On his first day back in office, President Trump signed a series of executive orders aimed at addressing the “unprecedented flood of illegal immigration” under the previous administration. Trump campaigned–and, at least in part– won based on promises to stop illegal immigration and to deport millions of undocumented immigrants. But within just three months, his administration has also introduced sweeping changes that disrupt key aspects of the legal immigration system.
Far-reaching changes have disrupted routine operations at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), consulates abroad, and ports of entry, complicating travel for even long-established legal immigrants and eliminating some legal pathways altogether. While President Trump has reduced arrivals at the southern border, the chaos now unfolding within the legal immigration system risks severe and unintended consequences for the U.S. economy.
For example, data from the Department of Commerce’s International Trade Administration (ITA) shows that in March 2025, the number of overseas visitors coming to the United States decreased by over 11.6 percent compared to last year, only the second year-over-year decrease since the COVID-19 pandemic, with the first occurring just a month earlier in February. These figures represent legal visa holders traveling to the U.S. for business, tourism, or other personal reasons. Given ITA’s estimate that every 40 international visits supports one U.S. job, this decline could impact nearly 7,900 American jobs.
While President Trump’s rhetoric has centered primarily on illegal immigration, there is growing evidence that it may also be discouraging legal immigrants and international visitors from coming to—or staying in—the United States. The broader implications of such a trend could be deeply damaging, both economically and diplomatically.
USCIS processing
USCIS is the government agency tasked with administering legal immigration within the U.S. It handles a wide range of responsibilities, including adjudicating employer-sponsored worker petitions, applications for work authorization, green card adjustments, and naturalization. Unlike many other federal agencies currently facing deep personnel cuts under Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), USCIS has largely been spared—likely because approximately 94 percent of its funding comes from fees paid by applicants and petitioners, rather than taxpayer dollars.
However, USCIS has not been immune to disruption since President Trump’s inauguration. One of his earliest executive orders mandated a government-wide recognition of only two sexes, reversing policy changes made during the Biden Administration that had introduced a “Another Gender Identity” option to many immigration forms.
In response, USCIS was forced to revise its forms to comply with the new directive. On February 24, 2025, the agency announced that the first group of updated forms was available and would become mandatory immediately. Just over a week later, on March 3, a second wave of updated forms was released—again with immediate effect. While usage rates for the third gender identity option are not published, the latest reports indicate that more than 99.8% of filed H-1B petitions, for example, reported a male or female beneficiary. The removal of the third gender option changes nothing for most cases not selecting that option, but even they were required to comply with the abrupt form change. Without any notice period, petitions and applications already in the mail were rejected upon receipt, not because of selecting the third gender option, but simply because the form included the option to do so.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) filed suit, arguing that the abrupt rollout would lead to the arbitrary rejection of “thousands of applications.” In response, USCIS backtracked slightly, announcing a grace period on March 8. However, the damage was already done—many applicants who submitted forms during the short window between February 24 and March 8 faced unnecessary disruptions.
While most of these rejected petitions and applications can likely be resubmitted with the updated forms, the consequences may still be significant. Many applicants depend on timely filings to qualify for automatic extensions of legal status or work authorization. For them, a delay caused by a last-minute, largely symbolic policy change could jeopardize their ability to remain in the country legally or continue working—underscoring the true cost of administrative whiplash.
USCIS has already published two Federal Register notices announcing its intentions to update its forms again to collect social media handles and additional identification information from beneficiaries, applicants, and their family members in compliance with the enhanced vetting executive order. If form updates are again rolled out without notice periods, the same chaos could ensue.
Even with adequate notice periods, these changes are likely to worsen the administrative burden on USCIS and its staff. For applicants, the proposed form changes will increase form completion time by anywhere from 48 to 81 minutes per person, per form—amounting to over 3 million additional hours of effort. On the agency side, it is still unclear exactly how much additional time will be needed to review the newly collected information. However, it is almost certain that processing each application will require more substantive staff attention, which in turn will slow down adjudications. The result will be longer wait times, more backlogs, and further delays for individuals navigating an already complex legal immigration system.
Processing times are already starting to creep up, even without the additional information being added to forms. Data updates regarding processing times are currently delayed, but USCIS published median processing times for FY2025 as of January 31st and February 28th. Just comparing those two publications, nearly half of the 50 reported forms experienced increases in median processing times, increasing by an average of approximately 11 days each. Eleven days may not seem particularly significant yet, but if this pattern continues and the burdens on USCIS staff continue to grow, processing times are likely to snowball.
Worse still, some categories of legal immigration have seen processing halted entirely. One striking example is the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP). Refugees who enter through USRAP do so legally and undergo some of the most rigorous vetting of any group seeking entry into the United States. Although the USRAP program is currently suspended from admitting new refugees except for Afrikaners, those who are already here are required to apply for permanent residency, or a “green card,” once they have been in the U.S. for one year.
As of March 25, 2025, reports indicate that USCIS has halted the processing and issuance of green cards for both refugees and approved asylees. Previously, the median processing time for green card applications based on refugee status was 7.6 months, with 80 percent of cases completed within 14 months. But with the system now at a standstill, each month brings a growing backlog, as more refugees who arrived under the previous administration reach the one-year mark and become eligible—indeed, legally required—to apply for permanent residency. If this pause continues, it is unclear when, or even if, these individuals will receive the green cards that they are entitled to, leaving them in legal limbo through no fault of their own.
Other categories of green card applicants are still being processed but are also likely to face longer delays. The first Trump administration expanded the interview requirements for green card applicants already present in the United States and narrowed eligibility for interview waivers. However, the Biden administration took a risk-based approach to these interviews, increasing the usage of waivers to boost efficiency when the applicants had already been thoroughly vetted through other means. While the current administration hasn’t formally announced a reversal of this policy, multiple reports suggest that increasing in-person interviews is already a priority. However, the logistics of such a shift may pose serious challenges. USCIS employees have reported a severe shortage of desks and office space—particularly for staff who had been working remotely and are now returning to the office.
There is now little recourse for individuals experiencing extreme delays or other issues with USCIS, due in large part to cuts made by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman’s Office was a separate entity within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that aided individuals and employers who experienced difficulties with USCIS.
However, on March 21, 2025, DHS announced sweeping reductions in force that effectively dismantled the Ombudsman’s Office. Without it, petitioners and applicants must seek assistance from their Congressional representatives or Senators. But these offices have also been overwhelmed with a sharp uptick in constituent calls, leaving their ability to intervene more limited than ever.
Consular processing
While domestic immigration operations have been the primary focus of this administration, American consulates have had their fair share of procedural changes. Most prominently, legal immigration has been weaponized by the Department of State as a bargaining chip in diplomatic negotiations regarding the transport and acceptance of deported foreign nationals.
On April 5, 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that all U.S. visas–including tourist visas, student visas, and employer-sponsored visas–issued to South Sudanese passports would be revoked, and none would be issued until further notice. Secretary Rubio justified this ban based on claims that South Sudan sent back a deported man and therefore was uncooperative with repatriation efforts. However, South Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation argued that the individual was returned to the U.S. because he was not South Sudanese and was actually from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. South Sudan ultimately agreed to accept the Congolese man in the “spirit of the existing friendly relations” between the U.S. and South Sudan. Despite this gesture of cooperation, the U.S. consulate in South Sudan has not resumed visa interviews, and visa issues remain on pause.
Although South Sudan was made an example in this case, other countries may soon be affected by similar restrictions. A draft list of 43 potential targets for a visa ban began circling in mid-March, but it has not yet been adopted. Reports indicate that the basis for the ban, a report co-authored by the Secretary of State, Attorney General, Secretary of Homeland Security, and Director of National Intelligence, is delayed but still forthcoming. In the meantime, nationals from countries likely to be targeted are left in a state of uncertainty, rushing to finalize visa and travel plans out of fear they may be stranded abroad if and when the ban is enacted.
Even nationals of the seemingly unaffected countries likely already face increased delays at American consulates. As directed by President Trump’s executive order, enhanced vetting has become the basis for several changes to pre-existing consular practices. Under the Biden administration, consular officers were permitted to waive in-person interview requirements for certain foreign nationals if the eligibility criteria were met and the officer did not have reason to require the interview. Extending interview waiver eligibility to low-risk international travelers became an essential tool for managing wait times when visa demand skyrocketed after COVID-19 restrictions were lifted.
However, less than a month into the Trump administration, the Department of State made significant changes to interview waiver eligibility. Previously, those reapplying within 48 months of their most recent visa’s expiration were eligible for waivers on a discretionary basis. Now, eligibility has been reduced to just 12 months. Many seasonal workers, such as agricultural workers, were also eligible for exemption due to the sensitive timeline of their work in the U.S. Unless they qualify under the 12-month exemption category, these workers are no longer eligible for waiver consideration.
The impact of these changes on interview wait times is yet to be seen. The Department of State previously updated global visa appointment wait times on a nearly-weekly basis, but without explanation, those updates ceased on January 7, 2025.
With the rollback of interview waiver eligibility and the introduction of new vetting measures, including mandatory social media reviews, it is likely that wait times have increased significantly. Even before these changes, tourist visa applicants in some countries faced wait times exceeding 300 days.
The consequences won’t be limited to inconvenience. Critical sectors of the U.S. economy could be severely impacted: agricultural employers may be left short-staffed as seasonal workers fail to arrive, and high-spending international tourists may choose to vacation—and spend—elsewhere. If left unchecked, these cascading delays could translate into lost jobs, missed opportunities, and long-term economic harm.
Ports of entry
Even if foreign nationals persevere through the changes at USCIS and the Department of State, their entry to the U.S. could still hang in the balance. Chaos at ports of entry, like airports, has been a nearly daily news story since President Trump was inaugurated. A few prominent cases have even prompted some of our closest allies to issue travel advisories to their citizens considering travel to the U.S.
Germany, for instance, updated its travel guidance for the U.S. in March 2025 after several German citizens attempting to enter the country legally were denied entry and detained at ports of entry. This unpredictability likely made many travelers reconsider their plans, and as a result, in March 2025, the number of German visitors to the U.S. dropped a staggering 28 percent compared to March 2024.
Considering that German nationals have the third highest level of overseas travel expenditure in the world, cuts to our tourism from Germany could have significant implications for our economy, especially with major international events on the horizon– particularly the World Cup and the Olympics, which are each posed to generate billions in economic activity for the United States.
As cell phone and social media searches become more common at ports of entry and as stories of permanent residents or legal visa holders being denied entry continue to go viral, American businesses that rely on functioning legal immigration to fill gaps in their staff or generate revenue are likely to continue facing increased risks driven by this unpredictability.
Meanwhile, more than 1,700 international students and recent graduates have had their visa statuses abruptly changed, sparking significant concern and attention online. This sudden shift is likely to discourage others from choosing the United States as a destination for higher education—an area where the U.S. has long been a global leader.
While early anecdotes and narrow indicators already suggest a downward trend in interest and participation, the true scale of the impact remains unclear. Publicly available data, which once offered timely insight into these patterns, has not been updated with the consistency it once had. Yet even in the absence of comprehensive data, the direction of the trend is evident: these erratic policy shifts are likely to have far-reaching consequences for both our workforce and our economy.
Although these changes are often framed in the language of national security, we should not accept a false choice between safety and prosperity. A well-managed immigration system can—and should—deliver both.