For audio listeners, you can listen to our audio version of the News Digest here. You can also join our Immigration News Digest Newsletter here.

• State Department Expands Premium B-1/B-2 Visa Appointment Pilot
• TPS Update: Protections End for Ethiopia and Somalia
• BIA Changes Advance Parole Rules for Applicants With Prior Unlawful Presence
• USCIS Extends Work Authorization for El Salvador, Ukraine, and Sudan
• Appeals Court Allows Limited USCIS Re Review of Approved Benefits
• Higher Education Groups Sue to Block New Fixed Admission Rule 

State Department Expands Premium B-1/B-2 Visa Appointment Pilot

The U.S. Department of State has expanded its fee-based pilot program that allows certain B-1/B-2 visitor visa applicants to obtain an earlier consular interview for an additional $750 fee. Effective August 18, 2026, the program now covers additional posts across the Americas. 

The pilot initially launched in Mexico and has expanded to include: 

• U.S. Embassy and consulates throughout Canada 
• Bogota, Colombia 
• Guatemala City, Guatemala 
• San Jose, Costa Rica 
• Tegucigalpa, Honduras 

Applicants who have completed Form DS-160 and paid the standard visa application fee may select a premium appointment, when available, that is scheduled within 10 business days. The State Department has emphasized that appointment quantities will be limited and additional consular posts may be added before the pilot concludes on December 31, 2026. 

Importantly, the $750 fee only expedites access to the visa interview. It does not accelerate adjudication, security screening, administrative processing, passport return, or visa issuance, and it provides no advantage in determining visa eligibility. 

Applicants considering appointments outside their country of nationality or residence should also review current restrictions on third country national processing before making travel arrangements. 

The State Department will evaluate the program after December 31 to determine whether the service should continue and whether the fee should be adjusted. 

Impact: The expansion gives business and personal travelers in more locations an additional option for securing an earlier visa interview. Employers should remember that the premium service improves appointment access only, so international travel plans should still account for possible post interview processing delays.

TPS Update: Protections End for Ethiopia and Somalia

Recent federal court and Department of Homeland Security actions have ended Temporary Protected Status and related employment authorization for beneficiaries from Ethiopia and Somalia, creating immediate Form I-9 considerations for employers.

Ethiopia: A federal district court in Massachusetts lifted its stay blocking DHS from terminating Ethiopia’s TPS designation. USCIS subsequently announced that TPS based employment authorization terminated effective August 18, 2026, despite an earlier extension indicating that certain EADs would remain valid through August 19. The change affects qualifying TPS EADs with original expiration dates of June 12, 2024 or December 12, 2025. The underlying lawsuit will continue on constitutional grounds.

Somalia: DHS has also terminated Somalia’s TPS designation effective August 14, 2026. USCIS had previously issued a series of brief EAD extensions while litigation continued, but qualifying Somalia TPS EADs are no longer valid based solely on the terminated designation.

Both developments follow the Supreme Court’s June 2026 decision allowing TPS terminations for Haiti and Syria to proceed. That ruling has influenced ongoing litigation involving several other TPS designations.

Employers with affected workers must determine whether employees possess another valid basis for employment authorization. If not, they may not continue working after their TPS based authorization expires.

Impact: Employers should promptly identify affected Ethiopia and Somalia TPS beneficiaries and complete any required Form I-9 reverification. Employees who cannot present alternative evidence of valid employment authorization may no longer continue working, making immediate review of affected records particularly important. 

BIA Changes Advance Parole Rules for Applicants With Prior Unlawful Presence

The Board of Immigration Appeals has issued a significant decision changing how advance parole travel is treated for individuals who previously accrued unlawful presence. In Matter of Delcarmen Lara, the BIA expressly overruled its longstanding precedent in Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly. 

For more than a decade, Arrabally provided that travel on advance parole did not constitute a “departure” that triggered the three year or ten year unlawful presence bars. Under the new decision, advance parole travel is now considered a departure for purposes of those bars. 

This does not mean all adjustment of status applicants should avoid international travel. The unlawful presence bars generally require an individual to have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence before departing. A properly filed adjustment application generally places an applicant in a period of authorized stay, meaning additional unlawful presence typically does not accrue while the I 485 remains pending. 

The critical question is therefore how much unlawful presence an individual accumulated before filing for adjustment or entering another protected period. Those who accumulated more than 180 days may now trigger a three year bar upon departure, while one year or more may trigger a ten year bar. 

Importantly, the BIA made its new interpretation prospective, providing protection for prior advance parole travel undertaken under the former rule. 

Impact: Advance parole should no longer be viewed by itself as assurance that travel will not trigger unlawful presence consequences. Employers and adjustment applicants with complex immigration histories should obtain an individualized review before international travel, while applicants who maintained lawful status before filing may see little or no practical change. 

USCIS Extends Work Authorization for El Salvador, Ukraine, and Sudan

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has issued updated employment authorization guidance for certain Temporary Protected Status beneficiaries from El Salvador, Ukraine, and Sudan with pending TPS based EAD renewal applications. 

Affected employees should receive USCIS notices confirming the automatic extension of their Employment Authorization Documents. When presented with an eligible EAD and the applicable USCIS extension notice, the documents may serve as List A evidence of identity and continued employment authorization for Form I-9 purposes. 

The new employment authorization dates are: 

• El Salvador: Extended through September 9, 2026 

• Ukraine: Extended through October 19, 2026 

• Sudan: Extended through October 19, 2026 

For qualifying employees, employers should use the applicable new expiration date when completing or updating Form I-9 and when creating a case in E Verify. Employers may also retain the relevant USCIS alert and country specific TPS guidance with the employee’s Form I-9 documentation. 

The extensions apply only to qualifying TPS beneficiaries with eligible prior EAD expiration dates and pending renewal applications. Employers should therefore review the employee’s documentation carefully rather than assuming that all TPS beneficiaries from these countries receive the extension. 

USCIS has previously documented the underlying TPS designations and extensions for these countries, including El Salvador and Sudan.

Impact: The extensions provide additional employment continuity for qualifying TPS beneficiaries while pending EAD renewals are processed. Employers should identify affected workers, review USCIS extension notices, and update Form I-9 and E Verify records with the appropriate expiration date to maintain compliance.

Appeals Court Allows Limited USCIS Re Review of Approved Benefits

A federal appeals court has partially paused a lower court ruling that struck down several USCIS policies affecting foreign nationals from countries subject to U.S. travel restrictions. The August 14 decision allows USCIS to resume one policy involving the re review of certain previously approved immigration benefits while the government’s appeal continues. 

Under the policy, USCIS may reexamine benefit approvals involving foreign nationals from designated travel ban countries who entered the United States on or after January 20, 2021. Certain individuals whose immigration benefits were approved on or after that date may also be affected. 

Importantly, the First Circuit did not allow USCIS to reinstate three other policies previously vacated by the district court. USCIS remains prohibited from: 

• Suspending benefit adjudications solely because an applicant is from a travel ban country 
• Treating nationality from a designated country as a negative factor in discretionary adjudications 
• Suspending asylum adjudications under the challenged policy 

The litigation stems from USCIS policies introduced in late 2025 and expanded in early 2026. A Rhode Island federal district court vacated the policies in June after finding them unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act. The government’s appeal remains ongoing, meaning the scope of USCIS authority could change again as the case proceeds. 

Impact: Foreign nationals from affected travel ban countries may once again face additional scrutiny even after an immigration benefit has been approved. Employers and individuals should carefully review any new USCIS correspondence involving a prior approval and seek guidance promptly if the agency initiates a re-review.

Higher Education Groups Sue to Block New Fixed Admission Rule

A coalition of higher education organizations and labor unions has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to stop the Department of Homeland Security’s new rule replacing Duration of Status with fixed admission periods for F-1 students, J-1 exchange visitors, I foreign media representatives, and their dependents. 

The lawsuit, filed August 18 in federal district court in Massachusetts, argues that DHS violated the Administrative Procedure Act when finalizing the regulation. The plaintiffs include NAFSA, the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, the American Federation of Teachers, and the UAW. 

Among their claims, the organizations allege that DHS provided insufficient time for public comment, did not adequately consider feedback or assess the rule’s costs and benefits, and exceeded its statutory authority. 

The challenged regulation would fundamentally change how affected nonimmigrants maintain status. Instead of being admitted for the duration of their qualifying program or activity, individuals would receive fixed admission periods and may need to apply for extensions when additional time is required. The federal rulemaking record confirms DHS’s shift from Duration of Status to fixed admission periods. 

The plaintiffs are seeking emergency relief that would prevent the regulation from taking effect while litigation proceeds. Unless a court intervenes, however, employers, universities, and affected foreign nationals should continue preparing for implementation as scheduled. 

Impact: The lawsuit creates new uncertainty around one of the most significant recent changes affecting students and exchange visitors. Until a court blocks or delays implementation, employers and educational institutions should continue preparing for fixed admission periods, extension filings, and increased tracking of immigration expiration dates.