PHAN NGUYEN BLOG

Asylum has played a large role in the immigration process for decades, and it has provided safety for millions of people, but with recent changes to immigration policy, many people are left wondering if this option is still available to them. One of the most controversial policies issued last year is the “fast track” denial policy.  Under the policy, if a judge decides that a Form I-589 is legally incomplete or insufficient, the case can be denied without a hearing. In the past, people had the ability to correct mistakes, but now an error can lead to deportation without a review of evidence. Since hearings are not guaranteed, it is important that you ensure the correctness of your information, as immigration processes often run on strict deadlines, and even the smallest delay may harm your case. How to Qualify? Before you submit your application, you must not only confirm that you are eligible for asylum, but also be able to prove that you are. Since asylum offers a direct path to citizenship, these applications are looked at very closely, and these are the qualifications: You must be within the US when you submit your application File Form I-589, within 1 year of arriving in the US, there is a $100 non-waivable fee Provide evidence of well-founded fear of persecution Not all forms of persecution qualify for asylum— only those falling within these protected categories: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, and membership in a particular social group. While most categories are self-explanatory, proving that you are a part of a “particular social group” (PSG) requires 3 characteristics: A shared trait they can't change. Everyone in the group has something in common that's either unchangeable (like where they're from or who their family is) or so personal that no one should be forced to change (like their sexuality). The group has clear boundaries. "People who've been threatened" is too vague — almost anyone could fit. "Women from a specific village who face forced marriage" is specific enough to have real edges. Other people in their country actually see them as a group. It's not enough that the applicant thinks of themselves as part of a group — their own society has to recognize that group as real and distinct, whether through laws, culture, or social norms. If you are a part of a qualifying category, you also need to show one of two things: either that you were already harmed in your home country, or that you have reason to believe you will be harmed if you go back. If something already happened to you, this is a strong starting point because the law assumes the danger is still there, and it's then up to the government to argue otherwise. If nothing has happened yet but you're afraid it will, you don't need to prove it's guaranteed to happen—you just need to show there's a realistic chance it could. But your fear can't just be a feeling. You need to be able to point to real-world reasons — things happening in your country, to people like you — that back it up. The persecution also has to come from the right source — either your government directly, or from a group that your government is unwilling or unable to stop. Asylum Disqualifications and Bans While the qualifications are important, you should also keep in mind the disqualifying factors: You participated in persecuting others based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. You have been convicted of a particularly serious crime, including any aggravated felony. You are considered a threat to national security or have ties to a terrorist organization. You were already offered permanent safety in another country before coming to the US. You are subject to a third-country removal agreement, meaning the US can send you to another country to have your claim processed there instead, where you would then need to prove you'd be in danger there too. The third-country removal agreements were introduced in 2025 and are formally known as an Asylum Cooperative Agreement (ACA). This is essentially a deal the US makes with another country where that country agrees to take in asylum seekers and process their claims instead of the US doing it. So if you traveled through or have a connection to one of those countries on your way to the US, the US government can say "that country will handle your case" and send you there rather than letting you apply here. You don't have to have lived there or have any real ties to it — just being subject to the agreement can be enough. The catch is that once you're sent there, you'd have to start the asylum process all over again in that country. And if you want to argue against being sent, you'd have to prove that you'd face danger in that third country specifically — not just in your home country. The BIA confirmed in a 2025 ruling that immigration judges can dismiss an asylum application outright if an ACA applies and the applicant can't show they'd be at risk in the third country — even if their original claim against their home country is strong. There are also 39 country-wide asylum application processing pauses with two tiers: countries with a full ban (all nonimmigrant and immigrant visa categories are fully suspended) and countries with a partial ban (suspension covers B-1/B-2 visitor visas, F, M, and J student and exchange visitor visas, and all immigrant visas — but other nonimmigrant categories like work visas (H-1B, L-1, O-1) remain available). As of March 30, 2026, USCIS lifted the processing hold for asylum seekers from "non-high-risk countries," but has not publicly defined which countries count as "high-risk" or provided any written guidance. Full ban: Afghanistan, Burma (Myanmar), Burkina Faso, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Laos, Libya, Mali, Niger, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen — anyone traveling on Palestinian documents. Partial ban: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Burundi, Côte d'Ivoire, Cuba, Dominica, Gabon, The Gambia, Malawi, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Togo, Tonga, Venezuela, Zambia, and Zimbabwe — plus Turkmenistan. A single incomplete form, a missed deadline, or an unexpected policy change can derail a case that might otherwise succeed — and with hearings no longer guaranteed, there may not be a second chance to get it right. Whether you're just beginning the process or have a case already in motion, working with an experienced immigration attorney can help you understand where you stand and give your case the best possible chance of moving forward. Call the Law Office of Phan Nguyen at 469-465-2344. We are here Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM. You can also visit us at nguyen-legal.com to book a consultation. You don't have to face this alone. We are here for you. Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. The information provided is for general informational purposes only. Immigration laws and enforcement priorities can change rapidly. For advice specific to your situation, please consult with a licensed immigration attorney at the Law Office of Phan Nguyen — call 469-465-2344 or visit nguyen-legal.com.

In 1996, the federal government passed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA). While this law has been in place for around 30 years, it has rarely ever been enforced. To apply for a US passport, you must pay any outstanding child support payments, and if you owe more than $2,500, federal regulations do not allow you to be issued a passport. Additionally, they may revoke your valid passport. According to the US Department of State , “A revoked passport may no longer be used for travel even if child support debt has been paid.” Before 2026, the government mostly blocked new passports or renewals, but now they are actively revoking valid passports. While anyone owing over $2,500 is at risk, the department told The Associated Press that the revocations, which began on May 8th, would be focused on those who owe $100,000 or more. They are choosing to focus on those with a high amount overdue while they continue to collect the data for individuals who owe over $2,500. They have not released a statement on when this expansion of enforcement will begin. The department will send passport revocation notices directly to the passport holder by email or by mail using the address listed on their most recent passport application. Once you have paid all of your outstanding child support, it's also important to note that it may take at least 2-3 weeks before the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) removes your name from its records and allows you to be eligible for a new passport. If you are not in the US but received a notification that your US passport has been revoked, you should contact the state where you owe child support to pay your debt and look for the nearest US embassy or consulate for passport application procedures. At that time, you will only be eligible for a limited passport for direct return to the US until HHS verifies the repayment of your debt. According to the Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) , even if a parent lowers their child support debt below $2,500, the state does not automatically have to remove them from the passport denial program. Each state has its own rules for deciding when someone can be removed. Some states may allow payment plans, while others may require a larger payment or the full balance to be paid first. A parent is usually removed from the program once the overdue balance is fully paid off or the state asks for the case to be withdrawn, and only the state that reported the debt can request removal. If multiple states reported the same parent, every state involved must agree to remove the case. As the federal government expands enforcement efforts, individuals with unpaid child support should be aware that passport restrictions are no longer limited to new applications or renewals. Revocation of existing passports is now being actively pursued, and resolving these issues may require coordination with multiple state agencies and federal departments. These situations can affect international travel, immigration matters, and the ability to return to the US, so it is important to address any outstanding issues as soon as possible. If you are dealing with passport revocations or related immigration concerns and are unsure of what your options are, it would be best to consult with an experienced immigration attorney who can explain your options. Call the Law Office of Phan Nguyen at 469-465-2344. We are here Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM. You can also visit us at nguyen-legal.com to book a consultation. You don't have to face this alone. We are here for you.  Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. The information provided is for general informational purposes only. Immigration laws and enforcement priorities can change rapidly. For advice specific to your situation, please consult with a licensed immigration attorney at the Law Office of Phan Nguyen — call 469-465-2344 or visit nguyen-legal.com.

The fundamental concept behind the writ of habeas corpus has existed for centuries, with many tracing its origins to the Magna Carta. The threat of unlawful imprisonment has long been a concern of citizens subject to government authority. Similarly, the US adopted habeas corpus as a constitutional safeguard against arbitrary detention. Historically, habeas corpus has been used to challenge imprisonment without trial, and while it is still used for that today, its use has expanded to include challenges to immigration detention and deportation-related custody. Who qualifies for habeas corpus? Any person who is being detained or restrained may seek habeas corpus relief if they believe the detention is unlawful and it is not limited to U.S. citizens; noncitizens, like immigrants in detention facilities, may also file habeas petitions. Immigration habeas petitions are generally filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and are most commonly used when detention becomes prolonged or when the government allegedly lacks authority to continue holding the person. There is no strict minimum amount of time a person must remain detained before filing a habeas petition. Technically, a detainee may seek habeas relief as soon as they believe the detention is unlawful; however, in practice, federal courts are more likely to seriously consider habeas relief when detention has become prolonged, especially where the detainee has not received a bond hearing or where removal is not reasonably foreseeable. In immigration cases, courts often begin criticizing detention more closely after approximately six months of custody, especially in cases where a final order has already been issued. How does the Vietnamese repatriation agreement factor into this? For many Vietnamese immigrants— particularly those who arrived in the US before July 12, 1995— the US faced major obstacles deporting them because of the 2008 Vietnam Repatriation Agreement. Under that agreement, Vietnam refused to accept deportees who entered the US before diplomatic normalization in 1995. The issue became more complicated after a 2020 memorandum between the United States and Vietnam created a process allowing Vietnam to consider accepting some pre-1995 arrivals for repatriation. However, deportation still often depends on Vietnam’s discretionary approval and issuance of travel documents. As a result, habeas corpus remains important because even after the 2020 agreement, Vietnam has refused or delayed travel documents often leaving Vietnamese people detained for unforeseeable periods of time. Unlike prison sentences in criminal cases, immigration detention is not supposed to punish a person, but instead to make sure they appear for immigration proceedings and can be deported if necessary. Because of this, when the government cannot realistically deport someone within a reasonable amount of time, keeping them detained for long periods raises serious justice and constitutional concerns. Habeas corpus therefore serves as an important legal tool that allows detained immigrants to challenge prolonged detention and require the government to explain why continued detention is justified. For many Vietnamese immigrants facing delayed or uncertain repatriation, habeas petitions have become an important safeguard against being held for an indefinite amount of time when deportation may not actually be possible. These cases are highly fact-specific and involve both immigration law and federal court procedure, so speaking with an immigration attorney can help clarify whether habeas relief is appropriate for your case and what your best course of action may be. Call the Law Office of Phan Nguyen at 469-465-2344. We are here Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM. You can also visit us at nguyen-legal.com to book a consultation. You don't have to face this alone. We are here for you. Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. The information provided is for general informational purposes only. Immigration laws and enforcement priorities can change rapidly. For advice specific to your situation, please consult with a licensed immigration attorney at the Law Office of Phan Nguyen — call 469-465-2344 or visit nguyen-legal.com.

Dated May 21, 2026, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sent out a policy memo to US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) immigration officers about a change in how green card applications will be processed. In an official statement published on the USCIS website , the agency explained that individuals seeking “adjustment of status must do so through consular processing via the Department of State outside of the country.” This change is likely to affect the majority of people looking to adjust their status, including family-based applicants (spouses, parents, children of US citizens/LPRs), employment-based applicants (H-1B, PERM-based green cards, etc.), and students or graduates transitioning to a work visa. The USCIS statement says, “Nonimmigrants, like students, temporary workers, or people on tourist visas, come to the U.S. for a short time and for a specific purpose. Our system is designed for them to leave when their visit is over.” Despite this claim, INA § 245(a) / 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a) , states that “The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States … may be adjusted … to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if … the alien makes an application for such adjustment.” Adjustment of Status and Consular Processing While both processes lead to lawful permanent residence, they hold major differences that you should keep in mind with this new policy change. Adjustment of status allows applicants who are already inside the US to apply for a green card without leaving the country. During the process, many applicants can remain with their families, continue working using employment authorization, and avoid the uncertainty of international travel. On the other hand, consular processing requires applicants to complete their immigrant visa interviews at a US embassy or consulate overseas before returning to the US as permanent residents. This often means leaving the country for weeks or months while the case is processed. Under the new policy, green cards would be issued to people within the US only in “extraordinary circumstances” that largely rely on immigration officers' discretion. Consular processing can create serious risks related to unlawful presence because leaving the US is what triggers the legal penalties. If someone has stayed in the US without a valid status for more than 180 days or more than one year, departing for a visa interview abroad can activate a 3-year or 10-year bar on returning. This means a person who might otherwise qualify for a green card could suddenly be blocked from coming back after they leave. Once an applicant leaves the US for their immigrant visa interview, they generally cannot return until the case has been approved. If there are delays like missing documents, security checks, or consular backlogs, the person may be forced to stay outside of the US for an unpredictable amount of time. This policy is being treated as effective immediately and applies to pending and future cases unless an exception is granted. Under this framework, there are a lot of questions about who will still qualify to adjust status inside the US and who will be required to go through consular processing. These decisions often depend on individual details like how someone entered the US, how long they have been here, and whether they have ever fallen out of status, which can vary widely from case to case. Given how fact-specific these cases can be and how much they can affect a person’s ability to stay with their family or remain in the US, it is often important to get advice from an immigration attorney before making decisions about how to move forward. Call the Law Office of Phan Nguyen at 469-465-2344. We are here Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM. You can also visit us at nguyen-legal.com to book a consultation. You don't have to face this alone. We are here for you.  Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. The information provided is for general informational purposes only. Immigration laws and enforcement priorities can change rapidly. For advice specific to your situation, please consult with a licensed immigration attorney at the Law Office of Phan Nguyen — call 469-465-2344 or visit nguyen-legal.com.

Texas Senate Bill 4 was passed in November 2023 and came into effect in May 2026. This bill lets police officers participate in immigration enforcement even though they are not trained the same way as federal agents are. It has opened up a way for police in Texas to detain people they believe are not citizens or legal permanent residents, and people they suspect may have illegally entered from Mexico or another country. Additionally, police officers aren’t the only ones being allowed to enforce immigration laws without training; Texas judges will also be allowed to interpret immigration laws and “ order individuals deported under certain circumstances ”. While unlawful entry has been considered a criminal offense since 1929, it was largely criminalized on the federal level; Texas is the first to try to create a state-level crime for unlawful entry into the state from a foreign nation, allowing for state and local prosecution of the conduct. It is trying to directly recreate the federal crime in 8 U.S. Code § 1325 at the state level. People who have received a deportation order from the state of Texas and fail to leave the U.S. may be faced with up to 20 years in prison. Under this new policy, police officers may feel more empowered to ask people about their immigration status, in this situation, it’s important to remember that everyone has the right to remain silent, regardless of immigration status. If you are afraid that your answer to a question could be used against you, you should let the officer know that you are exercising your 5th amendment right to remain silent; you should never lie or present any false information to an officer— this includes your name, date of birth, or address. You should also keep in mind that there are areas where officers are not allowed to enforce this immigration policy; those include pre-k through high school, places of worship, and health care facilities (including those involved in the SAFE program). Places of higher education, such as colleges and universities, graduate schools, and trade schools, are not protected from immigration enforcement. While officers will be allowed to ask questions relating to immigration status during traffic stops, they will not be allowed to stop and question you just because they suspect you entered illegally. For example, if you are pulled over for speeding, expired registration, or any other traffic violation, officers may ask questions about immigration status during the stop, but they cannot initiate or extend the stop solely to enforce immigration laws if there is no separate offense or independent legal basis for the detention. If you are approached by an officer in a public place, you may ask whether you are being detained or are free to go, and you may leave if you are not being detained. Individuals arrested under SB4 will be processed using the current Texas criminal procedure rules governing bail. After an arrest, a judge is required to set bond in accordance with Texas law, considering factors such as flight risk, public safety, and likelihood of appearing in court. Immigration status alone does not automatically make a person ineligible for bond or result in mandatory detention. However, immigration-related circumstances may be considered by the court as part of the overall assessment when setting the type and amount of bond or deciding conditions of release. An ICE detainer does not change whether a person is eligible for bond under Texas law and does not replace a judge’s bond decision. This is the official version of Senate Bill 4 (SB 4) as it was passed into law by the Texas Legislature. Immigration enforcement laws and their application can vary depending on the specific facts of each case; because of this, individuals affected by SB 4 should seek advice from qualified immigration and criminal defense attorneys. An attorney can evaluate how the law may apply to your particular circumstances, explain your rights and risks, and help you understand any potential consequences related to detention, bond, or removal proceedings. Call the Law Office of Phan Nguyen at 469-465-2344. We are here Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM. You can also visit us at nguyen-legal.com to book a consultation. You don't have to face this alone. We are here for you. Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. The information provided is for general informational purposes only. Immigration laws and enforcement priorities can change rapidly. For advice specific to your situation, please consult with a licensed immigration attorney at the Law Office of Phan Nguyen — call 469-465-2344 or visit nguyen-legal.com.

Vietnamese immigrants in DFW are facing increased removal risks. Learn your rights, your options, and how an experienced Vietnamese-speaking attorney can help. Call 469-465-2344.

The Trump administration has introduced new immigration rules and regulation from shifts to TPS to Expanded Visa Bond Policy. Learn how it affects you.

As a result of Maldonado Bautista v. Santacruz Jr., people in removal proceedings who were denied bond in the past, just because they entered the country without inspection, can once again seek a bond hearing—at least as a matter of federal law.

Travel bans are not new to the Trump administration; the president was known for his bans back in 2017, which included countries like Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. In the past, he has stated it was a move to counteract terrorism, but his new wave of bans in 2025 has been a part of his goal of securing the border. State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce confirmed that the move was in response to countries that have not strengthened their passport vetting procedures, cooperated in accepting deported nationals from the US, and taken additional measures to ensure their citizens do not pose a threat to American security—there have also been comments made that the ban is being used to combat visa overstays. One of the key differences in his 2017 vs. 2025 bans is the number of countries that will experience travel restrictions; in the past, only 7 countries were affected, but the new ban extends to 40 countries in total. Some of these are full restrictions, while some are only partial; it’s important that you learn which countries are affected and what that means. Back in June, Proclamation 10949 put full entry restrictions on 12 “high-risk” countries: Afghanistan, Burma (Myanmar), Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen In a fact sheet published on the White House website , the administration added 8 countries to the full ban list and stated their “justification for full suspension.” This includes (in order of appearance): Burkina Faso, Laos, Mali, Niger, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Syria, and Palestine. Many of these countries are experiencing conflict within their own borders or have high overstay rates. If you’re not familiar with the consequences of a full ban, it comes in many shapes and sizes. One of the major impacts will be the block of most visas, like tourist or business visas (B-1/B-2), student or exchange visas (F, M, J), or work visas; even if someone already has a visa, there is still a possibility that they will be denied entry. Although countries are listed in the ban, it’s not the actual nation that is banned, but more so their citizens; this means that it does not matter what country they’re traveling to the US from— if their country of citizenship is listed, they will be blocked. There are still some exceptions to this rule, like US green card holders, diplomats, and people with dual citizenship travelling on a non-banned passport. This will block many refugees and asylum seekers, but there are also case-by-case waivers for international or humanitarian reasons, that is to say, you still should not rely on these waivers because they are very limited and given on a discretionary basis. Even if it's not listed as an official consequence, these bans will undoubtedly lead to the separation of many families. In the same proclamation from June, there are 5 countries listed as having a partial ban: Burundi, Cuba, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. There is also a list from the White House fact sheet titled a “justification for partial suspension” for the additional 15 countries: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Cote d’Ivoire, Dominica, Gabon, The Gambia, Malawi, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Tonga, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. In relation to visas, the categories most likely to be blocked by the ban are B-1 / B-2 / B-1-B-2 (tourism and short-term business visas) and F, M, J (students, vocational students, exchange visitors visas). The exception to visa blocks is a little broader than the full ban and includes some work visas, US green card holders, diplomats, and people with dual citizenship traveling on a non-banned passport. If you are currently a US citizen or green card holder, these bans will not affect you because they are bans on nationals from that country, not travellers. Travel bans are usually discussed in complex policy terms, but their impacts are most clearly understood when coming to certain stages in the immigration process. When countries are covered by the ban, first-time visa applicants will feel the effects most because embassies will stop issuing the banned visas. International students will also face major complications, as many will have already been accepted to universities, paid tuition, or begun their studies, but the block of student visas will likely cost them many opportunities, including their admissions spot or scholarships. Those with family-based petitions are not guaranteed entry if their country is banned, which means the final step in the visa process may be blocked for an unknown period of time. Although travel bans are painted as a broad security measure, most of the time, those who are stopped at the border are students, families, and individuals seeking safety or opportunity. The rules have been changing quickly; they can be hard to keep up with, vary by visa category, and include narrow exceptions and discretionary waivers. The outcome for any individual case is not always obvious from the information that is given, and small details— such as the type of visa sought, previous travel history, or family ties in the United States— can make a significant difference in how a ban is applied. An immigration attorney can help break down how a travel ban applies to your nationality, visa category, and immigration history, and decide whether exceptions, waivers, or alternative pathways may be available. Legal guidance can also help families understand timelines, preserve eligibility, and avoid unnecessary denials or prolonged separation. If you have an immigration case or would like legal advice, schedule a consultation with me today here or call at 469-465-2344!