, DHS announced that it was terminating, as of April 24, 2025, the CHNV program and revoking work authorization issued under the program.
Pursuant to Judge Talwani’s order, DHS has been enjoined from terminating CHNV parole for all beneficiaries by Federal Register notice. While the order is in effect, CHNV beneficiaries’ humanitarian parole and related work authorization document will expire on the date listed on the humanitarian parole approval notice/I-94 and related work authorization document. Judge Talwani’s ruling specifies that DHS cannot revoke a CHNV beneficiary’s humanitarian parole and related work authorization prior to the stated expiration date without a review of the beneficiary’s individual case.
Finally, the ruling states that all CHNV revocation notices sent to CHNV beneficiaries are stayed pending further court order.
Judge Talwani stated that DHS’s decision to terminate the CHNV program will force CHNV beneficiaries to “choose between two injurious options: continue following the law and leave the country on their own, or await removal proceedings.… The first option will expose Plaintiffs to dangers in their native countries.… The second option will put Plaintiffs at risk of arrest and detention and, because Plaintiffs will be in the United States without legal status, undermine Plaintiff’s chances of receiving other forms of immigration relief in the future – potentially permanently.”
Staying I-9 and E-Verify Compliant: Updates for Employers
USCIS has published a new version of Form I-9 and effected new updates to the form and E-Verify.
Employers can use the new 01/20/2025 edition date (expiring 5/31/2027) Form I-9, but the following previous versions continue to be valid:
08/01/23 edition date, valid until 05/31/2027; and
08/01/23 edition date, valid until 07/31/2026.
Employers using an electronic version of Form I-9 must update their systems with the new version by 07/31/2026, and E-Verify+ participants will see the 01/20/25 edition date and 05/31/2027 expiration date reflected in Form I-9NG.
The 01/20/2025 edition date lists “Alien Authorized to work” as an option under Section 1, replaces the word “gender” with “sex” under the description of two List B documents (consistent with the recent changes to the USCIS Policy Manual), and includes a revised DHS Privacy Notice to the instructions.
Additionally, since April 3, 2025, the checkbox “A noncitizen authorized to work” on E-Verify and E-Verify+ has been updated to “An alien authorized to work.” Because employees may be completing prior versions of Form I-9, however, even if an employee selects “A noncitizen authorized to work” on the form, employers must select the checkbox “An alien authorized to work” in E-Verify.
U.S. Implements Federal Registration Requirement for Noncitizens
Federal registration requirement for noncitizens physically present in the U.S. is now in full effect.
All noncitizens must carefully comply with requirements, such as maintaining updated records and promptly reporting address changes.
Reminder: Noncitizens are required to carry evidence of valid immigration status on person at all times.
A newly effective federal registration requirement now requires noncitizens physically present in the U.S. to register with the U.S. government and carry evidence of their valid immigration status on their person at all times. As of Friday, April 11, noncitizens—other than those already deemed registered by virtue of their nonimmigrant and immigrant vista processes—must create an account with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) and take certain steps, including attending a biometric appointment, to register as a noncitizen.
Affected noncitizens who must take action to comply with the registration requirements include:
Noncitizen children turning 14 while in the U.S., or those who have already turned 14 but have not previously registered;
Canadian visitors without a valid I-94 record who have stayed or intend to stay in the U.S. for more than 30 days;
Noncitizens without an Employment Authorization Document (also known as an “EAD” or work permit) or proof of registration, including applicants and recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”), Temporary Protected Status (“TPS”), and other humanitarian forms of relief; and
Any noncitizen who entered the U.S. without inspection, admission, or parole, or otherwise lacks documentation.
Noncitizens who are already considered registered and do not need to take any action to comply with the registration requirements include:
Nonimmigrants with a valid I-94 record or admission stamp;
Permanent residents;
Nonimmigrants in possession of a valid EAD or work permit;
Adjustment of status applicants; and
Canadian and Mexican nationals in possession of a valid border crossing card.
Those required to register must create an account with USCIS through the myUSCIS portal and complete the following five steps:
1) Complete Form G-325R.
Through this online form accessible in the myUSCIS portal, noncitizens will provide select biographic information. There is no charge to complete Form G-325R.
2) Attend a biometrics appointment.
Following the receipt and processing of Form G-325R, USCIS will schedule an appointment for the registrant to submit fingerprints, photos, and signatures. Select noncitizens who are required to register may be exempt from fingerprinting, including Canadian visitors and children under the age of 14.
3) Print the registration certificate.
After the biometrics appointment, registrants will gain access to a registration certificate through the myUSCIS account. Registrants must download and print the “Proof of Alien Registration” document.
4) Retain proof of registration.
At all times, registrants over the age of 18 must carry the Proof of Alien Registration, together with any original Form I-94, permanent resident card, or EAD.
5) Maintain current address records.
Noncitizens must report changes of address to USCIS within 10 days of moving to ensure correspondence and benefits are received without delay. Form AR-11 may be filed via mail or within the myUSCIS account platform. This reporting requirement does not apply to A and G visa holders and visa waiver visitors.
6) Carry proof of status on person at all times.
Every noncitizen who is 18 years old and over is required to carry evidence of their immigration “registration documents” at all times. The term noncitizen includes green card holders and other nonimmigrants in the U.S. “Registration documents” if in reference to valid immigration documents. Documents that noncitizen employees should carry with them (if applicable) are as follows:
Permanent resident card (green card)
Employment Authorization Card (EAD)
Unexpired foreign passport with valid visa stamp
I-94 Arrival/Departure Record and unexpired I-797 nonimmigrant petition approval notices from USCIS
Other receipt notices from USCIS (Form DS-2019, Form I-20, I-485 receipt notices)
Barnes & Thornburg LLP anticipates most of its clients will experience minimal disruptions, if any, to international workforces as a result of the registration requirement. However, for affected employees, a failure to comply with the registration requirement may prompt individual fines, detention, and a risk of removal.
Cross-Border Catch-Up: Flexible Global Hiring—The Non-Resident Employer Approach [Podcast]
In this episode of our Cross-Border Catch-Up podcast series, Patty Shapiro (San Diego) and Shirin Aboujawde (London), both of whom are members of the firm’s Cross-Border Practice Group, discuss what it means to be a non-resident employer, including the benefits and challenges associated with employing staff abroad without establishing a legal entity. Shirin and Patty address key legal and compliance risks, such as the importance of adhering to local employment laws and managing tax liabilities. They also explore the flexibility that being a non-resident employer offers, such as the relative ease of hiring employees in foreign markets without the lengthy process involved in setting up or dismantling a local entity.
Beltway Buzz, April 11, 2025
The Beltway Buzz™ is a weekly update summarizing labor and employment news from inside the Beltway and clarifying how what’s happening in Washington, D.C., could impact your business.
Wilcox Reinstatement Legal Back-and-Forth Keeps Her Off the NLRB. For Now. For the second time in a matter of weeks, Gwynne Wilcox was poised to return as a member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Until she wasn’t. Here is what happened this week. On April 7, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated a three-panel decision that upheld Wilcox’s termination while the litigation challenging her removal proceeds. This decision would have allowed Wilcox to return to the Board. However, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts subsequently stayed the initial district court order that had returned Wilcox to the Board. All of this procedural back-and-forth means that Wilcox will remain off the NLRB for the time being. As the Buzz has been predicting, ultimately, the Supreme Court of the United States will determine whether the president can remove members of independent federal agencies that operate as boards and commissions.
Samuels Sues. Jocelyn Samuels, who President Donald Trump removed from her position as commissioner on the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in January 2025, has filed a legal challenge to her removal. Samuels, who was first appointed to the EEOC in 2020 by President Trump, maintains that “the EEOC’s structure, mission, and functions, along with the terms set for Commissioners, demonstrate Congress’s intent to provide the Commission continuity, stability, and insulation from political pressure exerted by the president.” Former chair of the Commission, Charlotte Burrows, has also filed a lawsuit challenging her removal. Currently, the Commission consists of Acting Chair Andrea Lucas and Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal.
Administration Seeks Quick Repeal of “Unlawful” Regulations. As a follow-up to his February 19, 2025, Executive Order 14219 (“Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Deregulatory Initiative”), this week, President Trump issued a memorandum instructing executive branch agencies to “take steps to effectuate the repeal of any regulation, or the portion of any regulation, that clearly exceeds the agency’s statutory authority or is otherwise unlawful.” According to the memorandum, agencies should prioritize regulations that conflict with ten prescribed Supreme Court decisions (all issued in 2020 or later), including Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo,Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College. The memorandum further instructs agencies, when repealing such regulations, to proceed under the “good cause” exemption of the Administrative Procedure Act, which allows agencies to bypass the normal “notice and comment” process.
House Passes Bill Limiting Nationwide Injunctions. On April 9, 2025, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the No Rogue Rulings Act of 2025, by a vote of 219–213. Only one Republican—Michael R. Turner of Ohio—joined with all Democrats to vote against the bill. The bill would prohibit federal district courts from issuing injunctions that apply beyond the parties to the case, except in multistate challenges. Of course, federal district court nationwide injunctions blocked the implementation of the Obama administration’s 2016 persuader and overtime rules, as well as the NLRB’s 2023 joint employer rule, and the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) 2024 overtime rule.
House Committee Explores College Athletes’ Employment Status. On April 8, 2025, the House Committee on Education and the Workforce’s Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions held a hearing entitled, “Game Changer: The NLRB, Student-Athletes, and the Future of College Sports.” The hearing focused on the changing landscape of college athletics, and specifically explored the question of whether college athletes should be considered employees. Republicans maintained that college athletes are students and promoted the Protecting Student Athletes’ Economic Freedom Act, which would prohibit student-athletes from being classified as employees while retaining the ability to benefit from their name, image, and likeness.
FMCS: And Then There Were Four? It has been several weeks since the Trump administration effectively dismantled the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS), and the fate of the labor dispute-settling agency is now coming into clearer focus. This week, it was reported that the agency is down to just four employees. According to FMCS data, last year, the agency helped mediate more than 2,000 collective bargaining negotiations.
RIFs at DOL, USCIS. According to media reports, this week, Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer offered more DOL employees the opportunity to resign or retire as part of the administration’s efforts to shrink federal government agencies. This offer was reportedly made ahead of expected layoffs at the agency. Employees at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) reportedly received a similar offer. In February 2025, about fifty USCIS employees were separated as part of a broader purge at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). At this time, it is unclear how reductions in force (RIFs) at DOL might impact the department’s rulemaking and enforcement agenda. On the other hand, RIFs at USCIS are very likely to result in backlogs and delayed processing times.
“Time Stand Still.” This week, the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a hearing entitled, “If I Could Turn Back Time: Should We Lock the Clock?” We are happy to Cher the details. The hearing dealt with a bit of an evergreen topic here at the Buzz: Congress’s role in setting time policy (we’ve previously discussed the issue here and here). Specifically, the hearing focused on legislation that would make daylight savings time permanent in the United States. Proponents of the concept maintain that making daylight savings time permanent leads to increased economic activity, more time for exercise, and safer roads. Opponents claim that such a move would push sunrise to after 8:00 a.m. in many parts of the country, leading to circadian misalignment and reduced health outcomes. While experts and laypeople alike can debate the pros and cons of the issue, our senators clearly have an opinion: in 2022, the Senate passed the Sunshine Protection Act (making daylight savings time permanent) by unanimous consent.
The Buzz will be on hiatus next week but will publish again on April 25, 2025.
State-Level E-Verify Proposals Signal Shift in Employment Compliance Landscape
A growing number of states are considering legislation that would require more employers to use E-Verify, the federal system used to confirm that new hires are authorized to work in the United States. These proposals suggest a broader trend toward increased immigration-related employment compliance and may impact how businesses manage their hiring practices, particularly in sectors with large immigrant workforces.
Expanding E-Verify Requirements
In 2025, legislators in over a dozen states have introduced or advanced bills that would expand the use of E-Verify. Some states, such as Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Montana, and Texas, are exploring new mandates that would apply to all employers. Others are building on existing laws by lowering employer size thresholds or increasing penalties for noncompliance.
For example, Florida currently requires private employers with 25 or more employees performing services in Florida to use E-Verify. New proposals in the state would extend the requirement to all employers, apply verification obligations to independent contractors, and propose higher fines and the potential revocation of business licenses for violations.1
Impact on Employers
These proposals are particularly relevant for industries that rely on a significant number of foreign-born workers, such as agriculture, hospitality, construction, and healthcare. In several states, representatives from these sectors have raised concerns about the operational challenges associated with mandatory E-Verify use.
While E-Verify is currently mandatory only in a few states, it remains optional at the federal level for most private-sector employers, with certain exceptions, including but not limited to, employers with federal contracts. However, national policy discussions continue, with some lawmakers advocating for a broader federal mandate.
Federal Developments
The push for expanded E-Verify use is occurring alongside other immigration enforcement efforts, including worksite inspections and proposed changes to immigration programs that could affect work authorization for certain populations. A federal E-Verify mandate was previously included in immigration legislation, but it did not advance. Nonetheless, similar proposals continue to be introduced, with the most recent federal bill being introduced last month.
Employers may face additional uncertainty as state and federal discussions unfold, particularly where there are delays in visa processing or changes to Temporary Protected Status (TPS) and other programs affecting employment eligibility.
Considerations for Employers
Given the evolving landscape, employers should consider:
Reviewing Form I-9 procedures to enhance accurate and compliant employment eligibility verification practices.
Evaluating E-Verify enrollment and usage processes, especially in states where legislation is pending or likely.
Training HR and compliance personnel on the potential changes and how they may affect onboarding and recordkeeping.
Monitoring legislative activity in states where their organizations operate or have a significant workforce.
Implementing workforce planning strategies, including alternative hiring or mobility options, where appropriate.
As state-level E-Verify proposals continue to emerge, employers are encouraged to stay informed and prepare for the possibility of new compliance obligations. Early preparation may help minimize disruption and ensure alignment with both state and federal employment verification requirements.
1 See SB 782.; See HB 1033.
Deportation Ruling Highlights a Potential Separation-of-Powers Clash – SCOTUS Today
Late in the day on April 10, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion relating to an order in the case of Noem v. Abrego Garcia.
This order is noteworthy for several reasons. First, this is yet another of what has become a series of emergency-motion cases resolved without full briefing or oral argument on the so-called “shadow docket.” Second, contrary to what some have argued about that docket in the past, there is nothing that isn’t fully transparent about this opinion rendered on behalf of all the Justices. Third, and most importantly, yesterday’s opinion, while brief, might be a significant chapter in what very well may prove a classic separation-of-powers clash between the increasingly unorthodox executive branch and the Supreme Court.
The much-in-the-news Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia was removed by the United States to El Salvador, where he is currently detained. The government now acknowledges that he had been subject to a withholding order forbidding his removal to El Salvador and that his removal was thus illegal. The government alleges the removal was caused by an “administrative error” but nevertheless argues that he was a member of a gang that had been designated as a foreign terrorist organization. Abrego Garcia denies this, and there is no record of his having engaged in any illegal activities.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland had entered an order directing the government to “facilitate and effectuate the return of [Abrego Garcia] to the United States by no later than 11:59 PM on Monday, April 7.” That order had been stayed by the Chief Justice, and now the issue of the deadline had become irrelevant. However, in its latest opinion, the Supreme Court says that
[t]he rest of the District Court’s order remains in effect but requires clarification on remand. The order properly requires the Government to “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador. The intended scope of the term “effectuate” in the District Court’s order is, however, unclear, and may exceed the District Court’s authority. The District Court should clarify its directive, with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.
The question, therefore, has become, what must the government do to satisfy the Supreme Court’s mandate concerning the requirement to “facilitate” and “effectuate” Abrego Garcia’s release and, more pointedly, what can the Supreme Court do if the government is less than energetic in satisfying these obligations? Indeed, the point of a concurrence by Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson, is that the government already has been less than diligent and forthright in the matter so far.
As the Court (likely per the Chief Justice) notes, while the term “facilitate” might be more easily described, “effectuate” is more elusive, and efforts in that regard might conflict with the executive branch’s foreign affairs power. That is what defines the next stage in what might become a separation-of-powers battle. That stage will begin with the district court doing what the Supreme Court has required. But will the government otherwise comply with the facilitation requirement and any further obligation imposed upon it, or will it claim that it is ultimately unable to convince another sovereign to act and that any order of the Court requiring it to deliver exceeds the constitutional authority of the judiciary? That is still to be determined. We’ll keep you posted.
Federal Court to Block Termination of Humanitarian Parole for Citizens of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, Venezuela
On Apr. 10, 2025, U.S. District Court Judge Indira Talwani stated her intention to block DHS’s Mar. 25, 2025, decision to terminate Humanitarian Parole for individuals from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, also known as the CHNV program. The program allows approximately 450,000 people to live and work legally in the United States. It is set to expire on Apr. 24, 2025.
During an Apr. 10, 2025, hearing in a case brought by parolees and their U.S. sponsors to stay termination of the CHNV program, Judge Talwani said, “I am going to issue an order staying the revocation of parole under the Federal Register Notice and of people’s individual parole.” The judge stated that she is unlikely to block the Trump Administration from canceling the program going forward.
Judge Talwani called DHS’s decision to terminate the CHNV program a “Hobson’s choice” where “your parole gets ended, and you either go back to the country you fled … or they stay here in illegal status, at which point they lose all opportunity to adjust their status legally.”
Judge Talwani continued, “I don’t understand the reason … to say ‘No, that’s not enough for people who have been following the law, but instead we want to make them illegal now. We want to make them flee the country.’”
Although the judge is considering certifying the case as a class action, saying “there’s a sufficient basis” to certify a class of immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, she declined to issue an order requiring DHS to notify parolees of the ruling. On that, she stated, “I am trying to stay in my lane and address the problem that’s been created here. I don’t want to throw out the baby with the bathwater because I’m awarding more than I have jurisdiction to do.”
Department of Justice attorney Brian Ward argued that DHS Secretary Kristi Noem has discretion to cancel the CHNV program at any time. Plaintiffs’ attorney Justin Cox contends that DHS’s rationale to ending the CHNV program (to subject former parolees to expedited removal to enable DHS to deport them without a hearing before an immigration judge) is a clear example of legal error and grounds to block termination of the CHNV program.
Cross-Border Catch-Up: EORs and Their Impact on Global Workforce Management [Podcast]
In this episode of our Cross-Border Catch-Up podcast series, Diana Nehro (New York/Boston), chair of the firm’s Cross-Border Practice Group, and Patty Shapiro (shareholder, San Diego) discuss the evolving legal landscape surrounding global Employer of Record (EOR) arrangements. Patty and Diana explore the concept of EORs and their implications for global employment, tax, and immigration policies. They highlight trends for employers to consider, such as the increasing assertion of jurisdiction by home countries over foreign companies hiring local talent through EORs, as well as the challenge that EORs face in sponsoring work visas. They also provide insights on recent and anticipated policy changes in Kenya, Canada, and Singapore.