[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 208 (Thursday, October 30, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 48799-48820]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-19702]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 208 / Thursday, October 30, 2025 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 48799]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
8 CFR Part 274a
[CIS No. 2826-25; DHS Docket No. USCIS-2025-0271]
RIN 1615-AD05
Removal of the Automatic Extension of Employment Authorization
Documents
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Department
of Homeland Security (DHS).
ACTION: Interim final rule (``IFR'') with request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This IFR amends DHS regulations to end the practice of
automatically extending the validity of employment authorization
documents (Forms I-766 or EADs) for aliens who have timely filed an
application to renew their EAD in certain employment authorization
categories. The purpose of this change is to prioritize the proper
vetting and screening of aliens before granting a new period of
employment authorization and/or a new EAD. This IFR does not impact the
validity of EADs that were automatically extended prior to October 30,
2025 or which are otherwise automatically extended by law or Federal
Register notice.
DATES: This IFR is effective on October 30, 2025. Comments must be
received on or before December 1, 2025. The electronic Federal Docket
Management System will accept comments prior to midnight Eastern time
at the end of that day.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the entirety of this IFR,
identified by DHS Docket No. USCIS-2025-0271, through the Federal e-
Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the website
instructions for submitting comments.
Comments must be submitted in English, or an English translation
must be provided. Comments submitted in a manner other than via http://www.regulations.gov, including emails or letters sent to DHS or USCIS
officials, will not be considered comments on the proposed rule and may
not receive a response from DHS. Please note that DHS and USCIS cannot
accept any comments that are hand-delivered or couriered. In addition,
USCIS cannot accept comments contained on any form of digital media
storage devices, such as CDs/DVDs and USB drives. USCIS is also not
accepting mailed comments at this time.
If you cannot submit your comment by using http://www.regulations.gov, please contact Regulatory Coordination Division,
Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services, Department of Homeland Security, by telephone at (240) 721-
3000 for alternate instructions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Business and Foreign Workers Division,
Office of Policy and Strategy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services, DHS, 5900 Capital Gateway Drive, Camp Springs, MD 20746;
telephone (240) 721-3000.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Public Participation
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
B. Legal Authority
C. Summary of the Regulatory Action
III. Background & Purpose
A. Legal Authority
B. Legal Framework for Employment Authorization and Verification
1. Types of Employment Authorization: 8 CFR 274a.12(a), (b), and
(c)
2. The Application Process for Obtaining an Employment
Authorization Document
3. Renewal of Employment Authorization Documents
4. I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification
C. Automatic Extension of Employment Authorization and
Documentation
D. Increasing the Automatic Extension Period From a Maximum of
180 Days to a Maximum of 540 Days
1. Circumstances Resulting in the 2022 Temporary Final Rule
2. Circumstances Resulting in the 2024 Temporary Final Rule
3. Circumstances Resulting in the 2024 Final Rule
IV. Discussion of This Interim Final Rule
A. Negative Impact of Prior Policies
1. Impact of EAD Automatic Extensions on Public Safety and
National Security
2. Impact of the EAD Automatic Extension Final Rule on
Employment Authorization Eligibility
B. Administration Policies To Reduce EAD Filings Overall
C. IFR Impact on Aliens and Employers
3. Reliance Interests
4. Alternatives Considered
5. Employment Authorization Verification
D. Conclusion
E. Description of Regulatory Changes: Adding New 8 CFR
274a.13(e) and Modifying the Heading of 8 CFR 274a.13(d)
1. Adding New 8 CFR 274a.13(e)
2. Modifying the Heading of 8 CFR 274a.13(d)
F. Severability
V. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
A. Administrative Procedure Act
1. Good Cause
2. Foreign Affairs
B. Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review),
13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and 14192
(Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
1. Affected Population
2. Impacts of Ending the Practice of Providing EAD Automatic
Extensions
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
E. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(Congressional Review Act)
F. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
H. Family Assessment
I. Executive Order 13175
J. National Environmental Policy Act
K. Paperwork Reduction Act
Table of Abbreviations
APA--Administrative Procedure Act
CBP--U.S. Customs and Border Protection
CFR--Code of Federal Regulations
CRA--Congressional Review Act
DHS--U.S. Department of Homeland Security
EAD--employment authorization document
E.O.--Executive Order
Form I-765--Application for Employment Authorization
FY--Fiscal Year
HSA--Homeland Security Act of 2002
ICE--U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
IFR--Interim final rule
IIRIRA--Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of
1996
INA--Immigration and Nationality Act
ISO--Immigration Service Officer
NEPA--National Environmental Policy Act
OMB--Office of Management and Budget
[[Page 48800]]
PRA--Paperwork Reduction Act
SBREFA--Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
Secretary--Secretary of Homeland Security
TFR--Temporary final rule
UMRA--Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
U.S.C.--United States Code
USCIS--U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
I. Public Participation
DHS invites all interested parties to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written data, views, comments and arguments on
all aspects of this IFR. DHS also invites comments that relate to the
economic, environmental, or federalism effects that might result from
this IFR. Comments must be submitted in English, or an English
translation must be provided. Comments that will provide the most
assistance to USCIS in implementing these changes will reference a
specific portion of the IFR, explain the reason for any recommended
change, and include data, information, or authority that support such
recommended change. Comments submitted in a manner other than the one
listed above, including emails or letters sent to DHS or USCIS
officials, will not be considered comments on the IFR and may not
receive a response from DHS.
Instructions: If you submit a comment, you must include the agency
name (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) and the DHS Docket No.
USCIS-USCIS-2025-0271 for this rulemaking. Regardless of the method
used for submitting comments or material, all submissions will be
posted, without change, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov, and will include any personal information you
provide. Therefore, submitting this information makes it public. You
may wish to consider limiting the amount of personal information that
you provide in any voluntary public comment submission you make to DHS.
DHS may withhold information provided in comments from public viewing
that it determines may impact the privacy of an individual or is
offensive. For additional information, please read the Privacy and
Security Notice available at http://www.regulations.gov.
Docket: For access to the docket and to read background documents
or comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov, referencing DHS
Docket No. USCIS-USCIS-2025-0271. You may also sign up for email alerts
on the online docket to be notified when comments are posted or a final
rule is published.
II. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
The purpose of this rulemaking is to prioritize the proper vetting
and screening of aliens before granting a new period of employment
authorization and/or a new EAD by ending the practice of automatically
extending the validity of employment authorization and/or EADs for
aliens who have timely filed an application to renew their EAD in
certain employment authorization categories. DHS will also continue to
work to reduce frivolous, fraudulent or otherwise non-meritorious EAD
filings to free up adjudicatory and other resources to better ensure
national security and program integrity. Ending the practice of
providing automatic extensions of EADs is consistent with President
Trump's directive in Executive Order (E.O.) 14159 ``Protecting the
American People Against Invasion,'' which directs the Secretary of
Homeland Security, in coordination with the Secretary of State and the
Attorney General, in Section 16 to take all appropriate action to align
any departmental activities with the policies set out by the President,
and to ensure, among others, ``that employment authorization is
provided in a manner consistent with section 274A of the INA (8 U.S.C.
1324a), and that employment authorization is not provided to any
unauthorized alien in the United States.'' \1\ It is also consistent
with E.O. 14161, ``Protecting the United States From Foreign Terrorists
and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats,'' which directs
the Secretary of State, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland
Security, the Attorney General, and the Director of National
Intelligence in Section 2 to ``identify all resources that may be used
to ensure that all aliens seeking admission to the United States, or
who are already in the United States, are vetted and screened to the
maximum degree possible.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See E.O. 14159, Protecting the American People Against
Invasion (Jan. 20, 2025), 90 FR 8443, 8446 (Jan. 29, 2025).
\2\ See E.O. 14161, Protecting the United States From Foreign
Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats
(Jan. 20, 2025), 90 FR 8451, 8451 (Jan. 30, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Legal Authority
The authority for the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) to
issue this IFR is found in section 103(a) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1103(a),
which authorizes the Secretary to administer and enforce the
immigration and nationality laws and establish such regulations as the
Secretary deems necessary for carrying out such authority, and section
101(b)(1)(F) of the Homeland Security Act (HSA), 6 U.S.C. 111(b)(1)(F),
which establishes as a primary mission of DHS the duty to ``ensure that
the overall economic security of the United States is not diminished by
efforts, activities, and programs aimed at securing the homeland.''
C. Summary of the Regulatory Action
This IFR makes the following changes:
DHS is revising the heading of 8 CFR 274a.13(d), to
clearly indicate that the up-to 540-day automatic extension period only
applies to renewal EAD applications filed before October 30, 2025. DHS
makes no other changes to this paragraph.
DHS is adding new 8 CFR 274a.13(e). The new provision
explains that, unless otherwise provided in 8 CFR 274a.13(d), by law,
or through a Federal Register notice for Temporary Protected Status
(TPS)-related employment documentation, the validity period of an
expired or expiring Employment Authorization Document and/or employment
authorization will not be automatically extended by a renewal EAD
application filed on or after October 30, 2025.
This IFR does not impact automatic extensions of EADs and/or
employment authorization provided by law or Federal Register notices,
such as those for TPS applicants and beneficiaries pursuant to section
244 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1254a, and 8 CFR part 244.
III. Background & Purpose
A. Legal Authority
The Secretary of Homeland Security's (Secretary) authority for the
regulatory amendments made in this IFR are found in various sections of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA or the Act), 8 U.S.C. 1101 et
seq., and the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (HSA), Public Law 107-296,
116 Stat. 2135 (codified in part at 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq.). General
authority for issuing this rule is found in section 103(a) of the INA,
8 U.S.C. 1103(a), which authorizes the Secretary to administer and
enforce the immigration and nationality laws and establish such
regulations as the Secretary deems necessary for carrying out such
authority, as well as section 102 of the HSA, 6 U.S.C. 112, which vests
all of the functions of DHS in the Secretary and authorizes the
Secretary
[[Page 48801]]
to issue regulations.\3\ Further authority for this rule is found in:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Although several provisions of the INA discussed in this
final rule refer exclusively to the ``Attorney General,'' such
provisions are now to be read as referring to the Secretary of
Homeland Security by operation of the HSA. See 6 U.S.C. 202(3), 251,
271(b), 542 note, 557; 8 U.S.C. 1103(a)(1) and (g), 1551 note;
Nielsen v. Preap, 586 U.S. 392, 397 n.2 (2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 208(d)(2) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1158(d)(2), which
provides the Secretary with authority to grant employment
authorization, in her discretion, to applicants for asylum if 180 days
have passed since filing an application for asylum;
Section 214 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1184, including section
214(a)(1) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1184(a)(1), which authorizes the
Secretary to prescribe, by regulation, the time and conditions of the
admission of nonimmigrants;
Section 244(a)(1)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1254a(a)(1)(B),
which states that the Secretary shall authorize employment and provide
evidence of employment authorization for aliens who have been granted
Temporary Protected Status;
Section 274A(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1324a(b), which
provides for the employment verification system and outlines employment
eligibility verification requirements;
Section 274A(h)(3)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1324a(h)(3)(B),
recognizes the Secretary's authority to extend employment authorization
to aliens in the United States; \4\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Courts have acknowledged that Congress delegated authority
to DHS to grant or extend employment authorization to certain
classes of aliens. See, e.g., Wash. All. of Tech. Workers v. DHS, 50
F.4th 164, 191-192 (D.C. Cir. 2022) (``What matters is that section
1324a(h)(3) expressly acknowledges that employment authorization
need not be specifically conferred by statute; it can also be
granted by regulation.''). DHS is exercising this discretionary
authority consistent with all applicable authorities, including the
referenced authorities in the HSA, and sections 103, 208, 214, 244,
and 274A(h)(3) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1158, 1184, 1254a, and
1324a(h)(3), as well as the Administrative Procedure Act at 5 U.S.C.
553. See Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 144 S. Ct. 2244, 2263
(2024) (``In a case involving an agency, of course, the statute's
meaning may well be that the agency is authorized to exercise a
degree of discretion. Congress has often enacted such statutes. For
example, some statutes `expressly delegate' to an agency the
authority to give meaning to a particular statutory term. Others
empower an agency to prescribe rules to `fill up the details' of a
statutory scheme, or to regulate subject to the limits imposed by a
term or phrase that leaves agencies with flexibility,' such as
`appropriate' or `reasonable.' '') (internal citations omitted).
Litigation challenging DHS's authority to provide employment
authorization to certain H-4 nonimmigrants is currently pending
before the Supreme Court. Save Jobs USA v. DHS, No. 24-923 (docketed
Feb. 26, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sections 100003(c) and 100012(a) of the One Big Beautiful
Bill Act, Public Law 119-21 (July 4, 2025), which limit the validity
period of any employment authorization for aliens granted Temporary
Protected Status (TPS) under section 244 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1254a, to
a period of one year or for the duration of the designation of TPS,
whichever is shorter.
B. Legal Framework for Employment Authorization and Verification
1. Types of Employment Authorization: 8 CFR 274a.12(a), (b), and (c)
Whether an alien is authorized to work in the United States depends
on the alien's immigration status or other conditions that may permit
employment authorization (for example, having a pending application for
asylum or a grant of deferred action). DHS regulations outline three
classes of aliens who may be eligible for employment in the United
States, as follows: \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ There are several employment-eligible categories that are
not included in DHS regulations but instead are described in the
form instructions to Form I-765, Application for Employment
Authorization (EAD application). Employment-authorized L
nonimmigrant spouses are an example. See INA sec. 214(c)(2)(E), 8
U.S.C. 1184(c)(2)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens in the first class, described at 8 CFR 274a.12(a),
are authorized to work ``incident to status'' for any employer, as well
as to engage in self-employment, as a condition of their immigration
status or circumstances. This means that for certain eligible aliens,
employment authorization is granted with the underlying immigration
status (called ``incident to status'' employment authorization).
Although authorized to work as a condition of their status or
circumstances, certain classes of aliens must apply to USCIS, which
they do by filing a Form I-765 Application for Employment
Authorization, in order to receive a Form I-766 EAD as evidence of that
employment authorization.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens in the second class, described at 8 CFR 274a.12(b),
also are authorized to work ``incident to status'' as a condition of
their immigration status or circumstances, but generally the
authorization is valid only with a specific employer.\7\ These aliens
are issued an Arrival-Departure Record (Form I-94) indicating their
employment-authorized status in the United States and in most cases do
not file separate requests for evidence of employment authorization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens in the third class, described at 8 CFR 274a.12(c),
are required to apply for employment authorization, which they do by
filing a Form I-765 Application for Employment Authorization, and may
work only if USCIS, in its discretion, approves their application and
issues a Form I-766 EAD. They are authorized to work for any employer
or engage in self-employment with a valid EAD, subject to certain
restrictions.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(c); Matter of Tong, 16 I&N Dec. 593, 595
(BIA 1978) (holding that the term `` `employment' is a common one,
generally used with relation to the most common pursuits,'' and
includes ``the act of being employed for one's self'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The Application Process for Obtaining an Employment Authorization
Document
For certain eligibility categories listed in 8 CFR 274a.12(a) (the
first class) and all eligibility categories listed in 8 CFR 274a.12(c)
(the third class), as well as additional categories specified in the
Form I-765 instructions,\9\ an EAD application must be properly filed
with USCIS (with fee or fee waiver, as applicable) before an alien can
receive an EAD and/or employment authorization.\10\ If an EAD
application is approved under 8 CFR 274a.12(a), the resultant EAD
provides the alien with proof of identity and employment authorization
incident to status or circumstance. Certain aliens may file EAD
applications concurrently with related benefit requests if permitted by
the applicable form instructions or as announced by USCIS.\11\ In such
instances, the underlying benefit requests, if granted, would form the
basis for an EAD or eligibility to apply for employment authorization.
For eligibility categories listed in 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c), USCIS
has the discretion to establish a specific validity period for the
EAD.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See DHS, USCIS, Form I-765, ``Instructions for Application
for Employment Authorization,'' https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-765instr.pdf (last visited June 16, 2025). In
reviewing the EAD application, USCIS ensures that the fee was paid,
a fee waiver was granted, or a fee exemption applies.
\10\ See 8 CFR 103.2(a) and 8 CFR 274a.13(a). Some aliens who
are employment authorized incident to status (e.g., asylees,
refugees, TPS beneficiaries) may file an EAD application to obtain
an EAD. Aliens who are filing within an eligibility category listed
in 8 CFR 274a.12(c) must, by contrast, use the EAD application form
to request both employment authorization and an EAD.
\11\ See 8 CFR 274a.13(a). For example, the spouse of an H-1B
worker may file an EAD application at the same time as his or her
Form I-539, Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status. See
DHS, USCIS, Employment Authorization for Certain H-4, E Dependent
Spouses (last visited June 16, 2025), https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-workers/h-1b-specialty-occupations-and-fashion-models/employment-authorization-for-certain-h-4-dependent-spouses (last visited June 16, 2025).
\12\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After an alien's filing of an EAD application, USCIS typically
issues a
[[Page 48802]]
Form I-797C, Notice of Action (``Form I-797C'' or ``receipt notice'')
to confirm receipt. EAD applications received by USCIS initially go
through an intake process. The technical mechanics of the intake
process vary based on the requested employment authorization category
and whether the EAD application was filed electronically or by mail.
Regardless of the applicable category or method of filing, the EAD
application intake process generally consists of the following steps:
data is entered into a USCIS case-management system based on the
information provided by the applicant, the required fee is collected or
waived, and the applicant's signature is verified.
Once these steps are complete, USCIS begins the pre-processing
stage of the adjudication. Pre-processing may include A-number
verification, scheduling of a biometrics appointment or biometric
reuse, and resolution of discrepancies related to the applicant's
identity or address. This stage also includes initial security checks
based on biographic information provided by the applicant. If the
initial security checks reveal any national security or public safety
threat through ``hits'' in the database system, these hits must be
promptly reviewed by an officer who will have to resolve and address
these hits. The resolution of some hits can be time consuming and may
involve collaboration with law enforcement agencies.
Once pre-processing is complete, the case moves into a queue to
await adjudication, where cases are assigned for adjudication generally
based on a first-in-first-out processing order. At adjudication,
immigration service officers (ISO) review the applicant's evidence of
eligibility. If the ISO determines that the applicant is eligible,
additional security checks may be conducted. Upon final review of the
results of security checks and resolution of any issues that are
identified during the security check and review process, and if the
applicant continues to be eligible and merits a favorable exercise of
discretion, as applicable, the application may be approved.
If eligibility is not established, or if the applicant does not
appear to merit a favorable exercise of discretion, when applicable,
USCIS may issue a request for evidence or notice of intent to deny in
order to provide the applicant with the opportunity to address any
deficiencies in the record or rebut a presumption of ineligibility.
Upon receiving the response, USCIS reviews the submission and issues a
final decision on the application. Prior to issuing the final decision,
USCIS may update or conduct additional security checks.
3. Renewal of Employment Authorization Documents
Temporary employment authorization and EADs generally are not valid
indefinitely but instead expire after a specified period of time.\13\
Generally, aliens within the eligibility categories listed in 8 CFR
274a.12(c) must obtain a renewal of employment authorization and their
EADs before the expiration date stated on their current EADs, or they
will lose their eligibility to work in the United States (unless, since
obtaining their current EADs, the aliens have obtained an immigration
status or belong to a class of aliens with employment authorization
incident to that status or class, or obtain employment authorization
based on another category).\14\ The same holds true for some classes of
aliens authorized to work incident to status whose EAD expiration dates
coincide with the termination or expiration of their underlying
immigration status. Other aliens authorized to work incident to status,
such as asylees, refugees, and TPS beneficiaries, may have immigration
status that confers employment authorization that continues past the
expiration date stated on their EADs. Nevertheless, such aliens may
wish to renew their EAD to have acceptable evidence of their continuous
employment authorization for various purposes, such as presenting
evidence of employment authorization and identity to their employers
for completion of Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.
Failure to renew their EADs prior to the expiration date may result in
job loss if such aliens do not have or cannot present unexpired
alternate acceptable evidence of employment authorization to show their
employers.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See 8 CFR 274a.13(b). But see 8 CFR 274a.14 (setting forth
the basis for termination or revocation of employment
authorization); see also secs. 100003(b), (c), 100010(a) and
1000012(a) of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Public Law 119-21
(July 4, 2025) (limiting any employment authorization for aliens
paroled into the United States or granted TPS to a duration of one
year or for the duration of the parole/TPS, whichever is shorter).
\14\ See 8 CFR 274a.14(a)(1)(i).
\15\ The employee must present the employer with acceptable and
unexpired documents evidencing identity and employment
authorization. The lists of acceptable documents can be found on
Form I-9. See DHS, USCIS, Form I-9, Employment Eligibility
Verification, https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-9.pdf (last visited June 16, 2025) and 8 CFR
274a.2(b)(1)(v). An example of alternate evidence for an asylee is
Form I-94, Arrival/Departure Record, with the appropriate stamp or
notation paired with an acceptable identity document, such as a
state-issued driver's license or identity card. See DHS, USCIS, M-
274, Handbook for Employers, 7.3 Refugees and Asylees, https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/form-i-9-resources/handbook-for-employers-m-274/70-evidence-of-employment-authorization-for-certain-categories/73-refugees-and-asylees (last visited June 16, 2025). An
employer that does not properly complete Form I-9, which includes
reverifying continued employment authorization, or continues to
employ an individual with knowledge that the individual is not
authorized to work, may be subject to civil money penalties. See
DHS, USCIS, M-274, Handbook for Employers, 11.8 Penalties for
Prohibited Practices, https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/form-i-9-resources/handbook-for-employers-m-274/110-unlawful-discrimination-and-penalties-for-prohibited-practices/118-penalties-for-prohibited-practices (last visited June 16, 2025). In addition, an employer who
engages in a ``pattern or practice'' of employing unauthorized
aliens may face criminal penalties under 8 U.S.C. 1324a(f). U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement has primary enforcement
responsibilities for enforcement of the civil monetary penalties
under INA sec. 274A, 8 U.S.C. 1324a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those seeking to renew previously granted employment authorization
and/or obtain new EADs must file renewal EAD applications with USCIS in
accordance with the form instructions.\16\ USCIS generally recommends
filing a renewal EAD application up to 180 days before the current EAD
expires.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See 8 CFR 103.2, 106.2, and 274a.13(a); see DHS, USCIS,
Form I-765, Instructions for Application for Employment
Authorization, https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-765instr.pdf (last visited June 16, 2025). In reviewing the
EAD application, USCIS ensures that the fee was paid, a fee waiver
was granted, or a fee exemption applies.
\17\ See DHS, USCIS, ``I-765, Application for Employment
Authorization,'' https://www.uscis.gov/i-765 (last visited June 16,
2025); DHS, USCIS, Employment Authorization Document (last visited
June 16, 2025), https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-processes-and-procedures/employment-authorization-document (last
visited June 16, 2025); see also 81 FR 82398, 82456.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification
The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) requires employers to
verify the identity and employment eligibility of their employees and
sets forth criminal and civil sanctions for employment-related
violations. See Public Law 99-603, 100 Stat. 3445 (1986). Section
274A(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1324a(b), requires employers to verify the
identity and employment eligibility of all individuals, including
aliens, hired in the United States. The Employment Eligibility
Verification form (Form I-9) is used by employers to document this
verification. For all current employees and certain former employees,
employers are required to maintain for inspection original Forms I-9 on
paper or as an electronic version generated by an electronic system
that can produce legible and readable paper copies, among other
requirements.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See 8 CFR 274a.2(e)-(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under 8 CFR 274a.2(b)(1)(vii), if an employee's EAD and/or
employment
[[Page 48803]]
authorization expires, his or her employer must reverify or update the
employee's Form I-9 to reflect that the employee is still authorized to
work in the United States; otherwise, the alien's continued employment
may be in violation of the law. No later than the date employment
authorization expires, employees must present unexpired acceptable
documentation that demonstrates continued authorization to work.\19\
The employer is required to reverify or update information on the
employee's Form I-9 to record the employee's evidence of continued
employment authorization. Employers who fail to properly complete Forms
I-9, including reverification, are subject to civil money penalties for
paperwork violations.\20\ Employers must terminate employment of
employees who have gaps in their employment authorization documentation
and are not able to reverify or risk being fined under the employer
sanctions provisions in section 274A of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1324a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See DHS, USCIS, M-274, Handbook for Employers, 6.1,
Reverifying Employment Authorization for Current Employees, https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/form-i-9-resources/handbook-for-employers-m-274/60-completing-supplement-b-reverification-and-rehire-of-form-i-9/61-reverifying-employment-authorization-for-current-employees
(last visited June 16, 2025).
\20\ See INA sec. 274A(e)(5), 8 U.S.C. 1324a(e)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If an alien engages in unauthorized employment, such activity may
render the alien removable,\21\ render the alien ineligible for future
benefits such as adjustment of status,\22\ and/or subject the employer
to civil and/or criminal penalties.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See, e.g., INA sec. 237(a)(1)(C), 8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(1)(C); 8
CFR 214.1(e).
\22\ See INA sec. 245(c), (k); 8 U.S.C. 1255(c), (k).
\23\ See INA sec. 274A, 8 U.S.C. 1324a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Automatic Extension of Employment Authorization and Documentation
Before November 2016, 8 CFR 274a.13(d) stated that USCIS would
adjudicate an EAD application within 90 days of receipt. If USCIS did
not adjudicate the EAD application within that timeframe, the alien was
eligible to request an interim EAD with a validity period not to exceed
240 days.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See 8 CFR 274a.13(d) (2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 18, 2016, as part of DHS's efforts to implement the
American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000
(AC21), DHS published a final rule that eliminated Interim EADs and
replaced them with a maximum 180-day automatic extension period for
certain renewal applicants.\25\ DHS subsequently issued a final rule in
December 2024 that increased the automatic extension period from up to
180 days to up to 540 days for certain applications pending on May 4,
2022, or properly filed on or after May 4, 2022.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See 81 FR 82398 (Nov. 18, 2016) (AC21 Final Rule).
\26\ See 89 FR 101208 (Dec. 13, 2024) (permanently increased the
automatic extension period to up to 540 days). In addition, DHS
previously issued temporary final rules on this same topic in May
2022 and April 2024, discussed further below in Section III.D of
this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the current regulation, the automatic extension period
automatically extends the validity period of certain categories of EADs
for up to 540 days if the alien timely files a renewal application (and
USCIS is still processing the application after the expiration date of
the current EAD). The issuance of the receipt notice (Form I-797C)
indicating timely filing of the EAD renewal application, and the same
employment eligibility category as stated on the facially expired EAD
is the mechanism that serves to automatically extend the EAD.\27\
However, at the time of the issuance of the receipt notice, vetting and
screening checks have not been completed, potential hits of derogatory
information have not been resolved, a determination of continued
eligibility has not been made, and when applicable, USCIS has not
determined that the employment authorization should continue to be
granted in the exercise of discretion. Once USCIS adjudicates the
renewal EAD application, the automatic extension period ends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ For EADs and I-797C notices that contain either an A12 or
C19 category code, the category codes need not match.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To receive an automatic extension under the current regulation, an
eligible renewal applicant must meet the following conditions:
The alien timely files an application to renew the EAD
and/or employment authorization before the EAD expires; \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ 8 CFR 274a.13(d)(1)(i). TPS beneficiaries must file during
the re-registration period in the applicable Federal Register
notice; see 81 FR 82398, 82455 (Nov. 18, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The renewal EAD application is based on the same
employment authorization category shown on the front of the expiring
EAD or, for an alien approved for TPS, whose EAD was issued pursuant to
either 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(12) or (c)(19); \29\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See 8 CFR 274a.13(d)(1)(ii) (exempting aliens approved for
TPS with EADs issued pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(19) from the
requirement that the employment authorization category on the face
of the expiring EAD be the same as on the renewal EAD application).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The alien's eligibility to apply for employment
authorization continues notwithstanding the expiration of the EAD and
is based on an employment authorization category that does not require
the adjudication of an underlying application or petition before the
adjudication of the renewal application, as may be announced on the
USCIS website.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See 8 CFR 274a.13(d)(1)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following classes of aliens filing to renew an EAD may be
eligible to receive an automatic extension of their employment
authorization and/or EAD for up to 540 days under the current
regulation: \31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ See DHS, USCIS, Automatic Employment Authorization (EAD)
Extension (last visited June 16, 2025), https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/information-for-employers-and-employees/automatic-employment-authorization-document-ead-extension
(last visited June 16, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens admitted as refugees (A03); \32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens granted asylum (A05); \33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens admitted as parents or dependent children of aliens
granted permanent residence under section 101(a)(27)(I) of the INA, 8
U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)(I) (A07); \34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens admitted to the United States as citizens of the
Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands,
or the Republic of Palau pursuant to agreements between the United
States and the former trust territories (A08); \35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens granted withholding of deportation or removal
(A10); \36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens granted TPS, if the employment authorization
category on their current EAD is either A12 or C19 (A12); \37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(a)(12) or (c)(19).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alien spouses of E-1/2/3 nonimmigrants (Treaty Trader/
Investor/Australian Specialty Worker) (A17); \38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See INA sec. 214(e)(2), 8 U.S.C. 1184(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alien spouses of L-1 nonimmigrants (Intracompany
Transferees) (A18); \39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See INA sec. 214(c)(2)(E), 8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(2)(E).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens who have filed applications for asylum and
withholding of deportation or removal (C08); \40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens who have filed applications for adjustment of
status to lawful permanent resident under section 245 of the INA, 8
U.S.C. 1255 (C09); \41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(9). In certain adjustment of status
cases, if the applicant seeks an EAD and advance parole (by filing
Form I-131, Application for Travel Document), USCIS may issue an
employment authorization card combined with an Advance Parole Card
(Form I-512). This is also referred to as a ``combo card.'' If the
EAD card is combined with the advance parole authorization (the EAD
card has an annotation ``SERVES AS I-512 ADVANCE PAROLE''), any
automatic extension does not apply to the advance parole part of the
combo card.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48804]]
Aliens who have filed applications for suspension of
deportation under section 244 of the INA (as it existed prior to April
1, 1997), cancellation of removal pursuant to section 240A of the INA,
or special rule cancellation of removal under section 309(f)(1) of the
Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996
(C10); \42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(10).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens who have filed applications for creation of record
of lawful admission for permanent residence (C16); \43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(16).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens who have filed applications for TPS and who have
been deemed prima facie eligible for TPS under 8 CFR 244.10(a) and have
received an EAD as a ``temporary treatment benefit'' under 8 CFR
244.10(e) and 274a.12(c)(19) (C19); \44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(19).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens who have filed legalization applications pursuant
to section 210 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1160 (C20); \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(20).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens who have filed legalization applications pursuant
to section 245A of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1255a (C22); \46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(22).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens who have filed applications for adjustment of
status pursuant to section 1104 of the Legal Immigration Family Equity
Act (C24); \47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(24).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain alien spouses (H-4) of H-1B nonimmigrants with an
unexpired Form I-94 showing H-4 nonimmigrant status (C26); \48\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(26).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens who are the principal beneficiaries or derivative
children of approved Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-
petitioners,\49\ under the employment authorization category
``(c)(31)'' in the form instructions to the EAD application (C31).\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Family-based immigration generally requires U.S. citizens
and lawful permanent residents to file a petition on behalf of their
alien family members. Some petitioners may misuse this process to
further abuse their alien family members by threatening to withhold
or withdraw sponsorship in order to control, coerce, and intimidate
them. With the passage of VAWA and its subsequent reauthorizations,
Congress provided aliens who have been abused by their U.S. citizen
or lawful permanent resident relative the ability to petition for
themselves (self-petition) without the abuser's knowledge, consent,
or participation in the process. The VAWA provisions allow victims
to seek both safety and independence from their abusers.
\50\ INA sec. 204(a)(1)(D)(i)(II), (IV), (a)(1)(K), 8 U.S.C.
1154(a)(1)(D)(i)(II), (IV), (a)(1)(K).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The extension automatically terminates up to 540 days after the
expiration date on the face of the EAD, or upon issuance of
notification of a decision denying the renewal request, whichever date
is earlier.\51\ An EAD that is expired on its face is considered
unexpired when combined with a Form I-797C receipt notice indicating a
timely filing of the application to renew the EAD when the automatic
extension requirements are met.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See 8 CFR 274a.13(d)(3).
\52\ See 8 CFR 274a.13(d)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, when the ``card expires'' date on the front of the EAD
is reached, an eligible alien who is continuing his or her U.S.
employment may present to his or her employer the Form I-797C receipt
notice for the renewal EAD application to show that the validity of the
EAD has been automatically extended as evidence of continued employment
authorization, and the employer must update the previously completed
Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, to reflect the extended
EAD expiration date based on the automatic extension while the renewal
is pending.
For new employment, the automatic extension date is recorded on the
Form I-9 by the employee and the employer in the first instance. In
either case, reverification of employment authorization and/or the EAD
must occur when the automatic extension period terminates.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See DHS,USCIS, ``Completing Supplement B, Reverification
and Rehires (formerly Section 3),'' https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/complete-correct-form-i-9/completing-supplement-b-reverification-and-rehires-formerly-section-3 (last visited June 16,
2025); see also DHS, USCIS, M-274 Handbook for Employers, 5.2
Temporary Increase of Automatic Extension of EADs from 180 Days to
540 Days (last visited June 16, 2025), https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/form-i-9-resources/handbook-for-employers-m-274/50-automatic-extensions-of-employment-authorization-andor-employment-authorization-documents-eads-in/52-temporary-increase-of-automatic-extension-of-eads-from-180-days-to-540-days (last visited June 16,
2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the renewal application is granted, the new employment
authorization and/or EAD generally is valid as of the date of approval
of the application. If the application is denied, the automatically
extended employment authorization and/or EAD generally is terminated on
the day of the denial.\54\ If the renewal application was timely and
properly filed, but remains pending beyond the maximum 540-day
automatic extension period, the applicant must stop working upon the
expiration of the automatically extended validity period, and the
employer must remove the employee from the payroll if the applicant/
employee cannot provide other acceptable evidence of current employment
authorization.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See 8 CFR 274a.13(d)(3).
\55\ See 8 CFR 274a.2(b)(vii) (reverification provision).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Increasing the Automatic Extension Period From a Maximum of 180 Days
to a Maximum of 540 Days
USCIS' ability to process both initial and renewal EAD applications
within USCIS' targeted processing times was adversely impacted by a
variety of circumstances since the promulgation of the up to 180-day
automatic extension period for certain renewal EAD applicants.\56\ To
reduce the number of renewal EAD applicants eligible for an automatic
extension of their EAD validity under 8 CFR 274a.13(d) from
experiencing lapses in their EAD validity and/or employment
authorization because of USCIS processing delays, DHS issued temporary
final rules in May 2022 \57\ and April 2024 \58\ that temporarily
increased the automatic extension from up to 180 days to up to 540
days. DHS also issued a final rule in December 2024 \59\ that codified
the up to 540-day automatic extension for certain applications pending
on May 4, 2022, or properly filed on or after May 4, 2022. These three
regulatory actions are discussed in more detail in the following
sections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ See 87 FR 26614, 26617-26 (May 4, 2022) (identifying USCIS'
precarious fiscal status, the COVID-19 public health emergency, and
dramatic increases in Form I-765 filings); see also 89 FR 24628,
24634-40 (Apr. 8, 2024) (identifying an increase in referrals to
USCIS for Credible Fear Assessment and an increase in affirmative
and defensive asylum filings as contributing factors to increased
EAD processing times).
\57\ 87 FR 26614 (May 4, 2022) (temporarily increased the
automatic extension period to up to 540 days).
\58\ 89 FR 24628 (Apr. 8, 2024) (temporarily increased the
automatic extension period to up to 540 days).
\59\ 89 FR 101208 (Dec. 13, 2024) (permanently increased the
automatic extension period to up to 540 days).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Circumstances Resulting in the 2022 Temporary Final Rule
In 2022, processing times for renewal EAD applications had
significantly increased due to fiscal and operational challenges that
were exacerbated by the emergency measures USCIS employed in response
to the COVID-19 pandemic and a sudden increase in EAD application
filings.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ 87 FR 26614, 26622, 26625 (May 4, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USCIS is a fee-based agency that relies on predictable fee revenue
and its carryover from the previous year. USCIS began experiencing
fiscal troubles in early December 2019, due in part to the fact that
USCIS had not been able to update its fee structure since the 2016
[[Page 48805]]
Fee Rule, meaning that USCIS was unable to fully cover the costs of
administering current and projected volumes of immigration benefit
requests.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ 87 FR 26614, 26620 (May 4, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This precarious financial situation was exacerbated by the COVID-19
pandemic,\62\ which caused a significant drop in receipts across many
of the most common benefit types, resulting in a commensurate drop in
revenues.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ On January 31, 2020, the Secretary of Health and Human
Services (HHS) declared a public health emergency under section 319
of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 247d), in response to
COVID-19.See HHS, Determination that a Public Health Emergency
Exists, https://aspr.hhs.gov/legal/PHE/Pages/2019-nCoV.aspx (last
visited June 16, 2025).
\63\ In addition to the lowest number of receipts in the past 5
years, USCIS also completed the lowest number of benefit requests in
the past 5 years. The worst rates of completion were observed during
the beginning of the pandemic when USCIS field offices and ASCs were
closed to the public. While USCIS attempted to recover by shifting
adjudications to form types not requiring in-person appearances,
USCIS still completed fewer benefit requests than it received in FY
2020. See 2020 USCIS Statistical Annual Report, p. 4., https://www.uscis.gov/tools/reports-and-studies (last updated May 28, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consequently, USCIS was forced to take steps to preserve sufficient
funds to meet payroll and carryover obligations by cutting overtime
contractor support services and imposing an agency-wide hiring freeze
from May 1, 2020, through March 31, 2021. These cuts hindered USCIS'
ability to address and mitigate backlogs and ensure processing times
remained within goals.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ 87 FR 26614, 26620-26621 (May 4, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
An additional contributing factor was a substantial and sustained
increase in initial and renewal EAD applications which significantly
increased renewal EAD processing times.\65\ The increased filings
resulted from, among other things, new TPS designations by the Biden
Administration as well as increased filings related to asylum
applications and DACA.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ 87 FR 26614, 26624 (May 4, 2022).
\66\ 87 FR 26614, 26618 (May 4, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To mitigate the impact of these operational challenges on EAD
processing times, on May 4, 2022, DHS published a TFR titled
``Temporary Increase of the Automatic Extension Period of Employment
Authorization and Documentation for Certain Renewal Applicants'' (2022
TFR) in the Federal Register.\67\ The rule temporarily amended DHS
regulations at 8 CFR 274a.13(d) by adding a new paragraph 8 CFR
274a.13(d)(5), which lengthened the automatic extension period provided
in that section from up to 180 days to up to 540 days for those
categories described in the 2022 TFR, if the renewal applicant timely
filed a renewal EAD application.\68\ That increase was available to
eligible renewal applicants whose EAD applications were pending as of
May 4, 2022, including those renewal applicants whose employment
authorization had already lapsed following the initial 180-day
extension period. The increase was also available to eligible aliens
who filed a renewal EAD application during the 540-day period beginning
on or after May 4, 2022, and ending October 26, 2023.\69\ On October
27, 2023, the automatic extension renewal period reverted to 180 days
(the automatic extension period under 8 CFR 274a.13(d)(1)) for eligible
renewal EAD applications filed on or after October 27, 2023.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ 87 FR 26614 (May 4, 2022).
\68\ See 8 CFR 274a.13(d); see also 87 FR 26614, 26651 (May 4,
2022).
\69\ See 8 CFR 274a.13(d); see also 87 FR 26614, 26651 (May 4,
2022).
\70\ See 87 FR 26614, 26631 (May 4, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Circumstances Resulting in the 2024 Temporary Final Rule
As discussed later in this preamble, in FY2023, the adjudicative
demands caused by the Biden Administration's approach to the border
crisis,\71\ and other increases in immigration benefit filings and
court-ordered processing timeframes,\72\ created new operational
strains that significantly increased renewal EAD application processing
times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ As noted in the April 2024 EAD TFR, CBP had a record number
of encounters at the U.S. southern border throughout FY 2022 and
2024. See 89 FR 24628, 24637.
\72\ As a result of the court order in Asylumworks v. Mayorkas,
590 F. Supp. 3d 11 (D.D.C. Feb. 7, 2022), since February 7, 2022,
USCIS has been required to process initial EAD applications for all
asylum applicants within 30 days of filing for their EAD. The burden
created by the court's order was significant and impacted overall
EAD processing due to the surge in C08 EAD applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the Biden Administration's encouragement of new
asylum applicants, the decision to reassign USCIS employees to perform
credible fear assessments \73\ for the flood of new asylum
applicants,\74\ and the additional TPS designations \75\ combined to
create renewal EAD application processing backlogs such that large
numbers of renewal EAD applicants eligible for the up to 180-day
automatic extension were projected to nonetheless experience a gap in
their EAD validity and/or employment authorization.\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ Under the INA, certain aliens arriving at the U.S. border
but who are inadmissible to the United States on certain grounds,
may be removed expeditiously under the INA without a hearing unless
the alien indicates either an intention to apply for asylum under
section 208, 8 U.S.C. 1158, or expresses a fear of persecution or
torture. See INA sec. 235(b)(1)(A)(i)-(iii), 8 U.S.C.
1225(b)(1)(A)(i)-(iii). If that is that is the case, then the
officer at the border refers the alien to a USCIS asylum officer for
a credible fear assessment. If the alien has a credible fear of
persecution or torture, the individual may apply for asylum and
remain in the United States until a final determination is made on
the asylum application by an immigration judge, or, in some cases,
by a USCIS asylum officer. Such an asylum applicant is also
authorized to apply for an EAD, and subsequently, renewal EADs in
accordance with the regulations.
\74\ To address the impact of these high numbers of credible
fear referrals from the southwest border on existing asylum and
credible fear procedures, USCIS detailed USCIS personnel, including
officers who adjudicate EAD applications, to the USCIS RAIO
directorate for up to 120 days to conduct credible fear screenings.
Many USCIS detailees were required to take a full-time asylum
officer training course lasting several weeks in addition to the
120-day detail period. Diverting adjudicatory resources by training
and detailing adjudicators to conduct credible fear screenings
significantly strained operational resources for renewal EAD
adjudications, resulting in increased processing times.
\75\ Over the course of FY 2022 and FY 2023, the Secretary of
Homeland Security, in consultation with interagency partners,
designated, redesignated, and extended the designation of several
countries for TPS under section 244 of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1254a. The
increased number of TPS-based EAD filings (particularly in renewal
EAD applications in the A12 category) from FY 2022 to FY 2023
further stretched limited USCIS resources and contributed to the
longer processing times for renewal EAD applications overall. For a
current list of designated countries, see DHS, USCIS, Temporary
Protected Status, https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/temporary-protected-status (last visited June 16, 2025).
\76\ USCIS projected that without the 2024 TFR, approximately
800,000 renewal applicants would have been in danger of experiencing
a lapse in their EAD validity and/or employment authorization in the
period beginning May 2024 and ending March 2026. See 89 FR 24628,
24660 (Table 7) (Apr. 8, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The primary drivers in the growth of EAD applications in FY 2023
(both initials and renewals) were EAD applications based on pending
asylum applications (C08), followed by TPS (A12/C19) and parole
(C11).\77\ The efforts USCIS undertook to improve its processing times
for renewal EAD applications, including increasing its staffing levels,
were insufficient to keep up with the substantial increase in EAD
application filings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ 89 FR 24628, 24635.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In April 2024, in order to reduce the number of renewal EAD
applicants who were projected to experience a lapse in their EAD
validity and/or employment authorization, DHS published a temporary
final rule (``2024 TFR'') that, for certain renewal EAD applications
filed from October 27, 2023, through September 30, 2025, again
temporarily increased the automatic extension period from up to 180
days to up to 540 days.\78\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ See 89 FR 24628 (Apr. 8, 2024). The 2024 TFR increased the
automatic extension period from up to 180 days to up to 540 days for
aliens who properly filed their renewal EAD applications on or after
October 27, 2023, and that remained pending on May 4, 2024, as well
as renewal EAD applications filed from May 4, 2024, through
September 30, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48806]]
3. Circumstances Resulting in the 2024 Final Rule
After the promulgation of the 2024 TFR, DHS determined that if the
automatic extension period were not permanently increased to 540 days,
future renewal EAD applicants could be in danger of experiencing a gap
in EAD validity and/or employment authorization.\79\ After having
considered all operational realities, to include the potential for a
renewed surge in EAD application filings or other circumstances that
may occur in the future and which could result in large numbers of
renewal EAD applications remaining pending beyond the 180-day automatic
extension period, DHS determined that without a permanent 540-day
automatic extension period there could be significant loss of EAD
validity and/or employment authorization.\80\ Accordingly, on December
13, 2024, DHS published a final rule that codified the automatic
extension period increase from up to 180 days to up to 540 days.\81\
This final rule was effective on January 13, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ 89 FR 101208, 101216.
\80\ 89 FR 101208, 101224.
\81\ See 89 FR 101208 (Dec. 13, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlike the 2022 and 2024 TFRs, the final rule was not issued to
address short-term issues with renewal EAD processing times. Instead,
the stated purpose of the final rule was to mitigate the impact of
potential future renewal EAD processing backlogs that may be caused by
a variety of circumstances.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ See 89 FR 101208, 101224.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Discussion of This Interim Final Rule
Aliens who timely filed a renewal EAD application for certain
employment authorization categories were eligible for the automatic
extension of their EADs for up to 540 days.\83\ This IFR amends DHS
regulations to end the practice of automatically extending the validity
of EADs. See new 8 CFR 274a.13(e). This IFR will not impact the
automatic extensions already granted to renewal EAD applicants under 8
CFR 274a.13(d)(1), if the renewal EAD request was filed before October
30, 2025. See 8 CFR 274a.13(d). This IFR also does not impact automatic
extensions otherwise provided by law or in an applicable Federal
Register notice regarding procedures for extending the validity of TPS-
related employment documentation pursuant to section 244 of the INA, 8
U.S.C. 1254a, and 8 CFR part 244.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ See 89 FR 101208.
\84\ DHS notes, however, that sections 100003(c) and 100012(a)
of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Public Law 119-21 (July 4, 2025),
limits the validity period of any employment authorization for
aliens granted Temporary Protected Status (TPS) under section 244 of
the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1254a, to a period of 1 year or for the duration
of the designation of TPS, whichever is shorter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS's mission is to safeguard the American people, our homeland,
and our values with honor and integrity. In service of that mission,
DHS protects the United States from threats by terrorists, criminals,
smugglers, transnational criminal organizations, failed state actors,
and unpredictable lone offenders that constitute present and future
threats to public safety and national security.
As explained earlier in this preamble, USCIS issues EADs to certain
classes of aliens. These documents are valid for a specified period of
time. Aliens who intend to continue their employment beyond the date
specified on their EAD must generally file an application to renew
their employment authorization and/or EAD. This renewal EAD requirement
allows DHS to ensure that the alien continues to be eligible for
employment authorization, including warranting a favorable exercise of
discretion, when applicable, or continues to be employment authorized
incident to their status or circumstance. USCIS makes the determination
of eligibility through the adjudication of the Form I-765, Application
for Employment Authorization. Adjudication of the application is
critical as it involves an eligibility determination for the benefit,
vetting and screening to ensure there are no identifiable threats to
national security or public safety, and, for certain categories, an
exercise of discretion.
The automatic extension of the validity of an EAD grants the
benefit of extending an alien's expired EAD and/or employment
authorization merely by filing a timely renewal EAD application and
without first completing adjudicative review and related vetting,
including resolution of derogatory information identified during the
vetting process. That is, it grants the benefit without an eligibility
determination; without completing vetting and screening checks; without
resolving potential hits of derogatory information; and, when
applicable, without a determination that the employment authorization
should be granted in the exercise of discretion. Without this IFR,
aliens could still obtain an automatic extension despite derogatory
information that could flag them as a national security or public
safety risk. As described above, vetting and screening might not be
completed and derogatory information reviewed and resolved before the
alien's EAD expires. The automatic extension, therefore, poses a
security vulnerability that could allow bad actors to continue to work
and generate income to potentially finance nefarious activities that
pose an imminent threat to the American public. Granting benefits
without proper vetting and full adjudication is contrary to the mission
of DHS and poses a threat to the safety and security of the American
people.\85\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\85\ See, e.g., Conference Report to accompany H.R. 4567 [Report
108-774], ``Making Appropriations for the Department of Homeland
Security for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2005,'' p. 74
(Oct. 9, 2004), https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-108hrpt774/pdf/CRPT-108hrpt774.pdf (recommending, among other things, the creation
of an organization to conduct ``law enforcement/background checks on
every applicant, beneficiary, and petitioner prior to granting
immigration benefits.'') (last visited June 16, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, DHS is ending the practice of providing automatic
extension of EADs to fulfill its mission by prioritizing the proper
vetting and screening of aliens before granting a new period of
employment authorization and/or a new EAD. DHS will also continue to
work to reduce frivolous, fraudulent or otherwise non-meritorious EAD
filings to free up adjudicatory and other resources to better ensure
national security and program integrity.
Ending the practice of providing automatic extensions of EADs is
also consistent with President Trump's directive in E.O. 14159
``Protecting the American People Against Invasion,'' which directs the
Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Secretary of
State and the Attorney General, in Section 16 to take all appropriate
action to align any departmental activities with the policies set out
by the President and to ensure, among others, ``that employment
authorization is provided in a manner consistent with section 274A of
the INA (8 U.S.C. 1324a), and that employment authorization is not
provided to any unauthorized alien in the United States.'' \86\ It is
also consistent with E.O. 14161, Protecting the United States From
Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety
Threats (Jan. 20, 2025),\87\ which directs the Secretary of State, in
coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney
General, and the Director of National Intelligence in
[[Page 48807]]
Section 2 to promptly ``identify all resources that may be used to
ensure that all aliens seeking admission to the United States, or who
are already in the United States, are vetted and screened to the
maximum degree possible,'' and ``vet and screen to the maximum degree
possible all aliens who intend to be admitted, enter, or are already
inside the United States, particularly those aliens coming from regions
or nations with identified security risks.'' \88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ See 90 FR 8443, 8446 (Jan. 29, 2025).
\87\ See 90 FR 8451, 8451 (Jan. 31, 2025).
\88\ See 90 FR 8451, 8451 (Jan. 31, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This IFR is also supported by the Presidential Proclamation
``Restricting the Entry of Foreign Nationals to Protect the United
States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public
Safety Threats,'' wherein the President noted that the ``United States
must ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present
in the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens,
culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not
advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists or other
threats to our national security.'' \89\ The President also noted that
``it is the policy of the United States to protect its citizens from
terrorist attacks and other national security or public-safety
threats'' and that ``[s]creening and vetting protocols and procedures
associated with visa adjudications and other immigration processes play
a critical role in implementing that policy.'' \90\ As such, the
President has made clear that a primary goal of this administration is
to ensure that admitted aliens and aliens otherwise already present in
the United States do not bear hostile attitudes toward its citizens,
culture, government, institutions, or founding principles, and do not
advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other
threats to our public safety and national security.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ Proclamation 10949 (June 4, 2025), 90 FR 24497-98 (June 10,
2025).
\90\ Proclamation 10949 (June 4, 2025), 90 FR 24497-98 (June 10,
2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS recognizes the differences between the various employment
authorization categories under 8 CFR 274a.12(a) and (c), including the
different underlying benefit requests, statuses, and circumstances upon
which employment authorization is based. DHS, however, has decided to
take a uniform approach in this IFR by ending the practice of providing
automatic extensions of employment authorization and/or EADs for all
affected categories. A uniform approach avoids the potential for
confusion among the regulated public, particularly employers who must
comply with Form I-9 employment eligibility verification paperwork
requirements or face potential adverse consequences, including possible
civil or criminal penalties depending on the nature and extent of the
violation(s). Additionally, it also advances the goal of providing a
comprehensive policy solution and administrative simplicity.
A. Negative Impact of Prior Policies
Over the last four years, the prior administration invited,
administered, and oversaw an unprecedented flood of immigration into
the United States. Millions of aliens crossed our borders or were
permitted to fly directly into the United States on commercial flights
and allowed to settle in American communities.\91\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ See E.O. 14159, Protecting the American People Against
Invasion, Section 1, Purpose, 90 FR 8443 (Jan. 29, 2025); see also
Andre Byik, USA Today, No, 51M `illegals' have not entered US under
Biden, Harris [verbar] Fact check (Aug. 12, 2024), https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2024/08/12/51-million-border-illegally-biden-fact-check/74595944007/ (relaying that U.S. Border
Patrol data showed in the range of 10 million nationwide encounters,
and that figure is imprecise because of overcounts and ``people who
are not turned back or apprehended after making an illegal entry'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of these aliens within the United States present significant
threats to national security and public safety, committing vile and
heinous acts against innocent Americans.\92\ Others are engaged in
hostile activities, including espionage, economic espionage, and
preparations for terror-related activities.\93\ Enforcing our Nation's
immigration laws is critically important to the national security and
public safety of the United States. The American people deserve a
Federal Government that puts their interests first and a government
that understands its sacred obligation to prioritize the safety,
security, and financial and economic well-being of Americans.\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\92\ See E.O. 14159, Protecting the American People Against
Invasion, Section 1. Purpose, 90 FR 8443 (Jan. 29, 2025; see also
Adam Shaw, Fox News, Over 1.7M migrants who could pose national
security risk arrived in US during Biden admin: report (Oct. 3,
2024), https://www.foxnews.com/politics/over-1-7-million-migrants-who-could-pose-national-security-risk-arrived-us-biden-admin-report
(citing an Oct. 3, 2024 House of Representatives Judiciary Committee
report on The Biden-Harris Border Crisis: At Least 1.7 Million
Potential National Security Threats).
\93\ See E.O. 14159, Protecting the American People Against
Invasion, Section 1. Purpose, 90 FR 8443 (Jan. 29, 2025; see also
Simon Hankinson, The Heritage Foundation, Biden's Border Crisis
Promotes Foreign Espionage in Plain Sight (May 31, 2024). https://www.heritage.org/border-security/commentary/bidens-border-crisis-promotes-foreign-espionage-plain-sight (arguing that asylum provides
an avenue for employment authorization that attracts Chinese
nationals who are primed to become espionage assets).
\94\ See E.O. 14159, Protecting the American People Against
Invasion, Section 1. Purpose, 90 FR 8443 (Jan. 29, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Impact of EAD Automatic Extensions on Public Safety and National
Security
The immigration policies of the prior administration encouraged a
historically high influx of EAD applicants, resulting in over one
million aliens being granted employment authorization in under one
year.\95\ The overwhelming flood of EAD applicants continues to bog
down USCIS processing times and adjudicative resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ See DHS, USCIS, Number of Service-wide Forms By Quarter,
Form Status, and Processing Time (July 1-Sept. 30, 2023), https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/quarterly_all_forms_fy2023_q4.pdf (last visited Sept. 22, 2025)
(showing that USCIS approved almost 3 million Forms I-765 during the
data period). See also Annual Statistical Report FY2023, p.14
(acknowledging that in ``FY 2023, USCIS received over 3.5 million
applications for employment authorization, 50 percent more than the
previous year, and completed over 3.4 million applications, 45
percent more than in FY 2022.''), https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/reports/fy2023_annual_statistical_report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address this unmanageable influx of EAD applications, which was
largely caused by the prior administration's policies that allowed a
significant number of aliens to enter the country on parole and seek
asylum and/or TPS, and alongside such applications, employment
authorization, DHS issued two temporary rules and a final rule to
triple the automatic extension period from a maximum of 180 days to a
maximum of 540 days. The 2024 final rule made this change permanent in
order to try to reduce the impact of potential future renewal EAD
processing backlogs based on events that had not yet materialized, but
could happen in the future--thus, the final rule was based on
speculative assumptions given the operational realities at USCIS at the
time.\96\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\96\ See 89 FR 101208, 101245 (noting ``the purpose of this
final rule is to provide a long-term solution to mitigate the
potential for unpredictable circumstances to significantly increase
renewal EAD application processing times that would require future
urgent action).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These automatic extensions, however, resulted in a substantial
number of aliens being granted automatically extended EADs and being
permitted to continue working lawfully without the completion of
appropriate vetting and screening of such aliens relating to their
renewal applications.\97\ In other words,
[[Page 48808]]
while these applicants were screened in the context of their initial
EAD application(s), the automatic extensions allows them to have their
EADs extended, for up to 540 days, without the complete and proper
vetting that would be done when adjudicating the renewal application.
This delay could impede DHS from timely identifying derogatory
information or other concerns that may have arisen since the
adjudication of the initial EAD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\97\ See, e.g., 89 FR 101208, 101224 (Table 7, showing that, as
of February 2024, USCIS had approximately 439,000 pending renewal
EAD requests in the categories eligible for automatic extension, and
the number was projected to grow given that USCIS received an
average of approximately 52,800 additional automatic extension-
eligible renewal EAD applications per month in FY 2023, which
exceeded the approximately 49,100 automatic extension-eligible
renewal EAD application completions per month at that time).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through this IFR, DHS intends to address prior policy decisions
that, as described in the preceding sections, resulted in the filing of
over 3 million EAD applications, resulting in substantial backlogs
across all EAD adjudications.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\98\ See USCIS, Annual Statistical Report FY2023, p.14
(acknowledging that in ``FY 2023, USCIS received over 3.5 million
applications for employment authorization, 50 percent more than the
previous year, and completed over 3.4 million applications, 45
percent more than in FY 2022.''), https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/reports/fy2023_annual_statistical_report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This administration's priority is the robust vetting of all aliens
in our country to better protect the safety of American workers and the
public at large. This rule will enhance public safety by ensuring
proper vetting before issuing renewal EADs, which are important
benefits, and improve program integrity. DHS is enhancing its vetting
and screening efforts, increasing its ability to detect aliens with
potentially harmful intent, deter fraud, and place removable aliens
into proceedings. USCIS uses all provisions under the law, to the
extent permissible under the law, to deny benefits to those who are a
risk to public safety and national security. This rulemaking ends the
practice of automatically extending the validity of employment
authorization documents, so that DHS can take appropriate action before
an immigration benefit is again provided to an alien.
The need to conduct complete and thorough vetting of applicants for
renewal EADs to mitigate potential risks to public safety and national
security became abundantly clear on June 1, 2025, when an alien
firebombed and assaulted demonstrators at a peaceful Jewish event to
support hostages in Gaza.\99\ The alien threw Molotov cocktails that
burned multiple victims, and his attack injured 15 people.\100\ The
alien had entered the United States in August 2022 and remained in the
United States beyond the expiration of his nonimmigrant status.\101\ He
applied for asylum in September 2022, and that application was still
pending at the time of the attack.\102\ He also obtained an EAD based
on a pending asylum application which was then automatically extended
for a period of up to 540 days.\103\ This attack by an alien against
peaceful demonstrators highlights the critical need and urgency to
ensure that aliens are not provided immigration benefits in the United
States without thorough vetting and more frequent determinations of
continued eligibility and, when applicable, determinations that the
alien continues to merit a favorable exercise of discretion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ See Colleen Slevin and Jesse Bedayn, Man Accused of Yelling
`Free Palestine' and Firebombing Demonstrators Charged with
Attempted Murder, The Associated Press, June 5, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/boulder-firebombing-attack-9820f4b51d73efc3da72150b80634ea2 (last visited June 16, 2025).
\100\ Id.
\101\ USCIS, CBP, ICE, and USCIS to Ramp Up Crackdown on Visa
Overstays Following Boulder Terrorist Attack, June 4, 2025, https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/news-releases/cbp-ice-and-uscis-to-ramp-up-crackdown-on-visa-overstays-following-boulder-terrorist-attack (last
visited June 16, 2025); see also DHS, Secretary Noem Announces ICE
Detains Boulder Terrorist Soliman's Family, June 4, 2025. https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/06/04/secretary-noem-announces-ice-detains-boulder-terrorist-solimans-family (last updated June 5, 2025); see
Adam Sabes, Timeline Exposes Boulder Suspect's Movements Before
Allegedly Carrying out Firebomb Attack on Pro-Israel Group, Fox
News, June 3, 2025, https://www.foxnews.com/us/timeline-exposes-boulder-suspects-movements-before-allegedly-carrying-out-firebomb-attack-pro-israel-group (last visited June 16, 2025).
\102\ See DHS, Secretary Noem Announces ICE Detains Boulder
Terrorist Soliman's Family, June 4, 2025, https://www.dhs.gov/news/2025/06/04/secretary-noem-announces-ice-detains-boulder-terrorist-solimans-family (last visited June 4, 2025).
\103\ See NBC Washington, US immigration authorities detain
family of Colorado Molotov attack suspect, June 3, 2025, https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/colorado-attack-backed-off-zionist-scared/3927308/?os=io....sxj9oul93fno_journeystrue&ref=app&noamp=mobile (last
visited June 16, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS has determined that the automatic extension of EADs provides a
significant benefit to aliens without adequate vetting and is therefore
not consistent with the E.O.s and the administration's priorities. The
automatic extension of an EAD grants the benefit of extending an
alien's expired EAD and/or employment authorization merely by filing a
timely renewal EAD application and without first completing
adjudicative review and related vetting, including resolution of any
derogatory information identified during the vetting process. That is,
it grants the benefit without a concurrent eligibility determination;
without concurrently completing vetting and screening checks; without
resolving potential hits of derogatory information in connection with
the alien; and without a determination that the employment
authorization should be renewed in the exercise of discretion, when
applicable. As stated previously, without this IFR, aliens could still
obtain an automatic extension despite derogatory information that could
flag them as a national security or public safety risk. The automatic
extension therefore poses a security vulnerability that could allow bad
actors to continue to work and generate income to potentially finance
nefarious activities that pose an imminent threat to the American
public.
For these reasons, DHS is amending its regulations to no longer
provide automatic extension of EADs for renewal applicants who have
timely filed Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization (Form
I-765). See new 8 CFR 274a.13(e).
2. Impact of the EAD Automatic Extension Final Rule on Employment
Authorization Eligibility
In addition to concerns with vetting to better protect the safety
and security of the United States, DHS, and specifically USCIS, is
charged with ensuring that only those aliens who are eligible are
granted employment authorization and/or an EAD. This was highlighted in
E.O.14159, Protecting the American People Against Invasion, where the
Secretary was directed to ensure ``that employment authorization is
provided in a manner consistent with section 274A of the INA (8 U.S.C.
1324a), and that employment authorization is not provided to any
unauthorized alien in the United States.'' \104\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ See 90 FR 8443, 8446.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated previously, prior DHS rules codified automatically
extending employment authorization and/or an EAD for a period of up to
540 days. This grant occurs before USCIS determined that the alien
continues to be eligible for the benefit sought and, when applicable,
continues to merit a favorable exercise of discretion. For the reasons
discussed above, DHS now believes this is a security vulnerability, and
that the risk posed by such a vulnerability outweighs the benefit
provided by automatically extending employment authorization and/or
EADs. Furthermore, with automatic extensions of employment
authorization and/or EADs, employers are more vulnerable to
inadvertently employ aliens that do not have employment authorization
because the
[[Page 48809]]
employer is dependent on the truthfulness of the alien in reporting
whether the renewal EAD request was approved or denied prior to the end
of the 540-day automatic extension.
During the prior rulemakings, DHS has recognized the risks
associated with lengthy automatic extension of employment
authorization; DHS acknowledged that the longer the period of time
before an employer has to reverify an alien employee whose employment
authorization is automatically extended, the greater the risk that the
employer could unknowingly employ someone whose employment
authorization has ended.\105\ Renewal EAD applications are filed by the
alien, so employers do not typically know when or if the application is
approved or denied; employers rely on the employee to provide the
information. The employer also relies on a non-secure document
presented by the alien when the alien's employment authorization is
based on an automatic extension.\106\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\105\ See 89 FR 24628, 24648 (Apr. 8, 2024).
\106\ Increasing the automatic extension period also frustrates
the ability of state agencies to issue benefits such as driver's
licenses for aliens, but also for others owing to the delays that
seeking SAVE verification of immigration status causes. See 89 FR
101208, 101240 (explaining that a commenter raised a concern that,
although USCIS is making improvements to the SAVE system, many cases
presented to front-line motor vehicle service clerks require
additional verifications that cannot be verified at the time of
transaction if the document presented to show immigration status is
an automatically extended EAD. Manual verification by SAVE (also
called ``additional verification'') can require applicants to
revisit service locations to repeat transactions and disrupt the
ability of the states to serve other customers as they explain the
need for additional verification).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Administration Policies To Reduce EAD Filings Overall
As discussed above, there was an unprecedented flood of illegal
immigration into the United States during the prior administration.
This, in turn, encouraged a historically high influx of EAD
applications, resulting in over three million applications being filed
within one year.\107\ The overwhelming flood of EAD applicants bogged
down USCIS processing times and adjudicative resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\107\ See USCIS, Annual Statistical Report FY2023, p.14
(acknowledging that in ``FY 2023, USCIS received over 3.5 million
applications for employment authorization, 50 percent more than the
previous year, and completed over 3.4 million applications, 45
percent more than in FY 2022.''), https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/reports/fy2023_annual_statistical_report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is the policy of the Trump Administration ``to faithfully
execute the immigration laws against all inadmissible and removable
aliens, particularly those aliens who threaten the safety or security
of the American people.'' \108\ Pursuant to this policy, the Secretary
of DHS, in collaboration with the Secretary of State and the Attorney
General have been directed by the President to ``rescind the policy
decisions of the previous administration that led to the increased or
continued presence of illegal aliens in the United States, and align
any and all departmental activities with the policies set out by this
order and the immigration laws'' including by ``ensuring that the
parole authority under section 212(d)(5) of the INA (8 U.S.C.
1182(d)(5)) is exercised on only a case-by-case basis in accordance
with the plain language of the statute'' and by ``ensuring that
designations of Temporary Protected Status are consistent with the
provisions of section 244 of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1254a), and that such
designations are appropriately limited in scope and made for only so
long as may be necessary to fulfill the textual requirements of that
statute.'' \109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\108\ 90 FR 8443, 8446.
\109\ See 90 FR 8443, 8446.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS has already taken a number of actions in support of these
directives.\110\ Accordingly, DHS does not anticipate a further influx
of initial and renewal EAD applications that will overwhelm USCIS
adjudicative resources. Thus, in addition to the serious concerns
relating to automatic EAD extensions discussed previously, given that
DHS has taken the above described measures addressing floods of filings
from TPS and other applicants, DHS expects that overall EAD filing
rates (initials and renewals) are likely to substantially decline,
freeing up adjudicative resources to reduce renewal EAD processing
times and the need for renewal EAD applicants in the longer term to
rely on an automatic extension of their EAD to avoid lapses in
employment authorization and/or EADs due to processing delays.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\110\ See, e.g., Termination of Parole Processes for Cubans,
Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans, 90 FR 13611 (Mar. 25, 2025);
Termination of the October 3, 2023 Designation of Venezuela for
Temporary Protected Status, 90 FR 9040 (Feb. 5, 2025); Special
Immigrant Juvenile Classification and Deferred Action, USCIS Policy
Alert (June 6, 2025) https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20250606-SIJDeferredAction.pdf (last
accessed June 13, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. IFR Impact on Aliens and Employers
1. Reliance Interests
DHS is cognizant that the current regulatory and policy framework
involving renewal EAD applications and automatic extensions may have
engendered reliance interests. Aliens, their families, and employers
may have relied on the automatic extensions to maintain the alien's
continuous employment authorization and/or EADs and to avoid lapses in
employment authorization that may be detrimental to the alien, their
family's finances, and their employer's operations.\111\ Some aliens
may have also relied on the automatic extension of their EAD to obtain
other forms of identification, such as driver's licenses.\112\ DHS is
mindful of the disruption that may occur when employment authorization
and/or EADs temporarily lapse.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ DHS acknowledges that the loss of employment authorization
for asylum applicants may pose additional challenges given that they
may be in a precarious financial situation due to circumstances such
as fleeing persecution in their home country. See 89 FR at 101224.
\112\ DHS also acknowledges that a valid EAD may be necessary
for certain aliens, such as for asylees and TPS beneficiaries, for
proof of identity or immigration status to establish identity for
purposes such as obtaining a REAL ID-compliant driver's license or
identification card. See 89 FR at 101225; see Real ID Act of 2005,
Public Law 109-13, div. B. Title II, Sec. 201(3) (May 11, 2005); 6
CFR 37.11(c). Following the full implementation of REAL ID
requirements, if an individual chooses to present a state-issued
driver's license or identification card for defined official
purposes, including access to certain Federal facilities and
boarding federally regulated commercial aircrafts, the driver's
license or identification card must be REAL-ID compliant. DHS
reasoned that without the automatic extension of the EAD, these
aliens may not be able to obtain REAL-ID compliant driver's licenses
or identification cards. Given the security posture of this country
at this time, DHS believes it is utterly unwise to allow aliens,
such as the alien in Boulder, Colorado, who was an asylum applicant,
to obtain identification cards and driver's licenses based on an
expired EAD that is automatically extended by a Form I-797C receipt
notice that was issued without having more recently assessed the
alien's continued eligibility and potential for security risk--
especially if these REAL ID cards provide access to Federal
Facilities and our airports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, as explained below, DHS believes that the weight of these
interests is significantly diminished by various factors, and
therefore, that the government's interests and policy concerns
underlying this rulemaking outweigh these interests. DHS notes that
with this rule, DHS is merely discontinuing the practice of providing
an automatic extension of the EAD or employment authorization upon the
filing of a renewal EAD application, because it grants a benefit
without an eligibility determination, without completing vetting and
screening checks, and without resolving the potential hits and
derogatory information. This IFR does not remove the ability of aliens
to obtain a renewal of their EADs and/or employment authorization. DHS
is also not preventing eligible aliens from obtaining EADs for purposes
such as proof of identity.
[[Page 48810]]
Furthermore, DHS and USCIS have been provided with considerable
flexibility by Congress under sections 103(a) and 274A of the INA, 8
U.S.C. 1103(a) and 1324a, among other provisions, to administer and
enforce the INA, including the granting of employment authorization and
the issuance of EADs. There is no explicit statutory mandate that
requires DHS to provide an automatic extension of EAD validity and/or
employment authorization for aliens filing renewal EAD applications
under 8 CFR 274a.12(a) or (c).
Additionally, the issuance of a renewal EAD and/or employment
authorization depends in large part on the applicant's timely filing of
a renewal EAD application. The proper planning by the alien and the
employer, and monitoring of EAD processing times, may allow the alien
to timely file a renewal EAD application as soon as eligible, thus
mitigating the risk for the alien, the alien's family, as well as the
employer that the alien will experience prolonged lapses in their EAD
validity and/or employment authorization. Proper planning may
ameliorate the risk of losing valid employment authorization, as well
as the disruption and associated instability with business continuity
or other financial harm for employers and the community as a whole.
DHS believes this rule will increase the security posture of the
United States as an alien's EAD validity and employment authorization
will only be extended based on the issuance of a secure document issued
after USCIS has determined that the applicant is eligible for the
renewal EAD and warrants a favorable exercise of discretion, if
applicable. As DHS noted in the 2024 Final Rule \113\ and the preceding
2024 Temporary Final Rule,\114\ DHS opted for an automatic extension
period of no more than 540 days, to limit the amount of time employers
would have to rely on a non-secure document, such as Form I-797C,
Notice of Action, to assess the applicability of the automatic
extension and run the risk of unwittingly continuing to employ a worker
whose employment authorization is in fact no longer valid. Having one
document only--a secure EAD card--may eliminate confusion for employers
and other agencies for purposes of Form I-9 verification, issuing of
driver licenses, or other benefits in the United States. This helps
ensure that only aliens whose eligibility has been fully determined and
background vetted are in possession of this important document that has
the potential to grant access to many locations, including federal
facilities and airports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\113\ See 89 FR 101208, 101232-33.
\114\ See 89 FR 24628, 24648.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, DHS believes the benefits of this rule to the United States
outweigh any reliance interests held by the alien, his or her family,
the employer or the public at-large in the automatic extensions of EADs
to avoid temporary lapses in employment authorization and/or EADs. The
Federal Government has a duty to protect U.S. national security, public
safety, and the integrity of immigration benefits, and more specific to
this rule, to better ensure that employment authorization is provided
in a manner consistent with prohibiting the unlawful employment of
aliens and is granted only after a determination is made that the alien
continues to be eligible and, when applicable, continues to merit a
favorable exercise of discretion. Any reliance interest in the current
regulatory framework and policy does not outweigh the need to protect
public safety and the integrity of immigration benefits and employment
authorization.
2. Alternatives Considered
DHS considered returning to the up to 180-day automatic extension
period, issuing interim EAD cards again, or delaying the issuance of
this rule. DHS recognizes that these measures might reduce the impact
on the affected regulated public and the public as a whole. However,
these alternatives suffer the same flaws as the up to 540-day automatic
extension. The automatic extension of an EAD, whether for 180 days, 540
days, or through the issuance of an interim EAD, grants the benefit of
extending an alien's expired EAD and/or employment authorization merely
by filing a timely renewal EAD application and without USCIS first
completing adjudicative review and related vetting for the renewal,
including resolution of any derogatory information identified during
the vetting process. That is, it grants the benefit without an
eligibility determination, without resolving potential hits of
derogatory information in connection with the aliens, and without a
determination that the employment authorization should be granted in
the exercise of discretion, when applicable. If DHS pursued these
options, aliens with derogatory information flagged during the
background check process would nevertheless still obtain an automatic
extension of 180 days, or an interim EAD, even if derogatory
information cannot be reviewed and resolved, and their application
denied, before the alien's EAD expires. These automatic extensions
therefore pose a security vulnerability that could allow bad actors to
continue to work and generate income to potentially finance nefarious
activities that pose an imminent threat to the American public.
3. Employment Authorization Verification
This rule does not modify the current requirements an employer must
follow for Form I-9 at 8 CFR 274a.2(b)(1)(vii) for reverifying
employment authorization and documentation. USCIS, in general, issues
Form I-797C, Notices of Action for any benefit request USCIS receives.
The I-797C acknowledges receipt of the benefit request, to include the
filing date, and provides general information to the applicant. To
conform to the changes made by this rule, Notices of Action issued on
or after October 30, 2025, will no longer contain information regarding
automatic extensions of employment authorization documentation.
Instead, USCIS will add appropriate information to the Notices of
Action clearly indicating that the document is not evidence of
employment authorization and cannot be used by itself or in conjunction
with an expired EAD as proof of employment authorization. USCIS will
also update I-9 Central on the USCIS website and the Handbook for
Employers, M-274 to provide employees and employers with specific
guidance on Form I-9 completion.
DHS will also inform other agencies that renewal EAD applicants
will no longer receive an automatic extension of their EAD and/or
employment authorization if they file their renewal EAD application on
or after October 30, 2025. See 8 CFR 274a.13(e). If another agency
accepts EADs for any purposes (such as identity or, in some situations,
immigration status), then the agency should generally no longer
consider as valid any unexpired EADs that bear a date that demonstrates
that the EAD is expired (that are ``facially expired''), unless the
applicant presents a Form I-797C, Notice of Action Receipt
demonstrating that the alien had timely (such as, before the EAD
expired) filed a renewal EAD application before October 30, 2025.
Benefits granting agencies that are registered to use the SAVE \115\
program to verify immigration status will receive a result that
indicates
[[Page 48811]]
an expiration date of employment authorization (if any) \116\ that does
not include the up to 540-day automatic extension period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\115\ SAVE is a program administered by USCIS and is used by
Federal, state, and local benefit granting agencies to verify the
immigration status of their benefit applicants in order for the
agency to determine eligibility for the benefits they administer.
See USCIS, About SAVE, https://www.uscis.gov/save/about-save/about-save (last visited June 16, 2025).
\116\ For example, in the case of an asylee, the SAVE response
is ``asylee EA indefinite.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Conclusion
Ending the practice of providing automatic extension of employment
authorization documents enhances benefit integrity in adjudications of
work authorization requests and will better protect public safety and
national security by ensuring that aliens are properly vetted and
determined to continue to be eligible, and when applicable, merit a
favorable exercise of discretion, for employment authorization before
such authorization is provided to the alien.
E. Description of Regulatory Changes: Adding New 8 CFR 274a.13(e) and
Modifying the Heading of 8 CFR 274a.13(d)
1. Adding New 8 CFR 274a.13(e)
With this IFR, DHS is amending 8 CFR 274a.13 to add a new paragraph
(e) that will be in effect immediately with the publication of this
rule. With the new paragraph, DHS is eliminating the practice of
providing automatic extension periods for EAD validity and/or
employment authorization for up to 540 days for renewal applications
filed on or after October 30, 2025. Therefore, renewal EAD applicants
will no longer receive an up to 540-day automatic extension of their
EAD and/or employment authorization if they file their application on
or after October 30, 2025. See new 8 CFR 274a.13(e).
Except as otherwise provided by law, in 8 CFR 274a.13(d), or in
accordance with applicable Federal Register notice regarding procedures
for renewing TPS-related employment documentation, an alien's EAD
validity and/or an alien's attendant employment authorization will
expire as follows: For those aliens who are employment authorized
incident to status under 8 CFR 274a.12(a), unless otherwise provided by
law, their EAD will expire on the date after the end validity date
stated on the face of the EAD. See new 8 CFR 274a.13(e)(1). Because the
alien's employment authorization is tied to the alien's status in the
United States, the employment authorization will expire or terminate
when the alien's status in the United States expires or terminates. For
example, an alien in L-2 nonimmigrant status as the spouse of an L-1
nonimmigrant is employment authorized incident to status.\117\ If the
L-2 nonimmigrant chooses to apply for an EAD to evidence his or her
employment authorization, the EAD will expire as of the date indicated
on the EAD card. In some cases that may be the same date as the
expiration of the L-2's nonimmigrant status. But in other cases, the L-
2 status expiration date may be after the EAD expiration date,
particularly if the L-2 nonimmigrant travelled outside of the United
States after obtaining an EAD and, upon return to the United States,
was provided a new status expiration date that will expire after the
EAD expires.\118\ In that scenario, the L-2 nonimmigrant would remain
employment authorized while in L-2 nonimmigrant status, even after the
EAD expires, but the expired EAD would no longer be a valid document to
evidence the L-2 nonimmigrant's employment authorization.\119\ Once the
alien is no longer in L-2 status (for example, the L-2 nonimmigrant
status expires), the alien would no longer be employment authorized as
an L-2 nonimmigrant because such employment authorization is dependent
on being in L-2 nonimmigrant status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\117\ See INA sec. 214(c)(2)(E), 8 U.S.C. 1184(c)(2)(E).
\118\ In this case, the new status expiration date is the date
stated on the alien's Form I-94, Arrival Departure document.
\119\ An L-2 can still have other evidence of documentation of
work authorization, such as a Form I-94, Arrival/Departure Record,
designated with the L-2S classification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For aliens who are not employment authorized incident to their
immigration status and who instead must obtain employment authorization
from USCIS pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c), before accepting employment in
the United States, such as adjustment of status applicants or aliens
with a pending asylum application, USCIS determines the length of the
period of employment authorization in the exercise of its discretion
and thereafter, issues an EAD reflecting the validity period.\120\
Therefore, the EAD will expire and the employment authorization will
terminate the day after the end validity date stated on the face of the
EAD, in the situations outlined in 8 CFR 274a.14, or for TPS applicants
pursuant to section 244 of the Act and 8 CFR part 244.\121\ See new 8
CFR 274a.13(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\120\ Employment authorization granted pursuant to 8 CFR
274a.12(c) is generally granted in the discretion of the Secretary.
See 8 CFR 274a.13(a)(1) (``The approval of applications filed under
8 CFR 274a.12(c), except for 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(8), are within the
discretion of USCIS.'').
\121\ For example, employment authorization may also end prior
to the expiration date displayed on the EAD, in accordance with 8
CFR 274a.14, if exclusion or deportation proceedings are instituted
against the alien; if a condition upon which the EAD was granted has
not been met or no longer exists; or upon a showing that the
information contained in the request for an EAD was not true and
correct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, an alien with a pending adjustment of status
application (Form I-485) is in possession of an EAD that expires on
December 15, 2025. The alien's adjustment of status application has not
yet been adjudicated and continues to be pending. The alien is eligible
to apply for a renewal EAD based on the pending adjustment of status
application. The alien applies for a renewal of the EAD after October
30, 2025. The alien will maintain continuous employment authorization
if his or her renewal application is granted by the time his or her
current employment authorization expires on December 15, 2025. If the
renewal EAD application remains unadjudicated on December 16, 2025, the
alien cannot continue to work for his or her employer on or after
December 16, 2025, unless the alien is employment authorized on a
separate basis. See new 8 CFR 274a.13(e). If the renewal EAD
application is subsequently approved, the alien would again be
employment authorized and may resume employment during the validity
period stated on the new EAD. The longer an alien waits to file a
renewal EAD application, the more likely it is that he or she may
experience a temporary lapse in his or her EAD validity and/or
employment authorization.
2. Modifying the Heading of 8 CFR 274a.13(d)
On December 13, 2024, DHS published a final rule amending 8 CFR
274a.13(d) to permanently increase the automatic extension period for
certain employment authorization and/or EAD validity. The rule became
effective on January 13, 2025.\122\ DHS is retaining the provision
granting an automatic extension for those aliens who had timely filed a
renewal EAD request and who meet the requirements of 8 CFR 274a.13(d).
To avoid confusion between the automatic extension period granted under
8 CFR 274a.13(d) for those renewal EAD requests filed prior to October
30, 2025, and those filed after the publication of this rule, DHS is
amending existing 8 CFR 274a.13(d) by revising the paragraph's heading
to reflect that the paragraph applies to renewal requests properly
filed before October 30, 2025. With this IFR, DHS is not otherwise
amending the provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\122\ See 89 FR 101208 (Dec. 13, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This will ensure that this IFR does not retroactively affect those
aliens who have already timely and properly filed a renewal EAD
application before
[[Page 48812]]
October 30, 2025. For these aliens, an EAD that appears on its face to
be expired (``facially expired'') is considered unexpired under this
IFR for up to 540-days from the expiration date on the front of the EAD
when combined with a Notice of Action (Form I-797C) indicating timely
filing (i.e., the receipt notice for the Form I-765 issued by USCIS has
a receipt date that is prior to the expiration date on the EAD case and
before October 30, 2025) of the renewal application based on the same
employment eligibility category as stated on the facially expired EAD
(or in the case of an EAD and I-797C notice that contains either an A12
or C19 category code, the category codes need not match). In those
cases, the alien's facially expired EAD is considered unexpired for the
up to 540-day period from the date of the EAD.\123\ USCIS will update
the web page on the USCIS website with the appropriate information.
USCIS will also update I-9 Central on the USCIS website and the
Handbook for Employers, M-274, to provide employers and employees with
additional guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\123\ If an adjustment of status applicant's (C09) EAD card is
combined with the advance parole authorization, i.e., the applicant
is issued a combo card (in this case, the EAD itself has an
annotation ``SERVES AS I-512 ADVANCE PAROLE''), the up-to 540-day
automatic extension under 8 CFR 274a.13(d) does not apply to the
advance parole part of the applicant's combo card.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS also reminds the public that the automatic extension applies to
EADs; therefore, if another agency accepts unexpired EADs for any
purposes (such as establishing identity or, in some situations,
immigration status) then the agency should generally accept the EADs
that are automatically extended under 8 CFR 274a.13(d). That is even if
the EAD presented by the alien is facially expired, the EAD is
automatically extended if the alien can present a Form I-797C receipt
notice which indicates that the alien timely filed (i.e., before the
EAD expired) a renewal EAD application before October 30, 2025.
Finally, DHS also reminds aliens that under existing 8 CFR
274a.13(d), DHS retains the ability to otherwise terminate any
employment authorization and/or EAD, or extension period for such
employment authorization and/or EAD, by written notice to the
applicant, by notice to a class of aliens published in the Federal
Register, or as provided by statute or regulation, including 8 CFR
274a.14.
F. Severability
In issuing this IFR, it is DHS's intention that the rule's various
provisions be considered severable from one another to the greatest
extent possible. For instance, if a court of competent jurisdiction
were to hold that ending the practice of automatically extending the
validity of employment authorization and/or EADs for aliens who have
timely filed an application to renew their employment authorization
and/or EAD in certain employment categories may only be applied to a
particular category of renewal EAD applicants or in a particular
circumstance, DHS would intend for the court to leave the remainder of
the rule in place with respect to all other covered persons and
circumstances. DHS' overarching goal is to militate against threats to
national security and public safety and to ensure that employment
authorization and/or EADs are provided only after USCIS conducts
adequate vetting and determines that the alien continues to be eligible
and, when applicable, merits a favorable exercise of discretion.
V. Statutory and Regulatory Requirements
A. Administrative Procedure Act
DHS has issued this IFR without prior notice or public procedure
because DHS is invoking the ``good cause'' exception of the APA. See 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Furthermore, the regulatory amendment involves a
foreign affairs function under 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1). For the same
reasons, a delayed effective date is not required under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3).
1. Good Cause
An agency may forgo notice and comment rulemaking and a delayed
effective date when the agency ``for good cause finds . . . that notice
and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest.'' See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Likewise,
section 553(d)'s requirement of 30-day advance publication may be
waived by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule.
See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
The ``impracticable'' prong of the good cause exception excuses
notice and comment in emergency situations, or where the delay caused
by the APA's notice and comment procedures would result in serious harm
to life, property or an immediate threat to public safety.\124\
Although the good cause exception is ``narrowly construed and only
reluctantly countenanced,'' \125\ it is an important safety valve to be
used where delay caused by notice and comment would do real harm (even
absent an emergency situation).\126\ An agency may find that advance
notice and comment or a delayed effective date is ``impracticable''
when undertaking such procedure would impede due and timely execution
of an important agency function.\127\ For example, courts have
explained that notice and comment rulemaking may be impracticable
where, for instance, air travel security would be unable to address
threats posing a ``possible imminent hazard to aircraft, persons and
property within the United States;'' \128\ if a rule was of life-saving
importance to mine workers in the event of a mine explosion; \129\ if
public safety is jeopardized; \130\ or in case of an urgency related to
an international crisis and national security.\131\ Impracticability is
[[Page 48813]]
inevitably a fact-or-context dependent inquiry.\132\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\124\ See Nat. Res. Def. Council v. Nat'l Highway Traffic Safety
Admin, 894 F.3d 95, 114 (2d Cir. 2018); see Jifry v. FAA, 370 F.3d
1174, 1179 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (finding good cause for the promulgation
of security rules in the aftermath of 9/11 terrorist attacks); see
also Util. Solid Waste Activities Grp. v. EPA, 236 F.3d 749 (D.C.
Cir. 2001).
\125\ See State of New Jersey v. EPA, 626 F.2d 1038, 1045 (D.C.
Cir. 1980); see also Am. Fed. Gov't Emps. v. Block, 655 F.2d 1153,
1156 (D.C. Cir. 1981) (``As the legislative history of the APA makes
clear, moreover, the exceptions at issue here are not `escape
clauses' that may be arbitrarily utilized at the agency's whim.
Rather, use of these exceptions by administrative agencies should be
limited to emergency situations . . .'').
\126\ See U.S. v. Dean, 604 F.3d 1275, 1379 (11th Cir. 2010);
United States Steel Corp. v. United States Environmental Protection
Agency, 595 F.2d 207, 214 (5th Cir. 1979).
\127\ See, e.g., Jifry v. FAA, 370 F.3d 1174, 1179-90 (D.C. Cir.
2004) (excusing APA 553 procedures for a regulation governing the
suspension and revocation of airman certificates of aliens for
security reasons, finding that the agency had legitimate concerns
over the threat of further terrorist acts involving aircrafts, and
that notice and comment would have delayed the ability of TSA and
the FAA to take effective action); see also Tri-Cty. Tel. Ass'n,
Inc. v. FCC, 999 F.3d 714, 719-20 (D.C. Cir. 2021) (per curiam)
(sustaining a finding of good cause because the damage from
hurricanes and upcoming hurricanes created an emergency sufficient
to make notice and comment impracticable to issue funds).
\128\ See Jifry v. FAA, 370 F.3d 1174, 1179 (D.C. Cir. 2004).
\129\ See Council of the S. Mountains, Inc. v. Donovan, 653 F.2d
573, 581 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
\130\ See United States v. Dean, 604 F.3d 1275 (11th Cir. 2010)
(finding that the Attorney General's public safety justification was
good cause for bypassing the notice and comment requirements of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in promulgating interim rule
making the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA)
registration retroactive to all sex offenders convicted prior to
SORNA's enactment).
\131\ See Malek-Marzban v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 653
F.2d 113, 116 (4th Cir. 1981) (Upholding the agency's finding that
notice and comment procedures were impracticable, unnecessary, and
contrary to the public interest when swift action was needed to
regulate the presence of aliens in light of the urgency of the
international crisis.'').
\132\ See Mid-Tex Elec. Co-op., Inc. v. FERC, 822 F.2d 1123,
1132 (D.C. Cir. 1987).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The good cause exception may also apply when affording prior notice
and comment would be contrary to the public interest. See 5 U.S.C.
553(b). This prong is met when the ordinary procedures under the APA--
generally presumed to serve in the public interest--would in fact harm
the interest of the public.\133\ The exception is appropriately invoked
when the timing and the disclosure requirement of the usual procedures
would defeat the purpose of the proposal and harm the public
interest.\134\ This prong of the good cause exception is closely
related to the impracticable prong.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\133\ See Mack Trucks, Inc. v. EPA, 682 F.3d 87, 95 (D.C. Cir.
2012).
\134\ Nat. Res. Def. Council v. Nat'l Highway Traffic Safety
Admin., 894 F.3d 95, 114 (2d Cir. 2018) (``Of course, since notice
and comment are regarded as beneficial to the public interest, for
the exception to apply, the use of notice and comment must actually
harm the public interest'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the reasons explained below, DHS believes that, based on the
totality of the circumstances, it has good cause to bypass ordinary
notice-and-comment procedures because following these public procedures
is impracticable and moving expeditiously is in the best interest of
the public. As outlined throughout this rulemaking and in accordance
with the directive issued by President Trump in his Executive Orders
14159 and 14161,\135\ the influx of migrants that came to the United
States, in part motivated by the attractiveness of interim benefits
such as employment authorization and lengthy automatic extensions, has
created a significant security risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\135\ See E.O. 14161 (Jan. 20, 2025), 90 FR 8451 (Jan. 30,
2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The automatic extension of an EAD grants the benefits of extending
an alien's expired EAD and/or employment authorization merely by filing
a timely renewal EAD application without an eligibility determination
for the renewal, without resolving potential hits of derogatory
information in connection with the aliens, and without a determination
that the employment authorization should be granted in the exercise of
discretion, when applicable. Aliens with derogatory information flagged
during the background check process may nevertheless still obtain an
automatic extension even if derogatory information cannot be reviewed
and resolved, and their application denied, before the alien's EAD
expires. The automatic extension therefore poses a security
vulnerability that could allow bad actors to continue to work and
generate income to potentially finance nefarious activities that pose
an imminent threat to the American public.
The attack by an alien against peaceful demonstrators in Boulder,
Colorado, highlights the critical and urgent need to act to mitigate
the immediate risk posed to innocent Americans. Neither this
administration nor the U.S. public have created this dire public safety
emergency, and the situation is far from speculative, as the recent and
grave events in Boulder, Colorado, have shown.
Thus, in accordance with President Trump's policy determinations
related to foreign nationals, DHS is taking, without delay, immediate
action to ensure that all aliens who are already in the United States
are vetted and screened to the maximum degree possible, so that they do
not receive significant benefits, such as an extension of employment
authorization, without complete and proper vetting.
This rule ends the practice of providing automatic extension of
EADs. An alien will not receive a renewal EAD until the alien has been
thoroughly vetted in the context of the renewal application and USCIS
determines that the alien remains eligible for the immigration benefit
and, when applicable, continues to merit a favorable exercise of
discretion. Therefore, this IFR removes a mechanism that aliens with
malevolent intent can use to support criminal endeavors that pose an
ongoing and imminent threat to public safety and national security. For
renewals filed after the effective date of the rule aliens can no
longer automatically extend, thereby preventing future use of a
facially expired EAD card to obtain a driver's license or other
identity documents which can give access to U.S. airways at airports,
or allow them to obtain other State benefits.
If DHS were to announce the rulemaking, it is self-evident that
aliens would rush to file renewal EAD applications to obtain automatic
extensions before the rule takes effect. More aliens would thus obtain
up to 540-day automatic extension without the proper vetting and
determination by USCIS that the alien continues to be eligible and,
when applicable, continues to merit a favorable exercise of discretion.
Having to go through notice and comment procedures and a 30-day delayed
effective date would therefore defeat the purpose of this regulation
and clearly harm the public interest.
DHS believes also that engaging in the APA's notice and comment
procedures and having a 30-day delayed effective date in this situation
would risk severe harm and would impede the due execution of USCIS's
mission to ensure aliens are appropriately vetted and screened before
USCIS grants a new period of employment authorization and issues
important documents such as a new EAD. If DHS had to engage in advance
notice and comment procedures, it would continue to allow aliens who
wish to fund nefarious activities to continue to work and generate
money. And as described above, these same aliens can obtain valid
identity documents which makes it easier to commit conduct detrimental
to the United States. These aliens are public safety and national
security risks who can use the notice and comment period to timely file
a renewal and be granted an automatic extension even if no longer
eligible for renewal. Therefore, a notice and comment period and a
delayed effective date can result in aliens who are not only
ineligible, but also a threat to the United States, obtaining an
automatic extension of up to 540 days.
DHS believes immediately ending the practice of providing automatic
extensions of EADs based on the filing of a renewal EAD application
improves program integrity by ensuring that employment authorization is
provided in a manner consistent with the laws of the United States and
allows the agency to properly perform its adjudicatory function and
better protect public safety and national security.
Although DHS recognizes that ending the practice of automatically
extending the validity of EADs for renewal applicants may have some
adverse impact on some members of the public, DHS believes that the
measure is a reasonable approach to avoid the harms described in this
rule immediately.\136\ Measures to alleviate security risks for the
U.S. public weigh heavily against the need of aliens and employers to
prepare for the measures--precisely because without immediate
implementation, it will lead to a flood of renewal EAD applications
filed by aliens for the very purpose of obtaining the up to 540-day
automatic extensions, and thus undermining public security and safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\136\ As explained in Section IV.C of this preamble, DHS expects
that overall EAD filing rates (initial and renewals) are likely to
substantially decline, thus reducing the need for aliens to rely on
an automatic extension of their EAD and/or employment authorization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The American people expect the government to keep the public safe
and to take timely action without undue delay, so that events such as
the violence against the Jewish community in Boulder, Colorado, are
prevented in
[[Page 48814]]
the future. For these reasons, DHS has concluded that the good cause
exceptions in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and (d)(3) apply to this IFR and that
delaying the implementation of this rule until the conclusion of
notice-and comment procedures and the delayed effective date would be
impracticable and contrary to public interest.
2. Foreign Affairs
Agencies may forgo notice and comment rulemaking and a delayed
effective date when the rulemaking involves a ``military or foreign
affairs function of the United States.'' See 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1). The
Secretary of State, on February 21, 2025,\137\ determined that ``all
efforts, conducted by any agency of the federal government, to control
the status, entry, and exit of people and the transfer of goods,
services, data, technology, and any other items across the borders of
the United States, constitutes a foreign affairs function of the United
States under the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\137\ See Determination: Foreign Affairs Functions of the United
States, 90 FR 12200 (Mar. 14, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS finds that granting EADs and employment authorization,
including automatic extensions under 8 CFR 274a.13(d), is directly
connected to the alien's status or authorized period of stay because
eligibility for employment authorization and/or documentation is
dependent upon the alien's status or circumstance.\138\ Because the
grant of employment authorization and/or EADs is inherent to the
control of an alien's status, and affects the transfer of goods,
including money, across the U.S. border, it falls within the
Secretary's foreign affairs determination. Eliminating the practice of
providing automatic extensions based on the filing of a renewal EAD
application is also part of the implementation of the President's
foreign policy directives, thus further implicating a foreign affairs
function.\139\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\138\ See 8 CFR 274a.12.
\139\ The Secretary of State's determination references and
implements numerous Presidential actions reflecting the President's
top foreign policy priorities, including E.O. 14161. See
Determination: Foreign Affairs Functions of the United States, 90 FR
12200 (Mar. 14, 2025). As noted, in E.O. 14161, the Secretary of
Homeland Security, in coordination with the Attorney General and the
Secretary of State, is directed to take all appropriate action to
reestablish a uniform baseline for vetting and screening standards
and procedures and vet and screen, to the maximum degree possible,
all aliens, including aliens who are inside the United States. See
also E.O. 14158, Section 16 (directing the Secretary, in
coordination the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, to
take all appropriate action, to rescind policy decisions and align
activities in accordance with the order, including ensuring that
employment authorization is not provided to unauthorized aliens in
the United States); see, e.g., Am. Ass'n of Exps. & Imps.-Textile &
Apparel Grp. v. United States, 751 F.2d 1239, 1249 (Fed. Cir. 1985)
(noting that the foreign affairs exception covers agency actions
``linked intimately with the Government's overall political agenda
concerning relations with another country''); Yassini v. Crosland,
618 F.2d 1356, 1361 (9th Cir. 1980) (because an immigration
directive ``was implementing the President's foreign policy,'' the
action ``fell within the foreign affairs function and good cause
exceptions to the notice and comment requirements of the APA'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, although the text of the APA does not expressly require
an agency to show that the activities related to the rulemaking may
result in ``definitely undesirable international consequences,'' some
courts required such a showing, and DHS can make one here.\140\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\140\ See, e.g., Rajah v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 427, 437 (2d Cir.
2008). Other courts have held that this exemption applies when the
rule in question clearly and directly involves foreign affairs
functions. See, e.g., City of New York v. Permanent Mission of India
to the United States, 618 F.3d 172, 202 (2d. Cir. 2010); see also
Yassini, 618 F.2d 1356, 1360 n.4. See id. This is the case with this
rule, which meets both standards utilized by courts as explained
throughout.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained throughout this preamble, the policy of issuing
unvetted automatic extensions of employment authorization and/or EAD
for up to 540 days, coupled with the prior administration's migration
policies, has caused aliens to stream into this country and to obtain
immigration benefits. It has created a migration and national security
crisis as demonstrated by the recent events in Boulder, Colorado.
Ending the practice of providing automatic extensions of employment
authorization based on the filing of a renewal EAD application and
issuing employment authorization only after having fully assessed
eligibility and the alien's background in the context of the renewal
application is an important piece in the administration's effort to
restore safety and security for the American people and to bring DHS'
practice into conformity with the President's foreign policy related to
immigration.\141\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\141\ See e.g., Nademi v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 679
F.2d 811, 814 (10th Cir. 1982 (finding that ``[i]t was entirely
rational for the Commissioner to alter immigration policy so as to
bring it into conformity with the President's foreign policy toward
Iran.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS also finds, consistent with the Secretary of State's
determination, that ending the practice of issuing automatic extensions
of EADs involves ``the transfer of goods, services, data, technology,
and any other items across the borders of the United States,'' and that
engaging in notice and comment procedures would result in undesirable
international consequences. Aliens are only permitted to work with
appropriate employment authorization. Ending the practice of providing
employment authorization based on the filing of a renewal EAD
application will also impact foreign remittances \142\ sent abroad, to
the extent such remittances include money earned through employment
based on automatically extended employment authorization and/or EADs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\142\ Remittances are financial or in-kind transfers made by
migrants to their families and communities in their countries of
origin. See Remittances, Worldbank.org, https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/migration/brief/remittances-knomad (last visited June 5,
2025). The World Bank estimates remittances, from multiple
countries, sent to aliens' home countries totaled about $656 billion
(that number accounts for those remittances sent to low-and middle-
income countries only but are the equivalent to the Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) of Belgium. See also World Bank, Remittances Slowed in
2023, Expected to Grow Faster in 2024, Migration and Development
Brief 40, June 2024. (hereinafter ``World Bank, June 2024''),
https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099714008132436612/pdf/IDU1a9cf73b51fcad1425a1a0dd1cc8f2f3331ce.pdf (last accessed June 6,
2025); see also FederalReserve.gov, FED Notes, Global Remittances
Cycle (Oscar Moterroso and Diego Vilan), February 27, 2025, https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/global-remittances-cycle-20250227.html (last visited June 5, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Embracing the potential to significantly enhance a country's Gross
Domestic Product (GDP) through international remittances, the world has
long recognized that governments of other countries benefit from their
citizens' migration to other countries,\143\ particularly migration to
the United States. The United States has consistently been among the
top migration destinations,\144\ and top remittance-sending countries
in the
[[Page 48815]]
world.\145\ For example, in 2021, the United States had a total outflow
of $72.7 billion (accounting for 26% of all remittances sent in 2021
world-wide),\146\ $79.15 billion in 2022,\147\ and $85.8 billion in
2023.\148\ Foreign-born nationals represent almost 20 percent of the
U.S. civilian workforce.\149\ Reductions in remittances, including
those stemming from changes in U.S. immigration policies, could be
viewed unfavorably by other countries and lead to international
consequences that other countries find undesirable, as shown, for
example, by recent concerns raised by Mexico.\150\ Ending the practice
of providing employment authorization based on the filing of a renewal
EAD application may impact aliens' ability to provide foreign
remittances, which may include money earned through employment based on
automatically extended employment authorization and/or EADs, and could
lead to a further reduction in remittances and have associated
international consequences that other countries find undesirable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\143\ For example, in 2024, the top five recipient countries for
world-wide remittances were India ($129 billion; 3.5% of the GDP),
followed by Mexico ($68 billion; 3.7% of the GDP), China ($48
billion; 0.2% of the GDP), the Philippines ($40 billion; 8.7% of the
GDP) and Pakistan ($33 billion; 9.4% of the GDP). See World Bank
Blogs, Dilip Ratha, Sonia Plaza and Eung Ju Kim, ``In 2024,
Remittance flows to low- and middle-income countries are expected to
reach $685 billion, larger than FDI and ODA combined'' (Dec. 18,
2024), https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/peoplemove/in-2024-remittance-flows-to-low-and-middle-income-countries-ar (last accessed July 11,
205); see also World Bank Group/Data, Personal Remittances, received
(% of GDP), https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BX.TRF.PWKR.DT.GD.ZS (last accessed July 11, 2025). In 2023,
remittances from multiple countries accounted for over 20% of the
GDP in countries like El Salvador, Honduras, Nepal and Lebanon. See
FederalReserve.gov, FED Notes, Global Remittances Cycle (Oscar
Moterroso and Diego Vilan), February 27, 2025, https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/global-remittances-cycle-20250227.html (last visited June 5, 2025).
\144\ According to 2024 World Bank data, the United States
continues to be by far among the top migration destination
countries, and in March 2024, the known foreign-born population had
reached 51.6 million. See World Bank, June 2024, Table 1.9, Top
Designation Countries, and page 13.
\145\ See, e.g., World Bank, June 2024, page 2 (``In 2023,
remittance flows to LMICs were supported by strong labor markets in
the advanced economies, particularly in the United States, which
stands as the largest source country for remittances and the primary
destination country for migrants.''); see CRS (2023), Remittances:
Background and Issues for the 118th Congress, Summary, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R43217 (last visited June 7, 2025)
(``The United States is the destination for the most international
migrants and, according to the International Monetary Fund and World
Bank, the largest global source of remittances, sending $72.7
billion in 2021'').
\146\ See CRS (2023), Remittances: Background and Issues for the
118th Congress, Summary, https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R43217
(last visited June 7, 2025).
\147\ See World Migration Report (2022), Chapter 2, Migration
and Migrants: A Global Overview International Remittances, page 18,
https://worldmigrationreport.iom.int/what-we-do/world-migration-
report-2024-chapter-2/international-
remittances#:~:text=High%2Dincome%20countries%20are%20almost,data%20h
ave%20not%20been%20updated (last accessed June 7, 2025).
\148\ See Migration Data Portal Remittance outflows for United
States of America at https://www.migrationdataportal.org/americas/key-figures?c=840&i=9181 (last visited June 12, 2025), see also
FederalReserve.gov, FED Notes, Global Remittances Cycle (Oscar
Moterroso and Diego Vilan), February 27, 2025, https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/global-remittances-cycle-20250227.html (last visited June 5, 2025).
\149\ See U.S. Department of Labor (May 20, 2025), Economic News
Release, Labor Force Characteristics of Foreign-born Workers,
Summary, https://www.bls.gov/news.release/forbrn.nr0.htm (last
accessed June 6, 2025). In 2024, the foreign-born labor force
accounted for 19.2 percent of the U.S. civilian labor force, up from
18.6 percent in 2023. See id. The data presented did not yet account
fully for the influx of aliens that has taken place at the border
over the course of 2023 and 2024, including those paroled into the
United States to seek asylum and who were given EADs.
\150\ See, e.g., NewsMedia Newsroom (June 7, 2025), Remittances
to Mexico Collapse as Trump Cracks Down on Illegal Immigration,
https://yournews.com/2025/06/07/3490549/remittances-to-mexico-collapse-as-trump-cracks-down-on-illegal/ (last visited June 10,
2025) (``According to the Bank of Mexico, remittances in April
totaled $4.76 billion--down $380 million from March's $5.14 billion.
That 12.1% year-over-year decline from April 2024 marks the steepest
drop in more than a decade, last matched in September 2012. Mexican
President Claudia Sheinbaum addressed the downturn during a press
conference, saying her administration would analyze the causes
behind the continued drop and would urge U.S. lawmakers to reject a
proposed 3.5% tax on remittance payments. A diplomatic delegation is
set to travel to Washington to oppose the levy.''); see also The
Latin American Post (Jan. 29, 2025), Remittances to Mexico Could
Plunge, https://latinamericanpost.com/economy-en/remittances-to-mexico-could-plunge-by-13-billion-under-trump/ (last visited June
16, 2025); see OFR America, How U.S. Immigration and Tax Policies
Could Affect Remittance Outflows (Mar. 26, 2025), https://orfamerica.org/orf-america-comments/us-immigration-and-tax-policies-remittance-outflows (last visited July 11, 2025) (``One effect of
the broader U.S. crackdown on both documented and undocumented
migration is expected to be the decline of remittance outflows, with
consequences for countries heavily reliant on these money flows.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the United States,\151\ as well as other countries
have long been occupied with detecting and disrupting financing of
terrorist and other transnational criminal activities, including
financing of such activities through remittances.\152\ Remittances may
pose money laundering and terrorist financing (ML/TF) risks, depending
on the context of the sender and/or recipient countries as well as the
scale and the characteristics of criminal activities and terrorism in
these transactions.'' \153\ If these risks are not mitigated
effectively, ``a remittance corridor could be abused by criminals,
organized crime groups, terrorists, and terrorist organizations,
potentially undermining national security, social order, and economic
stability on both sides of the corridor.'' \154\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\151\ See Congressional Research Service (CRS), Congress.gov,
Remittances: Background and Issues for the 118th Congress (updated
May 10, 2023), https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R43217 (last
accessed June 7, 2025).
\152\ See CRS, Congress.gov, Remittances: Background and Issues
for the 118th Congress, page 7 https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R43217 (last accessed June 7, 2025) (``Global standards for
remittances have emerged over the past decade, largely due to
concerns about unregulated money transfer services and their use in
planning the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. International
efforts have been negotiated at the Financial Action Task Force, an
inter-governmental body comprising 34 countries, including the
United States, and two regional organizations, that develops and
promotes policies and standards to combat money laundering and
terrorist financing.'').
\153\ See World Bank, Financial Stability Board (Sept. 2021), A
Draft Framework for Money Laundering/Terrorist Financing Risk
Assessment of Remittance Corridor, https://www.fsb.org/uploads/P131221-1.pdf (last accessed June 7, 2025).
\154\ See id; see also United Nations, Guidance for a risk-based
approach for remittance services providers, https://migrantmoney.uncdf.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/RBA-Guide_April2025.pdf (last accessed June 7, 2025) (recognizing that
``[h]owever, Remittance services are potentially at risk of being
misused for money laundering and financing terrorism activities. The
speed with which a remittance transaction takes place means that
these platforms are vulnerable to abuse by those wishing to use them
for money laundering and terrorism financing'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aliens who seek to support nefarious activities detrimental to the
United States and its allies, such as money laundering and terrorism,
could currently continue to work and generate money in the United
States for up to 540 days without vetting in the context of their
renewal application. Ending the practice of providing automatic
extensions of employment authorization and EADs based on the filing of
a renewal EAD application to enhance vetting and determine that an
alien remains eligible and, when applicable, continues to merit a
favorable exercise of discretion, strengthens DHS' ability to detect
and deter bad actors from financing nefarious activities through
remittances with money earned while automatically employment
authorized.
Vetting of foreign nationals, particularly those aliens coming from
regions or nations with identified security risk, as well as economic
impacts on other countries on account of U.S. immigration policies,
involves more cautious and sensitive consideration of those matters
which could easily impact relations with other governments.\155\ Having
to engage in notice and comment rulemaking on such matters, including
DHS's position on which country's nationals are vetted and to what
extent USCIS should issue automatic extensions of EADs, may lead to the
disclosure of sensitive intelligence related to the reasons why the
administration is taking this step in the first place.\156\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\155\ See, e.g., Rajah v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 427, 437 (2d Cir.
2008); see also Am. Ass'n of Exporters & Importers v. United States,
751 F.2d1239, 1249 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (quoting H. Rep. No. 1980, 69th
Cong., 2d Sess. 23 (1946); S. Rep. No. 752, 69th Cong., 1st Sess. 13
(1945) (Providing that the purpose of the exemption was to allow
more cautious and sensitive consideration of those matters which
``so affect relations with other Governments that, for example,
public rule-making provisions would provoke definitely undesirable
international consequences.'').
\156\ See, e.g., Rajah v. Mukasey, 544 F.3d 427, 437 (2d Cir.
2008) (finding that having to go through notice and comment
procedures would have at least three definitely undesirable
international consequences that would impair relations with other
countries, such as revealing intelligence when having to explain why
a nation's citizen is a threat, having to resolve public debate over
why some citizens of particular countries were potential dangers to
U.S. security, and the fact that notice and comment rulemaking is
slow and cumbersome, thus, diminishing the United States' ability to
collect intelligence regarding, and enhancing defenses in
anticipation of, a potential attack by foreign terrorists).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48816]]
Because this rule clearly implicates the foreign affairs policy of
the United States and notice and comment procedure as well as a 30-day
delayed effective date would definitely result in undesirable
international consequences, DHS is issuing this rule without engaging
in notice and public procedures and with an immediate effective date.
B. Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), 13563
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review), and 14192 (Unleashing
Prosperity Through Deregulation)
E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review) direct agencies to assess the costs
and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits.
Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying costs
and benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting
flexibility. Executive Order 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation) directs agencies to significantly reduce the private
expenditures required to comply with Federal regulations and provides
that ``any new incremental costs associated with the new regulations
shall, to the extent permitted by law be offset by the elimination of
existing costs associated with at least 10 prior regulations.''
This rule has been designated a ``significant regulatory action''
and economically significant as defined under section 3(f)(1) of E.O.
12866, because its annual effects on the economy may exceed $100
million in any year of the analysis. Accordingly, this rule has been
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
This interim final rule is not an Executive Order 14192 regulatory
action because it is being issued with respect to an immigration-
related function of the United States. The rule's primary direct
purpose is to implement or interpret the immigration laws of the United
States (as described in INA sec. 101(a)(17), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17)) or
any other function performed by the U.S. Federal Government with
respect to aliens. See OMB Memorandum M-25-20, ``Guidance Implementing
Section 3 of Executive Order 14192, titled ``Unleashing Prosperity
Through Deregulation'' (Mar. 26, 2025).
This IFR amends DHS regulations to end the practice of
automatically extending the validity of employment authorization
documents (Forms I-766 or EADs) for aliens who have timely filed an
application to renew their EAD in certain employment authorization
categories. The purpose of this change is to prioritize the proper
vetting and screening of aliens before granting a new period of
employment authorization and/or a new EAD. This IFR does not impact the
validity of EADs that were automatically extended prior to October 30,
2025. In previous rules providing for the automatic extension of EADs
based on the timely filing of a renewal EAD application, DHS attempted
to stabilize aliens' earnings and avoid labor turnover costs of
employers; however, the Department has shifted focus to prioritizing
public safety and national security.
1. Affected Population
Due to factors contributing to a high degree of uncertainty, DHS
cannot estimate the number of renewal EAD applicants who will be
affected by this rule. When DHS adjudicates and approves EADs before
their expiration date, this IFR results in no quantifiable impacts to
aliens and their employers. DHS anticipates that due to external DHS
actions for populations that may have otherwise applied for EADs, the
number of initial and renewal EAD applications will be lower than in
recent years.\157\ For more information on these actions, see Section
IV. B. of this preamble. DHS assumes this reduced workload on USCIS
could potentially eliminate the EAD backlog. Accordingly, under this
scenario, this IFR would be less likely to result in lapses in
employment authorization. If USCIS continues to have a backlog and is
unable to adjudicate renewal EAD applications before their expiration,
then this IFR, by ending the practice of providing automatic extensions
based on the timely filing of an EAD renewal application, would result
in temporary lapses in employment authorization and/or EADs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\157\ As an example of the potential reduction in the number of
EAD applications from external DHS actions, DHS estimated that
approximately 532,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans
that were part of the Parole Processes are no longer eligible for
work authorization. Many of these aliens may have applied for an
EAD, but will no longer be eligible, alleviating USCIS EAD
adjudication resources. (90 FR 13611, March 25, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS is not able to estimate the population that would be impacted
by this IFR if recent external actions do not eliminate the backlog.
However, DHS describes the impacted EAD renewal population that would
have been subject to automatic extensions from prior recent backlogs.
As detailed earlier in the preamble,\158\ DHS has previously published
two temporary final rules (2022, 2024) and a final rule (2024). DHS
previously estimated a population that would have lapsed in the
hypothetical absence of the 2024 final rule, and the 2024 and 2022
temporary final rules. In the 2024 final rule, DHS estimated a
population range of 293,000 to 449,000 pending renewal EAD applicants
in the categories eligible for automatic extension would have
experienced a lapse in employment and DHS assumes this is a reasonable
lower bound estimate.\159\ This estimate is a lower bound because of
this IFR's removal of the 180 day automatic extension in addition to
the 540 day extension, within the TFRs and 2024 Final Rule. Ending the
practice of providing automatic extensions of employment authorization
and/or EADs, whether up to 540 days or up to 180 days, could result in
more EADs lapsing. If USCIS is not able to process EAD renewal
applications before the associated EAD expires, a larger population
could experience a temporary lapse in their employment authorization
and/or EADs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\158\ See Section (III)(C) Background & Purpose: Automatic
Extension of Employment Authorization and Documentation.
\159\ See Table 8 Summary of Impacts, p.101246, Automatic
Extension Period of Employment Authorization and Documentation for
Certain Employment Authorization Document Renewal Applicants. In the
2024, Final Rule, DHS estimated between 306,000 and 468,000 renewals
EAD applicants would experience a lapse. DHS then adjusted this
population based on unemployment conditions in the economy. 89 FR
101208, December 13, 2024. https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2024-28584/p-748.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DHS received an average of approximately 52,800 additional
automatic extension-eligible renewal EAD applications per month in FY
2023. These additional renewal applications added to the backlog, given
that USCIS completed approximately 49,100 automatic extension-eligible
renewal EAD applications per month at that time.\160\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\160\ See 89 FR 101208 (December 13, 2024) p. 101246 footnotes
167 thru 168.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is difficult to accurately project future processing times. As
stated in the 2024 final rule, processing times for EAD applications
have fluctuated over the years. DHS cannot predict future fluctuations
because they are dependent on variables that may change or are
unanticipated, such as changes in application filing rates and
processing
[[Page 48817]]
efficiencies.\161\ DHS lacks data to accurately assess evolving
circumstances and unknown factors that contribute to backlogs.
Accordingly, given the large amount of uncertainty around these
factors, DHS is unable to produce a tenable population estimate for the
future population that may be affected by this IFR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\161\ See Preamble, Section III.D. for reasons the processing
times and backlogs have increased resulting in the 2024 TFR and 2024
Final rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Impacts of Ending the Practice of Providing EAD Automatic Extensions
The purpose of this rulemaking is to prioritize the proper vetting
and screening of aliens before granting a new period of employment
authorization and/or a new EAD by ending the practice of automatically
extending the validity of employment authorization and/or EADs for
aliens who have timely filed an application to renew their EAD in
certain employment authorization categories. While prior automatic
extensions reduced the risk of employers employing aliens with lapsed
authorizations, this IFR will also reduce the risk that affected
employers will continue to employ an alien who is no longer authorized
to work. For example, while within their automatic extension period, an
alien's application could have been adjudicated and denied. The
obligation is on the alien employee to notify his or her employer that
he or she is no longer work authorized, which puts employers at risk of
unknowingly employing an unauthorized alien. Absent this IFR, employers
assess the applicability of the automatic extension based in part on a
non-secure document (such as Form I-797C, Notice of Action, which is
printed on plain paper). With this IFR ending the practice of providing
automatic extensions based on the timely filing of a renewal EAD
application, DHS is reducing the potential for fraud and instances
where employers unknowingly employ aliens beyond their work
authorization and/or EAD validity.
This rule reverses some of the impacts described in the prior
automatic extension rules. Employment lapses could result in cost and
transfer impacts such as lost compensation to workers, transfers
between workers losing their work authorizations to replacement
workers, employers' lost productivity when they are not able to quickly
replace employees with lapses, and turnover costs for employers to find
replacement employees. In the following section, DHS discusses prior
calculations of these impacts but is not able to quantify these impacts
due to uncertainty.
Based on the 2024 final rule,\162\ DHS estimated that the rate of
compensation for individuals ranged from $20.26 to $62.21 per hour. To
estimate the earnings impacts of employment lapses, DHS would then
multiply this hourly compensation rate by the employed population with
lapsing EADs, average work hours per week, and the duration of lapsed
employment authorizations.\163\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\162\ Automatic Extension Period of Employment Authorization and
Documentation for Certain Employment Authorization Document Renewal
Applicants, 89 FR 101253, 101254 (Dec. 13, 2024).
\163\ See 89 FR 101255 for a description of these values and
calculations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The employment lapse impacts could result in either transfers of
compensation to other workers or costs to employers, depending on
employers' ability to replace workers with lapsed EADs. In cases where,
in the absence of an automatic extension period, businesses would have
been able to easily find reasonable labor substitutes for the lapsing
EAD, this rule results in transfers of the earnings of affected EAD
holders to others, who might fill in for or replace the renewal EAD
applicants during their earnings lapse. In cases where, absent the
automatic extension period, businesses may not easily find reasonable
labor substitutes for lapsed EADs, employers may incur lost
productivity and turnover costs or other disruptions. DHS assumes the
value of lost productivity is at least as high as the compensation the
employer would have paid the affected EAD holder.
The employer turnover cost is generally reported as a share of
annual wages.\164\ DHS would calculate the turnover costs by
multiplying the number of impacted lapse employees by the hourly wage
rate, hours worked per year, and the share of annual wages. In the 2024
Final Rule, the unloaded hourly wage ranged from $13.97 to $42.90.\165\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\164\ In the 2024 Automatic Extension Temporary Final Rule, DHS
estimated the turnover costs as a percentage of annual wages, using
a mean of 23 percent (Table 11). Temporary Increase of the Automatic
Extension Period of Employment Authorization and Documentation for
Certain Employment Authorization Document Renewal Applicants, 89 FR
24669 (April 8, 2024).
\165\ See 89 FR 101253 (April 8, 2024). This wage range does not
include benefits and is not the equivalent of the hourly
compensation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, if employers are unable to replace affected workers, there
could be changes in transfers from taxes that would have been paid by
affected aliens and their employers. It is challenging to quantify
Federal and State income tax impacts of employment lapses because
individual and household tax situations vary widely as do the various
State income tax rates. To calculate the potential transfers impact on
employment taxes, DHS would estimate the decrease in Medicare and
Social Security taxes, which have a combined tax rate of 7.65 percent
(6.2 percent and 1.45 percent, respectively).\166\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\166\ The various employment taxes are discussed in more detail,
see Internal Revenue Service, ``Understanding Employment Taxes,''
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/understanding-employment-taxes (last updated May 7, 2025). See
Internal Revenue
Service ``Publication 15,'' ``(Circular E), Employer's Tax
Guide'' (June 7, 2024), https://www.irs.gov/publications/p15 for
specific information on employment tax rates. Relevant calculation:
(6.2 percent Social Security +1.45 percent Medicare) x 2 employee
and employer losses = 15.3 percent total estimated public tax
impact.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, DHS acknowledges that an impact of this IFR is an
increased risk of loss of work authorization for aliens and employers.
To the extent that aliens can file their renewals earlier and DHS is
able to reduce the backlog, reductions in this uncertainty are
expected.
DHS is aware of the importance of employment authorization and
evidence of employment authorization for applicants' and their
families' livelihoods, as well as their U.S. employers' continuity of
operations and financial health. DHS also is cognizant of the potential
detrimental impact that gaps in employment authorization may have on an
applicant's eligibility for future immigration benefits should the
applicant engage in unauthorized employment during the gap,\167\ and on
their U.S. employers who must examine unexpired documents that evidence
their employees' employment eligibility and attest that their employees
are authorized to work in the United States.\168\ DHS also acknowledges
that backlogs and prolonged processing times for renewal EAD
applications are not the fault of applicants, but nonetheless could
have significant adverse consequences for applicants, their families,
and their employers in the absence of this IFR. DHS will also continue
to work to reduce frivolous, fraudulent or otherwise non-meritorious
EAD filings to free up adjudicatory and other resources to better
ensure national security and program integrity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\167\ With certain exceptions, if a noncitizen continues to
engage in or accepts unauthorized employment, the individual may be
barred from adjusting status to that of a lawful permanent resident
under INA 245. See INA secs. 245(c)(2) and (8), 8 U.S.C. 1255(c)(2)
and (8).
\168\ See, e.g., INA sec. 274A(b)(1), 8 U.S.C. 1324a(b)(1), 8
CFR 274a.2(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 48818]]
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 169
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\169\ Although a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required
under 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. when a rule is not subject to notice-and-
comment rulemaking, the agency has nevertheless prepared this
statement for the benefit of the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small businesses, small governmental jurisdictions, and
small organizations during the development of their rules. The term
``small entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit
organizations that are independently owned and operated and are not
dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with
populations of less than 50,000. The RFA's regulatory flexibility
analysis requirements apply only to those rules for which an agency is
required to publish a general notice of proposed rulemaking pursuant to
5 U.S.C. 553 or any other law.\170\ DHS did not issue a notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action. Accordingly, DHS is not required
to either certify that this IFR would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities nor conduct a
regulatory flexibility analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\170\ See 5 U.S.C. 604(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, this interim final rule directly regulates individuals,
and individuals are not defined as ``small entities'' by the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. The rule indirectly impacts certain employers if, in
the future, processing times exceed the expiration dates of EADs.
DHS is unsure what backlogs may continue in the future; however,
DHS anticipates due to other DHS actions, described in Section IV. B.
of this preamble, it is possible the backlog may end. If the backlogs
are eliminated outside of this rule, employers would no longer be
indirectly impacted by this final rule.
In the alternate scenario of a backlog in renewal EAD processing,
some employers could experience indirect costs or transfer effects. The
transfers would be in the form of lost compensation (wages and
benefits). A portion of this lost compensation might be transferred
from renewal EAD applicants to others who are currently in the U.S.
labor force. A portion of the effects of this rule would also be borne
by companies that would have continued to employ renewal EAD applicants
had they been in the labor market longer; however, they were unable to
find available replacement labor. These companies may incur an indirect
cost, as they will be losing the productivity and potential profits the
EAD applicant would have provided. Companies may also incur opportunity
costs by having to choose the next best alternative to the immediate
labor the applicant would have provided and by having to pay workers to
work overtime hours. DHS does not know what this next best alternative
may be for those companies. If companies can find reasonable labor
substitutes for the positions the alien occupied, they will bear little
or no costs. Conversely, if companies are unable to find reasonable
labor substitutes for the position the applicant would have maintained
then there would be no transfers and may experience turnover costs or
other disruptions.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) is intended, among
other things, to curb the practice of imposing unfunded Federal
mandates on State, local, and Tribal governments.\171\ Title I of UMRA
provides certain exceptions to its requirements and definitions. UMRA
does not apply to rules from independent regulatory agencies or rules
issued with no notice of proposed rulemaking. UMRA exempts legislative
provisions and rules relating to individual constitutional rights,
discrimination, emergency assistance, grant accounting and auditing
procedures, national security, treaty obligations, and elements of
Social Security legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\171\ The term ``Federal mandate'' means a Federal
intergovernmental mandate or a Federal private sector mandate. See 2
U.S.C. 1502(1) and 658(5) and (6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title II of UMRA requires each Federal agency to prepare a written
statement assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed
rule, or final rule for which USCIS published a proposed rule, which
includes any Federal mandate that may result in a $100 million or more
expenditure (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year by State,
local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector. See 2 U.S.C. 1532(a). This rule is exempt from the written
statement requirement because DHS did not publish a notice of proposed
rulemaking for this rule. This final rule does not contain a Federal
mandate as the term is defined under UMRA.\172\ Therefore, the
requirements of Title II of UMRA do not apply, thus DHS has not
prepared a statement under UMRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\172\ See 2 U.S.C. 1502(1), 658(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(Congressional Review Act)
The Congressional Review Act (CRA) was included as part of the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) by
subtitle E of SBREFA, Public Law 104-121, tit. II, 110 Stat. 847, 868,
et seq. This IFR meets the criteria set forth in 5 U.S.C. 804(2)
because it is likely to result in an annual effect on the economy of
$100 million or more. See 5 U.S.C. 804(2)(A). DHS has complied with the
CRA's reporting requirements and has sent this rule to Congress and to
the Comptroller General as required by 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1). As stated in
this preamble, DHS has found that there is good cause to make this rule
effective immediately upon publication. 5 U.S.C. 808(2).
F. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
This IFR will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government. Therefore, in accordance with section 6 of Executive
Order 13132, Federalism, 64 FR 43255 (Aug. 4, 1999), it is determined
that this IFR does not have sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement.
G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This IFR is drafted and reviewed in accordance with E.O. 12988,
Civil Justice Reform. This IFR was written to provide a clear legal
standard for affected conduct and was reviewed carefully to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguities, so as to minimize litigation and undue
burden on the Federal Court system. DHS has determined that this rule
meets the applicable standards provided in section 3 of E.O. 12988.
H. Family Assessment
DHS has reviewed this rule in line with the requirements of section
654 of the Treasury General Appropriations Act, 1999.\173\ DHS has
systematically reviewed the criteria specified in section 654(c)(1), by
evaluating whether this regulatory action: (1) impacts the stability or
safety of the family, particularly in terms of marital
[[Page 48819]]
commitment; (2) impacts the authority of parents in the education,
nurture, and supervision of their children; (3) helps the family
perform its functions; (4) affects disposable income or poverty of
families and children; (5) only financially impacts families, if at
all, to the extent such impacts are justified; (6) may be carried out
by State or local government or by the family; or (7) establishes a
policy concerning the relationship between the behavior and personal
responsibility of youth and the norms of society. If the agency
determines a regulation may negatively affect family well-being, then
the agency must provide an adequate rationale for its implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\173\ See Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With this IFR, DHS is discontinuing the practice of providing an
automatic extension of the EAD or employment authorization upon the
filing of a renewal EAD application because it grants a benefit without
an eligibility determination, without completing vetting and screening
checks and without resolving the potential hits and derogatory
information. DHS has determined that the implementation of this
regulation may potentially negatively affect family well-being as
outlined in section 654 of the Treasury General Appropriations Act,
1999. Specifically, this rule has the potential to affect disposable
income of families and children and therefore, also impacts the family
financially. However, DHS believes that it has an adequate rationale
for its implementation. DHS believes that the consequences of the
rule--the possibility that an alien is not authorized to work during
the pendency of the alien's renewal EAD application and thus, that
families have less disposable income--are justified in light of the
national security and public safety risk that automatically issuing
immigration benefits, such as an automatic extension of an EAD, poses
to the public. Additionally, DHS is not removing the alien's ability to
obtain a renewal of their EAD and/or employment authorization; DHS is
also not preventing eligible aliens from obtaining EADs for purposes
such as proof of identity. The issuance of a renewal EAD depends in
large part on the applicant's timely application for a renewal EAD. The
proper planning by the alien, and monitoring of EAD processing times,
allows the alien to timely file a renewal EAD application as soon as
eligible which may mitigate the risk that the alien could experience a
lapse in their EAD validity and have to temporarily stop working. For
these reasons, DHS believes that the benefit this rule provides by
improving the security posture as it relates to the issuance automatic
extensions outweighs the impact, if any, on families and their
children. Better protecting public safety and national security before
providing immigration benefits, such as automatic extensions of
employment authorization based on the filing of a renewal EAD
application, is paramount.
I. Executive Order 13175
This IFR will not have Tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
J. National Environmental Policy Act
DHS and its components analyze final actions to determine whether
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.,
applies and, if so, what degree of analysis is required. DHS Directive
023-01, Rev. 01 ``Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act''
(Directive 023-01) and Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01 Revision 01,
Implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act'' (Instruction
Manual) \174\ established the policies and procedures that DHS and its
components use to comply with NEPA and the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing NEPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\174\ The Instruction Manual contains DHS' procedures for
implementing NEPA and was issued Nov. 6, 2014. See DHS, Office of
the Chief Readiness Support Officer, National Environmental Policy
Act Compliance, https://www.dhs.gov/ocrso/eed/epb/nepa (last updated
Apr. 14, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEPA allows Federal agencies to establish, in their NEPA
implementing procedures, categories of actions (``categorical
exclusions'') that experience has shown do not, individually or
cumulatively, have a significant effect on the human environment and,
therefore, do not require an environmental assessment or environmental
impact statement.\175\ The Instruction Manual, Appendix A lists the DHS
Categorical Exclusions.\176\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\175\ See 42 U.S.C. 4336(a)(2), 4336e(1).
\176\ See Instruction Manual, Appendix A, Table 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under DHS NEPA implementing procedures, for an action to be
categorically excluded, it must satisfy each of the following three
conditions: (1) The entire action clearly fits within one or more of
the categorical exclusions; (2) the action is not a piece of a larger
action; and (3) no extraordinary circumstances exist that create the
potential for a significant environmental effect.\177\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\177\ Instruction Manual 023-01 at V.B(2)(a)-(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This IFR amends DHS regulations discontinuing the practice of
providing an automatic extension of the EAD or employment authorization
upon the filing of a renewal EAD application. DHS is ending the
practice of providing automatic extension of EADs to prioritize the
completion of vetting and eligibility screening of aliens before
granting a new period of employment authorization and/or a new EAD.
This final rule is strictly administrative and procedural. DHS has
reviewed this IFR and finds that no significant impact on the
environment, or any change in environmental effect will result from the
amendments being promulgated in this final rule.
Accordingly, DHS finds that the promulgation of this final rule's
amendments to current regulations clearly fits within categorical
exclusion A3 established in DHS's NEPA implementing procedures as an
administrative change with no change in environmental effect, is not
part of a larger Federal action, and does not present extraordinary
circumstances that create the potential for a significant environmental
effect.
K. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not propose new or revisions to existing
``collection[s] of information'' as that term is defined under the
paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, 44 U.S.C. chapter
35, and its implementing regulations, 5 CFR part 13200. As this IFR
will only end the practice of providing automatic extension of EAD
validity and/or employment authorization, USCIS does not anticipate a
need to update the EAD application or to collect additional information
beyond what is already collected on the EAD application.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 274a
Administrative practice and procedure, Aliens, Cultural exchange
program, Employment, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Students.
Regulatory Amendments
Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, the
Secretary of Homeland Security amends 8 CFR part 274a as follows:
[[Page 48820]]
PART 274a--CONTROLS OF EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS
0
1. The authority citation for part 274a continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1105a, 1324a; 48 U.S.C. 1806;
Pub. L. 101-410, 104 Stat. 890, as amended by Pub. L. 114-74, 129
Stat. 599; Title VII of Pub. L. 110-229, 122 Stat. 754; Pub. L. 115-
218, 132 Stat. 1547; 8 CFR part 2.
0
2. Amend Sec. 274a.13 by:
0
a. Revising the heading of paragraph (d).
0
b. Adding paragraph (e).
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 274a.13 Application for employment authorization.
* * * * *
(d) Renewal application filed before October 30, 2025--* * *
(e) Renewal application filed on or after October 30, 2025. Except
as otherwise provided by law, paragraph (d) of this section, or in an
applicable Federal Register notice regarding procedures for renewing
TPS-related employment documentation, the validity period of an expired
or expiring Employment Authorization Document and, for aliens who are
not employment authorized incident to status, also the attendant
employment authorization, will not be automatically extended by a
request for renewal. An Employment Authorization Document and, if
applicable, the attendant employment authorization, will expire as
follows:
(1) For aliens who are employment authorized incident to status
pursuant to Sec. 274a.12(a), unless otherwise provided by law, the
Employment Authorization Document will expire on the day after the end
validity date on the Employment Authorization Document. The employment
authorization will expire or terminate upon the expiration or
termination of the alien's status or circumstance.
(2) For aliens who are employment authorized pursuant to Sec.
274a.12(c), the Employment Authorization Document will expire, and the
attendant employment authorization will terminate, the day after the
end validity date on the Employment Authorization Document, pursuant to
Sec. 274a.14, or, for TPS applicants, pursuant to section 244 of the
Act and 8 CFR part 244.
Kristi Noem,
Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2025-19702 Filed 10-29-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-97-P