Newsweek: Trump admin plans new time limit for foreign students in US

The Trump administration is proposing new four-year time limits on student, exchange and media visa holders, as part of plans to tighten up immigration rules.

In a proposal filed in the Federal Register on Wednesday, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced its intention to modify the F, J, and I visa categories.

“If enacted, this rule would create additional uncertainty, intrude on academic decision-making, increase bureaucratic hurdles and risk deterring international students, researchers and scholars from coming to the United States,” Miriam Feldblum, president and CEO of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, told Newsweek.

Why It Matters

Student visa holders have been a focus of immigration enforcement under the second Trump administration, with many having their legal status revoked and interviews for new applicants paused for several weeks. This latest proposal revisits a plan from President Donald Trump‘s first term.

What To Know

The DHS said that, unlike many other visa types, F, J, and I visas currently do not have time limits; instead, they require holders to adhere to the rules of their respective visas. Under the new plan, four-year limits would be imposed, aimed at stopping lengthy visa overstays.

The three categories cover foreign students, exchange visitors—such as summer workers, au pairs, and medical students—and those in foreign media.

The DHS memo stated that part of the reason for seeking the new limits was due to the “dramatic rise” in these visas, with F visas (used by international students) increasing from 260,000 in 1981 to 1.6 million in 2023.

J visas (used by some students, academics, medical professionals, au pairs and other such visitors) experienced a 250 percent increase between 1985 and 2023, rising from 141,200 to approximately 500,000, while I visas (for media) also doubled during the same period.

The DHS stated that this posed a challenge to its agencies when it came to monitoring individuals in the U.S. with such visa types, and that a fixed-term approach would be more effective in managing immigration numbers.

For student visa holders, under the new proposal, they would have to either apply for a change in status at the end of their term (i.e., for an H-1B or other work-based visa) or ask for an extension of their F-1 visa if they have not completed their studies. Similar parameters would apply to I and J visa holders.

The Trump administration’s efforts to withdraw legal status for students and hold up interviews at the embassy stage have faced and lost to legal challenges in recent months, with student and exchange visitor advocates arguing that these programs deliver significant benefits to the U.S. economy.

What People Are Saying

Miriam Feldblum, president and CEO of the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, told Newsweek: “The proposed rule is yet another unnecessary and counterproductive measure targeting international students and scholars. It would require them to repeatedly submit additional applications just to remain in the country and fulfill requirements of their academic programs—imposing significant burdens on students, colleges and universities, and federal agencies alike.”

A DHS Spokesperson, in a statement shared with Newsweek“For too long, past Administrations have allowed foreign students and other visa holders to remain in the U.S. virtually indefinitely, posing safety risks, costing untold amount of taxpayer dollars, and disadvantaging U.S. citizens. This new proposed rule would end that abuse once and for all by limiting the amount of time certain visa holders are allowed to remain in the U.S., easing the burden on the federal government to properly oversee foreign students and history.”

What Happens Next

DHS will now welcome comments and feedback on the proposals. When the idea was floated in 2020, over 32,000 comments were submitted, many of which were against the idea, which was subsequently scrapped by the Biden administration.

This makes zero sense to me. The longer students are here, the more educated & skilled they presumably become, and we should want them to stay longer … perhaps permanently.

https://www.newsweek.com/student-exchange-visa-changes-proposal-trump-administration-2120179

Alternet: ‘Not joking’: Ex-Trump official warns he privately ‘waxes poetic’ about dictators he admires

During a White House press conference in late August, President Donald Trump addressed accusations that he is acting like a “dictator.”

Trump told reporters, “A lot of people are saying, ‘Maybe we’d like a dictator.’ I don’t like a dictator. I’m not a dictator. I’m a man with great common sense, and a smart person.”

One of Trump’s targets is Miles Taylor, who served the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) during Trump’s first presidency but is now an outspoken critic. The Never Trump conservative, who is facing a federal investigation, regards Trump as a dangerous authoritarian.

During a Wednesday morning, August 27 appearance on CNN, Taylor explained why he is zeroing on the line, “A lot of people are saying, ‘Maybe we’d like a dictator.'”

“Look at what Trump said five years ago,” Taylor told CNN’s John Berman. “He said: When you are president of the United States, the authority is total — and that’s how it’s gotta be. And five years later, he’s still saying things that would indicate his interest in being a dictator. Now, I will tell you, having spent time personally with the man in his first Trump Administration, he would wax poetic in private about foreign dictators he admired. He was jealous of their ability to exert total control over their populations.”

Taylor continued, “That is the president of the United States we are seeing now. And he is not joking.”

Taylor was serving as DHS chief of staff under then-Homeland Security Kirstjen M. Nielsen when he anonymously wrote a New York Times op-ed that was published on September 5, 2018 and headlined, “I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration.” Years later, Taylor came out as the person who wrote it.

Taylor told Berman, “When he said he was going to be America’s retribution, people said no, he’s joking about that. When he said he was going to lock people up, people said he was joking. When he said he was going to send in the troops, people said nah, he’s joking. He’s doing all of those things, John.”

Watch the full video below or at this link.

https://www.alternet.org/trump-miles-taylor-cnn

Daily Beast: Hot Mic Catches Republican Saying Trump Is in the Epstein Files

Collins made a bombshell admission that he believes Trump’s name will be in the files.

MAGA lawmaker Mike Collins lobbed a political grenade into efforts from Team Trump to limit his exposure to fallout from the Epstein files.

Georgia Rep. Collins made a bombshell admission, that he believes Donald Trump’s name will be in the files, at a county GOP meeting, the Washington Examiner reported.

A constituent asked the MAGA lawmaker whether he believed Trump was in the files related to Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender who died by suicide while in federal custody in New York City in August 2019 as he awaited trial on new sex trafficking charges.

“Yeah, I’m sure he’s in there,” Collins said, without providing evidence, according to an audio clip of the exchange uploaded to YouTube, titled, “HOT MIC: Republican caught saying Trump IS IN THE EPSTEIN FILES!”

The White House has repeatedly pushed back after reports emerged that Trump was told in May that he was in files related to Epstein. Trump and Epstein were once friendly, but the president said they fell out in 2004.

The Daily Beast contacted the White House and Collins for comment.

Trump “is in the Epstein files,” he wrote in a post on X as he and the president engaged in a bitter online feud. He alleged that “that is the real reason they have not been made public.” Musk signed the post off by writing: “Have a nice day, DJT!”

Musk added in a follow-up post: “Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out.”

At the time, Trump brushed off the claims in an interview with NBC News.

“That’s called ‘old news.’ That’s been old news. That has been talked about for years. Even Epstein’s lawyer said I had nothing to do with it. It’s old news,” the president said.

Officials in the first Trump administration determined that Epstein’s death was a suicide, but conspiracy theories that he was killed to shield high-profile individuals have proliferated nonetheless.

The Trump administration, in February, declassified and released files related to Epstein, but they were highly redacted and did not offer major revelations. The FBI said in a July memo that a “systematic review revealed no incriminating ‘client list.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/hot-mic-catches-republican-saying-trump-is-in-the-epstein-files

Reason: Looks Like We Found a Ham Sandwich a Grand Jury Won’t Indict

A federal grand jury reportedly refused to indict Sean Dunn for hurling a hoagie at a federal law enforcement officer.

The New York Times reported today that federal prosecutors failed to secure a grand jury indictment against Sean Dunn, the Washington, D.C., man who was arrested earlier this month after he hurled a Subway sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection officer.

Dunn’s act of defiance against the Trump administration’s occupation of D.C. with National Guard and federal law enforcement officers earned him viral fame—and an arrest warrant executed by 20 officers in riot gear (and a White House film crew).

As Reason‘s Billy Binion wrote, the “disproportionate response to [Dunn’s] offense epitomizes why Trump’s plan appears to be, at least for now, more political theater than a real solutions-oriented approach” to crime in D.C.

And the grand jury’s decision in his case shows the deep unpopularity of the federal takeover of D.C.’s streets. Dunn’s case is the second recent case where prosecutors for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for D.C. failed to convince a local grand jury to return an indictment for felony assault on a federal law enforcement officer. Prosecutors failed to convince three different grand juries to indict a woman accused of assaulting an FBI agent, forcing prosecutors to refile the case as a misdemeanor. 

Federal prosecutors can try again to convince another grand jury to indict Dunn, but of course, they then risk being further embarrassed. The Times called the grand jury’s decision in Dunn’s case a “remarkable failure” by the U.S. Attorney’s Office and a “sharp rebuke.”

Not bound by the Times‘ style guide and decorum, I can explain it to federal prosecutors more bluntly: They’re clowning on you. They don’t respect you, and they don’t want you there.

D.C. residents, because they live in a federal district, may be under the administration’s thumb, but thanks to the right to jury trials, they still have access to a powerful check on excessive and unpopular prosecutions: jury nullification.

Jury nullification is when a juror refuses to find guilt or indict someone due to moral objection to the law or charges in question, regardless of whether the defendant is guilty or not. As George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin wrote at The Volokh Conspiracy in 2018, nullification undermines the rule of law in a system where the criminal codes are more or less uniformly applied, but in the real world it has become, unfortunately,  “a counterweight to the enormous discretionary power already wielded by government officials.”

By turning D.C. prosecutions into a public relations campaign, the White House is delegitimizing itself in the eyes of D.C. jurors and, counterproductively, giving them the means to fight back.

https://reason.com/2025/08/27/looks-like-we-found-a-ham-sandwich-a-grand-jury-wont-indict

Tampa Free Press: Border Czar Tom Homan Vows Deportation Of Abrego Garcia Despite Judge’s Order

Homan Pledges to Remove Alleged Gang Member with ‘Significant Public Safety Threat’

Border Czar Tom Homan has vowed to deport Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, an illegal immigrant with a documented criminal past, despite a U.S. District Judge’s recent order to keep him in the country.

Appearing on Fox News’ “Hannity,” Homan called Abrego Garcia a “significant public safety threat,” citing his alleged status as a gang member, a “designated terrorist,” and his past indictment for human trafficking and alien smuggling.

Homan’s statement comes after an Obama-appointed U.S. District Judge, Paula Xinis, temporarily halted the Trump administration’s attempt to deport Abrego Garcia to Uganda. Judge Xinis ordered that he remain in the U.S. until an evidentiary hearing could be held.

During the interview, Homan expressed confidence that Abrego Garcia would be deported, stating, “I’m giving you my word. He will be deported from this country. I got my teeth in this thing. I’m not letting it go.”

The case has been a point of contention between the Trump administration and some Democrats, including Maryland Senator Chris Van Hollen, who has previously advocated for Abrego Garcia.

Documents released by the Department of Justice in April showed evidence of Abrego Garcia’s alleged MS-13 ties dating back to 2019. Despite these allegations and past domestic abuse accusations from his wife, Abrego Garcia was brought back to the U.S. in June to face human smuggling charges.

Homan dismissed the possibility of Abrego Garcia’s asylum claim, arguing that he is “beyond the required one year” and that his case lacks the necessary evidence of persecution to qualify under asylum law.

He maintains that if the judge “rules on the law,” Abrego Garcia” is gone.”

Tom Homan is an arrogant piece of shit with no respect for due process or the law.

Guardian: Judge blocks Trump administration from deporting Kilmar Ábrego García again

Federal judge says man wrongfully deported to El Salvador cannot be expelled until October as asylum case proceeds

A federal judge ruled Wednesday that Kilmar Ábrego García, who was already wrongfully deported once, cannot be deported again until at least early October, according to multiple reports.

CNN reported that the US district judge Paula Xinis, who is presiding over the case, scheduled an evidentiary hearing for 6 October, and said that she intends to have Trump administration officials testify about the government’s efforts to re-deport Ábrego.

At the same hearing, Ábrego’s lawyers informed the court that he plans to seek asylum in the United States, according to the Associated Press.

Ábrego’s case has drawn national attention since he was wrongfully deported by the Trump administration to El Salvador in March.

Following widespread pressure, including from the supreme court, the Trump administration returned him to the US in June. Upon his return, however, he immediately faced criminal charges related to human smuggling, allegations that his lawyers have rejected as “preposterous”.

Ábrego, who is 30 years old and a Salvadorian native, was released from criminal custody in Tennessee on Friday while awaiting trial.

But over the weekend, the Trump administration announced new plans to deport him to Uganda.

Then on Monday, Ábrego was taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) during a scheduled immigration check-in in Baltimore, which was one of the conditions of his release.

He is currently being held in a detention center in Virginia.

Ábrego’s legal team swiftly filed a lawsuit on Monday, challenging both his current detention and his potential deportation to Uganda. In court filings, they argued that the government is retaliating against Ábrego for challenging his deportation to El Salvador.

“The only reason he was taken into detention was to punish him,” said Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, an attorney representing Ábrego, on Monday. “To punish him for exercising his constitutional rights.”

Later on Monday, Xinis issued a ruling temporarily barring the government from deporting Ábrego until at least Friday. On Wednesday, she extended her order until Ábrego’s current deportation challenge in court is resolved, according to ABC News.

It added that Xinis said she would issue a ruling within 30 days of the 6 October hearing, and also ordered that Ábrego must remain in custody within a 200-mile (320km) radius of the court in Maryland.

She also reportedly said she would not order Ábrego released from immigration custody, leaving that decision for an immigration judge.

Ábrego entered the US without authorization around 2011 as a teenager. According to court documents, he was fleeing gang violence.

In 2019, a federal court granted him protection from deportation to El Salvador. Despite that ruling, in March, he was mistakenly deported there by the Trump administration.

In court documents in April, the Trump administration admitted that Ábrego’s deportation had been due to an “administrative error”.

Since then, Trump administration officials have repeatedly accused him of being affiliated with the MS-13 gang, a claim Ábrego and his family have denied.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/aug/27/kilmar-abrego-garcia-deportation-trump-asylum

Latin Times: Trump Admin Already Sending Migrants To African Country As Part Of Deportation Agreement

Seven migrants from third countries were sent to Rwanda, the country confirmed

The Trump administration deported seven migrants from third countries to Rwanda in August as part of an agreement, the African nation confirmed on Thursday.

Rwandan government spokeswoman Yolande Makolo said in a statement that the group arrived to the country in mid-August, ABC News reported.

They were “accommodated by an international organization,” Makolo added, and are being visited both by members of the International Organization for Migration and the Rwandan social services.

“Three of the individuals have expressed a desire to return to their home countries, while four wish to stay and build lives in Rwanda,” the spokeswoman added. They are also set to receive workforce training and healthcare. She provided no information of the migrants sent to the country.

Rwanda will take up to 250 migrants following an agreement signed in June.

Four African countries accepted receiving migrants from third countries from the U.S., the other ones being Eswatini, South Sudan and Uganda.

Uganda is the latest one to do so, with CBS News reporting earlier this month that it agreed to the deal as long as deportees don’t have criminal records. It is not clear how many migrants the country is willing to accept.

Overall, at least a dozen countries have already accepted or agreed to accept deportees from third nations so far in the second Trump administration.

Earlier this month the Miami Herald reported that more than three in ten migrants deported to third countries are Venezuelan. The outlet scanned through data obtained by the University of California’s Deportation Data Project. It showed that Venezuelans make up the largest share of deportees sent to countries where they were neither born nor were citizens.

Overall, close to 3,000 Venezuelans were deported to third countries during the first six months of the year, although the outlet clarified that the dataset is likely incomplete. Over two hundreds were infamously sent to a mega-prison in El Salvador, where many claimed to be subjected to numerous abuses before being released as part of a three-part agreement involving the U.S., Venezuela and the Central American country.

Most have been sent to Spanish-speaking countries including Mexico, Honduras, El Salvador and Spain. However, two were sent to Austria, one to Italy, one to Syria and one to Vanuatu, in the Pacific.

Overall, 7,900 such deportations were recorded by then, with Venezuelans representing 36.71% of the total. They are followed by Guatemalans (20%) and Hondurans (7.8%).

https://www.latintimes.com/trump-admin-already-sending-migrants-african-country-part-deportation-agreement-588923

Daily Beast: Trump Takes Revenge Against FEMA Workers Who Warned He’s Risking Disaster

FEMA employees were abruptly placed on administrative leave Tuesday—just 24 hours after they signed an explosive open letter warning Donald Trump that the agency is being dragged back to its pre-Katrina dark ages.

The letter, signed by 191 current and former FEMA staffers, was sent to Congress and top officials on Monday. Its message was blunt—the people now running FEMA are inexperienced, politically driven, and dismantling the very programs that keep Americans safe when disaster strikes.

The writers warned that, left unchecked, the agency could stumble into catastrophe. By Tuesday evening, FEMA’s administrator’s office had fired back with suspension letters.

The employees were told they would remain in “non-duty status” but keep their pay and benefits, effectively being benched for speaking out.

The letter also cited decisions made by Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi “ICE Barbie” Noem as a reason the agency could fail to manage disaster responses.

FEMA confirmed that multiple employees were placed on immediate leave, though the exact number remains unclear. Of the nearly 200 signatories, only about 36 revealed their names publicly, The Washington Post and CNN reported.

“It is not surprising that some of the same bureaucrats who presided over decades of inefficiency are now objecting to reform. Change is always hard. It is especially for those invested in the status quo, who have forgotten that their duty is to the American people not entrenched bureaucracy,” a FEMA spokesperson told the Daily Beast.

“Under the Biden Administration, the American people were abandoned as disasters ravaged North Carolina, and needed aid was denied based on party affiliation in Florida. Our obligation is to survivors, not to protecting broken systems. Under the leadership of Secretary Noem, FEMA will return to its mission of assisting Americans at their most vulnerable.”

Former President George W. Bush was heavily criticized for his administration’s slow response to Hurricane Katrina particularly in New Orleans, where much of the city was left underwater. In its aftermath, Congress passed the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (PKEMRA), which added safeguards to prevent another botched response.

The letter from FEMA employees warns that the Trump administration is rolling back those protections and calls on Congress to intervene. Their demands include shielding FEMA from “further interference” from the DHS, stopping “illegal impoundments of appropriated funding,” and protecting FEMA workers from “politically motivated firings.”

Noem, whose department oversees FEMA, was already under fire in July over the response to flooding in Texas that left about 135 people dead. Critics blamed a new rule she insisted upon, which required her personal sign-off on any contract or grant over $100,000, which delayed the deployment of an Urban Search and Rescue team by at least three days.

At least two FEMA staffers placed on leave had been part of that Texas flood response, The Washington Post reported.

Jeremy Edwards, a former FEMA press secretary who signed the “FEMA Katrina Declaration,” said the number of signatories “signifies the severity of the problem.”

“They are that scared of us being so inadequately unprepared. It speaks a lot to the situation right now,” Edwards told The Post.

The Trump administration also placed about 140 Environmental Protection Agency employees on leave in July after they signed a letter protesting the agency’s management and the treatment of federal workers.

The Daily Beast has contacted the White House for comment.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-takes-revenge-against-fema-workers-who-warned-hes-risking-disaster

Knewz: Trump admin faces double legal blow in just hours

Donald Trump and his administration suffered two major legal setbacks as federal judges in California and Rhode Island ruled against key policies pursued by the White House.

In California, U.S. District Court Judge Jennifer Thurston ordered the release of Salam Maklad, a Syrian national from the Druze religious minority, who had been detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers earlier this summer.

In Rhode Island, Senior District Judge William Smith blocked the administration from imposing new restrictions on domestic violence funding programs connected to the president’s recent executive order targeting what he described as “gender ideology.” Details of both rulings were shared by Politico’s legal affairs reporter, Kyle Cheney, on X.

With Republicans in control of the White House and both chambers of Congress, the judiciary has become a critical check on Trump’s agenda. Courts have previously halted efforts to penalize law firms representing cases against Trump, blocked attempts to revoke protections for Haitian migrants and struck down sanctions aimed at employees of the International Criminal Court. The California case centered on Maklad, who entered the United States in 2002 without valid documentation and applied for asylum. Court records show she later married a man who was granted asylum, which her legal team argued made her eligible for legal immigration status. ICE recently detained her after she attended what she believed was a routine “check-in” meeting and subsequently placed her in expedited removal proceedings and threatened her with deportation. Thurston emphasized Maklad’s clean record and lack of flight risk, writing that “the balance of the equities and public interest weigh in favor of Ms. Maklad.”

The judge ordered her release and barred authorities from rearresting her without “compliance with constitutional protections, which include, at a minimum, pre-deprivation notice — describing the change of circumstances necessitating her arrest — and detention, and a timely bond hearing.” Thurston further ruled that “Respondents are PERMANENTLY ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from rearresting or re-detaining Ms. Maklad absent compliance with constitutional protections. … At any such hearing, the Government SHALL bear the burden of establishing, by clear and convincing evidence, that Ms. Maklad poses a danger to the community or a risk of flight, and Ms. Maklad SHALL be allowed to have her counsel present.”

On the same day, Judge Smith ruled against the administration in a case tied to President Trump’s Executive Order 14168, titled “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.” The directive, issued earlier this year, declared that sex is an “immutable biological classification as male or female” and instructed federal agencies to “prioritize investigations and litigation to enforce the rights and freedoms” tied to this definition.

Following the order, the Office on Violence Against Women revised its grant policy in May 2025 to prohibit funding for “inculcating or promoting gender ideology.” A coalition of 17 nonprofit groups challenged the restrictions, arguing they undermined their work with survivors of domestic violence. Judge Smith sided with the organizations, ruling that the new requirements “could result in the disruption” of critical services for victims of sexual and domestic violence. Together, the rulings marked another day of judicial pushback against the Trump administration’s efforts to reshape immigration enforcement and federal gender policy.

https://knewz.com/trump-admin-double-legal-blow-hours

CBS News: U.S. to resume “neighborhood checks” for citizenship applications

The Trump administration is reinstating a long-dormant practice of conducting “neighborhood checks” to vet immigrants applying for U.S. citizenship, expanding its efforts to aggressively scrutinize immigration applications, according to a government memo obtained by CBS News.

The neighborhood checks would involve on-the-ground investigations by officials at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services that could include interviews with the neighbors and coworkers of citizenship applicants.

The government investigations would be conducted to determine if applicants satisfy the requirements for American citizenship, which include showing good moral character, adhering to the U.S. Constitution and being “well-disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States.”

To qualify for American citizenship in the first place, applicants typically must have lived in the U.S. for three or five years as legal permanent residents. They must also not have any serious criminal records, and pass a civics and English test. The process is known as naturalization.

The Trump administration’s memo upends a decades-old U.S. government policy. While the neighborhood investigations for citizenship cases are outlined in U.S. law, they can also be waived, which the U.S. government has done since 1991, government records show. Since then, the government has relied mainly on background and criminal checks by the FBI to vet citizenship applicants.

The USCIS memo immediately terminated the “general waiver” for neighborhood checks, directing officers to determine whether such investigations are warranted based on the information, or lack thereof, submitted by citizenship applicants. Officers retain the ability to waive the checks, according to the memo.

The directive said USCIS officers will decide whether to carry out a neighborhood investigation by requesting and reviewing testimonial letters from neighbors, employers, coworkers and business associates who know the person applying for U.S. citizenship. 

The memo suggested that citizenship applicants should “proactively” submit testimonial letters, to avoid receiving requests for more evidence. The agency said failure or refusal to comply with a request for evidence could lead to a neighborhood investigation and “impact” applicants’ ability to show they qualify for U.S. citizenship.

While the Trump administration’s campaign to expand arrests of immigrants living in the U.S. illegally is frequently touted by the president and his top officials, its effort to tighten access to the legal immigration system has been implemented with less fanfare.

Over several months, the second Trump administration has frozen the refugee admissions program, ended Biden-era policies that allowed some migrants to enter or stay in the U.S. legally and added additional layers of vetting for legal immigrants requesting immigration benefits like green cards and U.S. citizenship.

In August alone, USCIS said it would more heavily scrutinize the “good moral character” requirement for U.S. citizenship and probe “anti-American” views and activities of those applying for green cards, work permits and other immigration benefits.

The Trump administration has argued the changes are needed to combat fraud and shore up U.S. immigration procedures that it believes became too lax and generous under Democratic administrations.

USCIS Director Joe Edlow, who was confirmed by the Senate earlier this year, said the new memo will “ensure that only the most qualified applicants receive American citizenship.”

“Americans should be comforted knowing that USCIS is taking seriously its responsibility to ensure aliens are being properly vetted and are of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well-disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States,” Edlow said in a statement to CBS News. 

But pro-immigrant advocates and critics of the Trump administration said its policies are sending a chilling effect to immigrants across the country, legal and illegal alike.

“It sounds to me like the idea is to create a more intimidating atmosphere that discourages people from pursuing naturalization,” said Doris Meissner, who oversaw the Immigration and Naturalization Service during the Clinton administration.

The now-defunct INS adjudicated citizenship requests until USCIS was created in 2003. Meissner said the government had largely discontinued neighborhood checks when she became INS commissioner in the 1990s because they were labor intensive and seldom yielded useful information from neighborhoods or other sources. She also said there are other guardrails in place to prevent bad actors from becoming citizens, including background checks.

“It was viewed as one of those anachronistic processes,” Meissner added.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/neighborhood-checks-citizenship-applications