Stay Path Radar

U.S. Stay Path Policy Radar

14 policy developments · 78 school/department records

RECENT 30 DAYS

Developments in the last 30 days

10·10—11·08
#03 D/S Fixed Admission PeriodF-1The government filed the record index and excerpts cited in its request for judgment for the judge to review. The nationwide stay continues.#05 August 12 / 24 CPT GuidanceCPTThe judge heard both sides on pausing the CPT guidance and decided to rule later. The guidance remains in use.#06 H-1B / PERM Wage FloorsH-1B sent the wage to for review before publication. Current wage levels continue to apply; the published will set the final levels and effective date.#05 August 12 / 24 CPT GuidanceCPTPlaintiffs replied that the notices changed the longstanding practice of allowing elective internships for credit to qualify for CPT and asked the court for a pause. The court also allowed registered public telephone access. The hearing is November 6 at 3 p.m. ET; the guidance remains in use.#03 D/S Fixed Admission PeriodF-1 case: plaintiffs responded that inadequately assessed costs and benefits, alternatives and public comments, and that the 32-day was too short. They ask the court to strike down the whole rule. The nationwide pause continues; the government’s appeal brief is due November 9.#03 D/S Fixed Admission PeriodF-1 case: the government filed its final reply asking to win; as a fallback, it asks the court to send the rule back to for more explanation while keeping it, and to limit the pause to the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs want the whole rule struck down. The nationwide pause continues; the government’s appeal brief is due November 9.#03 D/S Fixed Admission PeriodF-1 case: both sides asked the court to decide the case on the written record without a trial. The government asks to win outright, or at least to have the rule sent back to without being struck down, or the pause narrowed; plaintiffs ask the court to strike down the whole rule. The nationwide pause continues.#05 August 12 / 24 CPT GuidanceCPTCPT lawsuit: the court let plaintiffs file a reply of up to 15 pages by November 4; the November 6 hearing stands.#09 EAD Renewal ExtensionsH-1BJane Doe case: the court moved the hearing on the government’s request to end the case and the scheduling conference to November 16, 4 p.m. Pacific / 7 p.m. Eastern.#02 $103,265 H-1B SurchargeH-1BSeparate $100,000 fee case: the district court refused to pause its case during the appeal and ordered the government to turn over its .#05 August 12 / 24 CPT GuidanceCPTCPT lawsuit: the government opposed, arguing the plaintiffs and ’s notices cannot be reviewed by a court; the November 6 hearing stands.#03 D/S Fixed Admission PeriodF-1 case: the court moved requests for judgment on the written record to October 30 and kept final replies due November 2; the government filed the index of its . The nationwide pause continues.#12 PERM Labor Certification ReformH-1BThe White House’s finished reviewing the reform proposal and cleared it once changes are made (Consistent with Change). Next, publishes the full proposal.#03 D/S Fixed Admission PeriodF-1 case: the government asked to move requests for judgment to October 30 and replies to November 6.#02 $103,265 H-1B SurchargeH-1BSeparate $100,000 fee case: the two sides filed a joint scheduling statement, each proposing a different timetable.#03 D/S Fixed Admission PeriodF-1 appeal: the set the government’s brief and appendix for November 9.#05 August 12 / 24 CPT GuidanceCPTCPT lawsuit: the court gave the government until October 28 to respond.#03 D/S Fixed Admission PeriodF-1 case: the court set a schedule: October 23, requests for judgment October 26, replies November 2.#13 H-1B Layoff-Review Executive OrderH-1BDOJ announced its settlement with Cloudera: for 24 months from its latest withdrawal, Cloudera may not file applications (ETA Form 9089) or post job ads.#02 $103,265 H-1B SurchargeH-1BSeparate $100,000 fee case: plaintiffs opposed pausing the district case during the appeal.#02 $103,265 H-1B SurchargeH-1BSeparate $100,000 fee case: the set the schedule in appeal No. 26-6667, with the government’s brief due November 6 and plaintiffs’ answer December 4.#09 EAD Renewal ExtensionsH-1BThe ending automatic extensions for certain renewals was published and took effect (91 FR 65306), keeping the 2025 unchanged; the cutoff is still October 30, 2025.#14 Renewal DeferenceH-1BThe proposal to stop deferring to earlier approvals at extension time was published (91 FR 65119); comments close November 13.#09 EAD Renewal ExtensionsH-1B posted for public inspection: the 2025 removal of certain automatic extensions is kept unchanged; renewals filed before the cutoff and legal exceptions keep their extensions.#14 Renewal DeferenceH-1B posted a proposal for public inspection: extensions would no longer defer to earlier approvals even when the employer, worker and facts are unchanged.
NEXT 30 DAYS

Key dates in the next 30 days

11·09—12·08
IMPACT RANKING

Highest-impact barriers

Ranked by potential impact on the stay path, #01 highest · Colors mark the path stage

Filter by immigration path
14 items
#01
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemakingProposal published; public comments open

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: published the proposal on October 8: schools would pay $70,000 the first time and $30,000 each time after, before an OPT recommendation. Public comments on the rule run until November 9.

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCompleted
  3. 3 publishedCompleted
  4. 4Public commentCurrent stage
  5. 5Not reached
  6. 6EffectiveNot reached
OPTH-1B transition

Proposed OPT Fees: $70,000 Initially, $30,000 Subsequently

Proposed rule · Comments through November 9

The first step of applying for OPT is a “recommendation” your school’s enters in . proposes that before that recommendation, the school must pay the government a fee for each student: $70,000 the first time and $30,000 for each later OPT (including a STEM extension). The school can pay it or pass it to the student or employer. Comments close November 9; it is not in effect, and OPT applications continue as usual. Submit a public comment ↗

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Past Now Expected
  1. The fee rule ( 1653-AB01) went to for review.

  2. finished review and cleared the proposal with changes.

  3. The proposal was published: schools pay $70,000 first and $30,000 each time after; rule comments close November 9, comments on forms and data collection (PRA) December 7.

  4. Proposal published; public comments open

  5. Public comments on the rule close; online comments must be in by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time.

  6. Comments on the forms and data collection (PRA) close.

  7. The and its start date; fees begin 60 days after the is published.

Read impact & outlook
#02
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemakingComment period closed; awaiting ’s final decision

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: The proposal is out and comments closed September 24. has to review the comments before it can issue a .

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCompleted
  3. 3 publishedCompleted
  4. 4Public commentCurrent stage
  5. 5Not reached
  6. 6EffectiveNot reached
H-1BOPT → H-1BH-1B selection

Proposed $103,265 H-1B Surcharge

Proposed rule · Comment period closed

proposes that for every H-1B petition that goes through the lottery (cap-subject), the employer pays an extra $103,265 on top of existing fees. That includes U.S. master’s-cap cases and F-1 students switching straight from OPT to H-1B inside the U.S.; petitions from employers such as universities do not pay. Comments closed in September and there is no , so nothing is charged now.

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Past Now Expected
  1. published the $103,265 surcharge proposal.

  2. The published a correction to the historical filing counts in one table; amount, scope and deadline unchanged.

  3. Public comments closed.

  4. Separate $100,000 entry fee: in Global Nurse Force the court struck down the collection policy and barred collection under both proclamations.

  5. $100,000 fee case: the government appealed to the and asked the district court to pause the case.

  6. $100,000 fee case: the set the government’s opening brief for November 6 and plaintiffs’ answer for December 4.

  7. $100,000 fee case: the district court refused to pause the case and ordered the government to turn over its .

  8. Comment period closed; awaiting ’s final decision

  9. $100,000 fee case: government’s opening brief due in the .

  10. $100,000 fee case: plaintiffs’ answering brief due.

  11. After reviewing public comments, decides the final text and start date of the $103,265 surcharge.

Read impact & outlook
#03
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemaking; both sides filed November 2 responses, ruling pending

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: On September 14 the court postponed the entire rule nationwide and barred / from enforcing it until further order or a final ruling. The September 15 start date is off.

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCompleted
  3. 3 publishedCompleted
  4. 4Public commentCompleted
  5. 5Current stage
  6. 6EffectiveNot reached
F-1CPTOPT

Court Stays the D/S Final Rule Nationwide

Nationwide court stay · Both sides filed November 2 responses

(duration of status) is how F-1 students stay today: as long as you keep studying by the rules, you can stay lawfully, with no fixed end date on your . ’s July would replace that with a fixed period and a separate extension filing when it runs out. On September 14 a court paused the rule nationwide, so nothing has changed. The case continues: both sides have asked the court to rule on the written record and filed responses on November 2; the government has also appealed, with its appellate brief due November 9.

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Court proceedings
  1. Lawsuit filed
  2. Government opposes
  3. Hearing; no ruling yet
  4. Nationwide stay
  5. Both sides seek judgment
  6. Government reply filed
Past Now Expected
  1. published the .

  2. published the .

  3. A coalition of universities and other plaintiffs filed suit in federal court in Massachusetts.

  4. The government filed its opposition, asking the court not to pause the rule.

  5. The court heard arguments and did not rule from the bench.

  6. The court issued a postponing the entire rule nationwide and barring enforcement.

  7. Lawmakers introduced resolutions to overturn the rule (S.J.Res.213 in the Senate, H.J.Res.215 in the House).

  8. S.J.Res.213 was placed on the Senate calendar (No. 668).

  9. / and others appealed to the (No. 26-2112); the pause stays in place.

  10. Status conference held; the court asked both sides for next-step proposals by October 9.

  11. Both sides filed proposals: the government asked to pause the district case until the appeal is decided; plaintiffs objected and asked for a quick ruling striking down the rule.

  12. The court set a schedule: by October 23, judgment requests by October 26, replies by November 2.

  13. The set the government’s brief and appendix for November 9.

  14. The court moved judgment requests to October 30 and kept replies due November 2; the government turned over the .

  15. Both sides asked the court to decide the case on the written record.

  16. The government filed its final reply asking to win; as a fallback, it asks to send the rule back to while keeping it, and to narrow who is protected.

  17. Plaintiffs responded to the government, challenged the cost-benefit analysis, alternatives and public-comment process, and asked the court to strike down the whole rule.

  18. The government filed an index and excerpts of the cited in its earlier request for judgment.

  19. ; both sides filed November 2 responses, ruling pending

  20. Government’s brief and appendix due in the .

  21. The district court rules on both sides’ requests for judgment; plaintiffs’ appellate answer is due 30 days after they receive the government’s brief.

Read impact & outlook
#04
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemaking in effect

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: completed the proposal, and . The rule took effect February 27, 2026 and weights the lottery by wage level from FY 2027.

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCompleted
  3. 3 publishedCompleted
  4. 4Public commentCompleted
  5. 5Completed
  6. 6EffectiveCurrent stage
H-1BOPT → H-1BH-1B selectionCap-subject

H-1B Selection Now Weights Wage Levels

In effect · Used beginning with FY2027

The H-1B lottery no longer gives everyone the same odds. It now depends on the wage level of your offer: Level I (entry) is entered once, Level II twice, Level III three times and Level IV (senior) four times. More entries mean a better chance of being picked. The rule took effect February 27, 2026 and applies from the FY 2027 lottery (held in spring 2026).

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Past Now Expected
  1. proposed the wage-weighted lottery.

  2. published the , keeping 1 to 4 entries for Levels I to IV.

  3. The rule took effect and was used for the FY 2027 H-1B lottery.

  4. in effect

  5. The next lottery will also be weighted by wage level.

Read impact & outlook
#05
Community score
—/10
administrative guidance
?
administrative guidanceGuidance in use; November 6 hearing held, ruling pending

(the part of that oversees international students) uses messages, FAQs and similar documents to tell schools how an existing rule should be applied, and schools and DSOs follow them. Because the regulation’s text stays the same, guidance skips the proposal, public-comment and final-rule steps and can take hold quickly; it carries less legal weight than a regulation, though, and is easier to challenge in court.

This policy: first warned schools about compliance, then narrowed the CPT standard. Schools and DSOs are already applying it.

  1. 1Risk noticeCompleted
  2. 2Standard clarifiedCompleted
  3. 3School implementationCurrent stage
  4. 4Enforcement monitoringNot reached
  5. 5Further guidanceNot reached
CPTDay-1 CPTInternships

Tighter CPT Guidance: An Elective Internship Course Is No Longer Enough

Guidance in use · November 6 hearing held; ruling pending

In August, sent schools two notices tightening CPT: CPT can be approved only for an internship every student in the program must complete to graduate, an elective internship course usually does not count, and the employer must sign a with the school. Many schools have paused or narrowed CPT as a result. Four higher-education associations sued to pause the guidance and replied to the government on November 4. The judge heard both sides on November 6 and will decide later whether to pause the guidance. Until the court rules, the guidance applies.

Risk noticeStandard clarifiedSchool implementationEnforcement monitoringFurther guidance
Court proceedings
  1. Lawsuit; pause requested
  2. Government opposes
  3. Reply allowed
  4. Plaintiffs replied
  5. Hearing held; ruling pending
Past Now Expected
  1. 2608-01: CPT must be indispensable to the degree and required of every student; DSOs and schools are responsible.

  2. Several schools paused elective (course-credit or optional) CPT, or approved only degree-required internships.

  3. 2608-02 explained more about electives, “all students” and cooperative agreements.

  4. Four associations sued (AAU v. ) and asked the court to pause the guidance.

  5. Plaintiffs filed their arguments for pausing the guidance.

  6. The court set a hearing for November 6.

  7. The court gave the government until October 28 to respond.

  8. The government opposed, arguing the plaintiffs and the notices cannot be reviewed by a court.

  9. Plaintiffs asked to file a reply by November 4.

  10. The court allowed plaintiffs’ reply.

  11. Plaintiffs filed their reply seeking a pause of the notices and a bar on enforcing the new interpretation; the court allowed registered public telephone access to the November 6 hearing.

  12. The judge heard both sides on pausing the guidance and decided to rule later.

  13. Guidance in use; November 6 hearing held, ruling pending

  14. The court decides whether to pause the two CPT notices while the case proceeds.

  15. After the ruling, schools adjust CPT approvals to the ruling and their curricula.

Read impact & outlook
#06
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemaking at ; review before publication pending

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: Comments closed May 26. received ’s draft on November 6 and is reviewing it before publication. Current wage levels continue to apply.

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCompleted
  3. 3 publishedCompleted
  4. 4Public commentCompleted
  5. 5Current stage
  6. 6EffectiveNot reached
H-1BOPT → H-1B

Proposed Increase to H-1B / PERM Wage Floors

Final rule at OIRA · Not in effect

When an employer sponsors you for H-1B or a green card, your pay cannot fall below a minimum set by the Department of Labor (). proposes raising that minimum sharply: for entry-level jobs, from “more than about 17% of people in the same job and area earn” to “more than about 34%,” with the other three levels rising too. On November 6, sent the draft to the White House’s for review before publication. Current wage levels continue to apply.

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Past Now Expected
  1. A told to start revising H-1B wage levels.

  2. published the proposal: four levels at the 34th, 52nd, 70th and 88th percentiles.

  3. The 60-day period closed and began reviewing comments.

  4. sent the wage to for review before publication.

  5. at ; review before publication pending

  6. completes final-rule review; then publishes the final text, transition arrangements and effective date.

  7. New wage levels apply only once a is published and its start date arrives.

Read impact & outlook
#07
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemakingUnder review

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: The proposal is under review; publishes the full text after the review.

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCurrent stage
  3. 3 publishedNot reached
  4. 4Public commentNot reached
  5. 5Not reached
  6. 6EffectiveNot reached
H-1BThird-party placement

H-1B Reform: Cap-Exempt Status and Client-Site Jobs Under Review

Under OIRA review · Not in effect

plans three changes: redefine which employers can skip the H-1B lottery (, such as universities and affiliated research institutes); look harder at employers with past violations; and look harder at jobs where workers are placed at a client company. The proposal is at , the White House office that reviews rules before publication. Its text is not public yet, and current H-1B rules still apply.

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Past Now Expected
  1. described the reform in its rulemaking plan.

  2. The proposal went to for review.

  3. Under review

  4. finishes review and publishes the full proposal.

  5. Once published, the proposal opens for before any .

Read impact & outlook
#08
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemakingProposal published; public comments open

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: The proposal was published September 11 and public comments run until November 10. then reviews comments and decides on a .

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCompleted
  3. 3 publishedCompleted
  4. 4Public commentCurrent stage
  5. 5Not reached
  6. 6EffectiveNot reached
H-1BH-1B job lossEmployer changeChange of status

Proposed End to the Up-to-60-Day Grace Period After Job Loss

Proposed rule · Comments due November 10

Today, if an H-1B or other work-visa holder is laid off or quits, they can stay in the U.S. lawfully for up to 60 more days to find a new employer, change status or arrange to leave. proposes ending that grace period. Comments close November 10, and if you lose your job now you still get the 60 days. The F-1 grace period after graduation is a separate rule and not part of this proposal. Submit a public comment ↗

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Past Now Expected
  1. The proposal went to for review.

  2. finished review and cleared the proposal with changes.

  3. The proposal was posted for public inspection in the , listing eight work-visa categories and their families.

  4. The proposal was published; public comments close November 10.

  5. Proposal published; public comments open

  6. Public comments due before midnight Eastern Time, filed on regulations.gov under USCIS-2026-0364.

  7. After reviewing comments, decides on a and its start date.

Read impact & outlook
#09
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemakingRule in force; hearing November 16 on the request to end the case

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: The ending automatic extensions has applied since October 30, 2025; the October 14 keeps it unchanged and is in effect. The September 11 protects the seven people who sued.

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCompleted
  3. 3 publishedCompleted
  4. 4Public commentCompleted
  5. 5Completed
  6. 6EffectiveCurrent stage
H-1BH-4 Adjustment pendingRenewal work gaps

Automatic Extensions Removed for Certain EAD Renewals

In force · final rule effective October 14

If you work on an (work permit) and filed your renewal on or after October 30, 2025, you have to stop working when the old card expires and wait for the new one. Before, filing a renewal kept the old card valid for a while longer (up to 540 days); that cushion is gone. The October 14 makes this permanent, with the same cutoff date. A September 11 court order protects only the seven people who sued. The court moved the hearing on the government’s request to end the case to November 16.

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Court proceedings
  1. Relief for seven plaintiffs
  2. Lawsuit hearing
Past Now Expected
  1. The was published and took effect, drawing the line by renewal filing date.

  2. Public comments on the closed.

  3. Jane Doe entered (signed September 10), protecting the seven people who sued.

  4. The was posted for public inspection in the , keeping the 2025 unchanged.

  5. The was published and took effect the same day (91 FR 65306); the October 30, 2025 cutoff is unchanged.

  6. The court asked both sides whether the October 14 left a dispute for it to decide.

  7. The court moved the hearing on the government’s request to end the case and the scheduling conference to November 16.

  8. Rule in force; hearing November 16 on the request to end the case

  9. Hearing on the government’s request to end the case and scheduling conference, 4 p.m. Pacific / 7 p.m. Eastern.

  10. Further USCIS instructions and later orders in the Jane Doe case.

Read impact & outlook
#10
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemakingComments closed; awaiting a

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: The proposal is out and comments closed August 4, 2026. The next step is a from .

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCompleted
  3. 3 publishedCompleted
  4. 4Public commentCurrent stage
  5. 5Not reached
  6. 6EffectiveNot reached
OPTH-4 Form

Proposed Expansion of Criminal-Record Review for Form I-765

Comment period closed · Not in effect

proposes that for most work permits, including OPT and H-4 , USCIS would generally deny Form if the applicant has ever been arrested, criminally charged, indicted or convicted, unless there is a strong public-interest reason to approve. People without a criminal record are not affected. Comments closed in August; there is no yet, so current standards still apply.

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Past Now Expected
  1. finished reviewing the proposal.

  2. published the proposal.

  3. The 60-day period closed.

  4. Comments closed; awaiting a

  5. reviews public comments and decides whether to revise or finalize.

  6. If finalized, the new standard applies to first-time and renewal applications from its start date.

Read impact & outlook
#11
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemakingLong-term plan; no date

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: It is only a long-term item in the government’s rulemaking plan; it has not gone to and there is no proposal.

  1. 1Draft / agendaCurrent stage
  2. 2 reviewNot reached
  3. 3 publishedNot reached
  4. 4Public commentNot reached
  5. 5Not reached
  6. 6EffectiveNot reached
H-1BH-4 familiesHousehold income

Proposed End to Work Authorization for Some H-4 Spouses

Long-term plan · No proposal date

Spouses of H-1B workers hold H-4 status, which does not allow work on its own. Since 2015, if the H-1B holder is on the green-card path (for example, an approved ), the spouse can apply for an (work permit). plans to end that eligibility. The H-1B holder is not affected. For now it is only on the government’s long-term plan, with no proposal, and the current rule still applies.

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Past Now Expected
  1. Listed as a long-term item in the government’s rulemaking plan.

  2. Long-term plan; no date

  3. If moves ahead, it must publish a proposal, take public comments and then issue a ; lawsuits could follow.

Read impact & outlook
#12
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemaking done; awaiting proposal

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: finished reviewing the proposal on October 23, 2026 and cleared it with changes; until the full proposal is published, current rules apply.

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCurrent stage
  3. 3 publishedNot reached
  4. 4Public commentNot reached
  5. 5Not reached
  6. 6EffectiveNot reached
H-1BH-1B to green cardEmployer sponsorship

PERM Reform: How Employers Recruit and Comply

OIRA review done · Awaiting proposal

is the first step of an employer-sponsored green card: the employer has to advertise the job and show it couldn’t find a qualified U.S. worker. plans to overhaul that step, covering how employers recruit, protections for laid-off U.S. workers and compliance rules. The White House’s finished its review on October 23 and cleared it with changes. Next, publishes the formal proposal; for now the old rules apply.

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Past Now Expected
  1. listed reform in the government’s rulemaking plan, aiming to publish a proposal in July.

  2. DOJ settled with OpenAI over , requiring it to post jobs on its own site and accept online applications.

  3. The proposal went to the White House’s for review.

  4. finished review and cleared the proposal once changes are made (Consistent with Change).

  5. done; awaiting proposal

  6. publishes the formal proposal, with recruiting channels, which cases it covers and a deadline.

  7. The , its start date and transition terms for pending cases.

Read impact & outlook
#13
Community score
—/10
Presidential
?
Presidential Signed; agencies implementing

An is the President’s working instruction to federal agencies. It takes effect when signed, without a proposal, or . Agencies must carry it out within the authority existing law gives them. Changing a regulation later still takes the full rulemaking process, and both the order and how it is carried out can be challenged in court.

This policy: The President signed the order on September 18, 2026, directing agencies to coordinate and consider relevant layoffs. Agencies are putting it into practice; implementing documents and review standards come next.

  1. 1President signsCompleted
  2. 2Agency implementationCurrent stage
  3. 3Implementation monitoringNot reached
H-1BVisa and entry

H-1B Executive Order: Employer Layoffs Become Part of Review

Signed · Agencies implementing

A September 18 tells the State Department, the Department of Labor and to share information when reviewing H-1B cases, and to consider the sponsoring employer’s recent relevant layoffs. “Relevant” means all three: the same employer, similar jobs, and within the past year or already planned. You are most likely to be asked about it at the visa interview or at the border. Layoffs are one factor in the review, and the reviewing officer weighs them case by case. will also re-check employers’ past LCAs.

President signsAgency implementationImplementation monitoring
Past Now Expected
  1. The President signed the order: agencies coordinate, consider relevant layoffs and re-check past LCAs.

  2. Published in the as 14431 (91 FR 60501–60503).

  3. Related action: at a White House press conference, a official announced a suspension of new and pending cases for named companies including Microsoft and Adobe.

  4. DOJ announced the Cloudera settlement: no filings for 24 months from its latest withdrawal.

  5. Signed; agencies implementing

  6. starts re-checking past LCAs (due to begin by October 18), and agencies issue their implementing documents.

Read impact & outlook
#14
Community score
—/10
Federal rulemaking
?
Federal rulemakingProposal published; public comments open

When a federal agency changes a regulation everyone must follow, it usually goes through six steps: draft it, send it to the White House’s for review, publish a proposal (), let anyone comment for a set period, issue a after reading the comments, and start enforcing it on the effective date. Nothing changes at the proposal stage; only a in effect counts. Once a rule is out, people may sue, and a court can pause or strike it down; lawsuits are shown next to the process.

This policy: The proposal was published October 14; public comments close November 13.

  1. 1Draft / agendaCompleted
  2. 2 reviewCompleted
  3. 3 publishedCompleted
  4. 4Public commentCurrent stage
  5. 5Not reached
  6. 6EffectiveNot reached
H-1BWork-petition renewalsEligibility review

Proposed End to Deference to Prior Approvals in Work-Visa Renewals

Proposed rule · Comments due November 13

When the first three years of an H-1B run out, the employer files another to extend it. Today, if the employer, worker and job are the same, USCIS generally follows its earlier approval instead of starting over. proposes ending that, so every extension can be reviewed from scratch. The proposal was published October 14 and comments close November 13. It is not in effect; extensions work as before for now. Submit a public comment ↗

Draft / agenda review publishedPublic commentEffective
Past Now Expected
  1. The proposal was posted for public inspection in the , proposing to delete 8 214.1(c)(5).

  2. The proposal was published (91 FR 65119); comments close November 13.

  3. Proposal published; public comments open

  4. Public comments due before midnight Eastern Time, filed on regulations.gov under USCIS-2026-0529.

  5. After reviewing comments, decides the final text and start date.

Read impact & outlook
CPT SCHOOL TRACKER

CPT: Which schools have paused approvals?

Most pauses concern elective or course-credit CPT, not every form of CPT.