The Trump administration has unveiled a new, broad immigration policy that directs U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officials to more thoroughly screen applicants for green cards, work permits, parole, and certain visas. Specifically, the directive seeks evidence of “anti-American” opinions or associations when deciding whether to grant immigration benefits.
The directive, announced this week, represents a vast expansion of the discretionary authority of USCIS judges and has raised concerns among legal experts and migrant advocates, who warn that the definition of “anti-American” is too vague and could undermine freedom of expression.
According to the updated USCIS Policy Manual, judges reviewing applications for immigration benefits — including green cards, work permits, parole applications, and certain investor visas — are instructed to weigh any evidence that an applicant has “endorsed, promoted, supported, or otherwise espoused” anti-American ideologies. This includes activity on social media, which has increasingly become a focus of immigration investigations during Trump’s second term.
The guidance specifies that anti-Americanism will be considered an “overwhelmingly negative factor” in discretionary cases, even if the applicant meets all legal requirements. This gives USCIS broad latitude to deny applications on subjective grounds.
The policy also focuses on associations with terrorist groups and organizations that promote antisemitic views, a concern for the administration given the public perspective on Israel’s offensive in Gaza. Officials are instructed to consider whether an applicant has participated in or supported “antisemitic terrorism” or advocated antisemitic ideologies when making decisions.
USCIS spokesperson Matthew Tragesser defended the changes, arguing that they are necessary to protect the integrity of immigration in the United States. “America’s benefits should not be given to those who despise the country and promote anti-American ideologies,” he said. “Immigration benefits — including to live and work in the United States — remain a privilege, not a right.”
One of the most controversial aspects of the policy is the lack of a clear definition of what constitutes “un-American.” Historically, U.S. immigration law has prohibited the naturalization of those who advocate communism, totalitarianism, or the violent overthrow of the government. But critics point out that Trump has repeatedly applied the label “anti-American” to describe historians who document slavery, museums that address racial injustice, and students who protest Israel’s military actions in Gaza.
The new rules come after months of heightened tension surrounding campus protests and visas for international students. Earlier this year, thousands of student visas were revoked or delayed after the State Department implemented new social media verification protocols.
Supporters argue that the directive is a sensible protective measure to prevent people hostile to the United States from taking advantage of the immigration system. They point to the growing use of parole programs, expanded under the Biden administration, as an example of policies that Trump officials say have been abused. USCIS officials will now also review whether parole applications contain “false or fraudulent” information, another factor that could lead to denial.
For their part, immigration advocates and legal experts have expressed alarm, comparing the policy to the “red scare” tactics of the 1950s, during which people suspected of having communist affiliations were spied on and blacklisted.
There are also concerns that expanding investigations into social media could punish applicants for their political expressions, including criticism of U.S. government policies. Given the administration’s recent efforts to crack down on pro-Palestinian activism, some worry that the directive could disproportionately affect students, academics, and activists.
The policy comes amid Trump’s broader efforts to restrict not only illegal immigration, but also legal immigration. A few days ago, his administration expanded the assessment of “good moral character” in naturalization cases.
