Kennedy Law Firm

07/21/2026

https://kennedyvisas.com/blog-kl-insights/f/f-1-students-duration-of-status-ends-sept-15-2026

06/23/2026

The Supreme Court just made it riskier for green card holders with pending criminal charges to travel abroad.In Blanche v. Lau (decided June 23, 2026), the Court held 6-3 that border officers do not need clear and convincing evidence that a returning lawful permanent resident committed a crime before treating that person as an applicant for admission rather than admitting them. A guilty plea entered later can support how the officer classified them at the border.Here is what that means in plain terms.

A green card does not guarantee you will be readmitted when you return from a trip abroad. If you have a pending charge, a prior arrest, or an unresolved criminal matter, you can be stopped at the airport, paroled in instead of admitted, and placed in proceedings, all before any conviction.That classification also carries a hidden cost. A returning resident treated as already admitted can only be removed through deportation proceedings, where the government carries the burden of proof. A resident treated as an applicant for admission faces inadmissibility proceedings, where the burden shifts onto the resident. The same classification can also increase the risk of detention and weaken the procedural protections a returning green card holder would otherwise have.The Supreme Court has come close to saying that a lawful permanent resident who travels after being charged with a crime cannot rely on the presumption of innocence at the border. The Court framed this as statutory interpretation rather than constitutional law, but the due process concerns are hard to miss. Justice Jackson's dissent presses them directly: green card confiscation, temporary documentation, and extended time in limbo, all before any judge weighs in.The practical lesson is straightforward.

If you are a lawful permanent resident with a pending charge, whether the charge is valid or wrongful, do not leave the country until it is resolved.

Full analysis on our blog: https://kennedyvisas.com/blog-kl-insights/f/supreme-court-narrows-reentry-for-returning-green-card-holders📞 301.823.6670

✉️ [email protected]

06/18/2026

A citizenship denial can put your green card at risk — not just your application.

A denial under Section 318 isn't USCIS saying you fell short of becoming a citizen. It's USCIS saying your green card was never valid in the first place — turning the naturalization interview into a second audit of a process that may have closed years ago. Under current enforcement, that can lead to removal proceedings.
The deadlines are short. If you've received a Section 318 NOID or denial, get counsel before you respond.

👉 https://kennedyvisas.com/blog-kl-insights/f/the-naturalization-interview-that-puts-a-green-card-at-risk
📞 301.823.6670 | ✉️ [email protected]

Denials under Section 318: How the Naturalization Interview Can Become a Second Audit of the Green Card Process Years Later.

06/18/2026

A court ruling just freed up thousands of stalled USCIS cases.

On June 5, a federal court vacated four USCIS policies that had frozen green cards, work permits, asylum, and naturalization for people from the travel-ban countries. If your application was filed and then went silent for months with no decision, this ruling is aimed squarely at cases like yours — and it applies across the country, not just to the people who brought the lawsuit.
One important distinction: the travel ban itself is still in effect. This decision does not reopen visa processing at consulates abroad. What it does is stop USCIS from putting your case on indefinite hold inside the United States just because of where you're from. USCIS now has to process applications under the normal rules and look at each case on its own facts.

A few honest caveats: the government is expected to appeal, so the picture could shift. The ruling doesn't guarantee approval of anyone's case, and USCIS can still run its usual security checks and request more evidence.
If your case was delayed by a nationality-based hold, this is a good moment to have it reviewed before you file, travel, or withdraw anything.
📄 Full breakdown on the blog: https://kennedyvisas.com/blog-kl-insights/f/fed-court-vacates-uscis-travel-ban-freeze-on-immigration-benefits
— Tara Kennedy, Kennedy Law, LLC

Federal Court Vacates USCIS Travel-Ban Freeze on Green Cards, Work Permits, Asylum, and Naturalization — But Travel Ban Remains in Effect

05/06/2026

Excited to share my latest Expert Analysis piece, just published in Law360.

The Supreme Court is considering whether the executive branch can deny birthright citizenship to some children born in the United States based on their parents' immigration status. My article examines why the government's argument has a core constitutional weakness.

Read the full analysis on Law360: https://www.law360.com/articles/2471687

Full text also available on my website: https://kennedyvisas.com/deportation-%26-removal/f/law360-a-core-weakness-in-the-challenge-to-birthright-citizenship

The government’s recent oral arguments against birthright citizenship in Trump v. Barbara would have the Supreme Court use modern immigration classifications as markers for a constitutional boundary that is not expressed in the Fourteenth Amendment, making the theory easier to administer but weake...

04/30/2026

The Department of State (DOS) issued a cable on Tuesday, April 28, 2026, that, effective immediately, states that all consular officers “should request that a nonimmigrant visa applicant affirm that he or she does not fear harm or mistreatment in returning to his or her country of nationality or former habitual residence, and document the response in case notes.” The U.S. Department of State has issued guidance telling consular officers to ask certain nonimmigrant visa applicants new asylum-related questions during visa interviews. Visa applicants should be careful.
El Departamento de Estado (DOS) emitió un cable el martes 28 de abril de 2026 que, con vigencia inmediata, indica que todos los oficiales consulares “deberían solicitar que un solicitante de visa de no inmigrante afirme que no teme sufrir daño o maltrato al regresar a su país de nacionalidad o de residencia habitual anterior, y documentar la respuesta en las notas del caso.” El Departamento de Estado de EE. UU. ha emitido una guía que indica a los oficiales consulares que hagan nuevas preguntas relacionadas con asilo a ciertos solicitantes de visas de no inmigrante durante las entrevistas consulares. Los solicitantes de visa deben tener cuidado.

Applicants may now be asked questions such as: “Have you experienced harm or mistreatment in your country?” and “Do you fear harm or mistreatment if you return to your country?”
Ahora los solicitantes podrían ser preguntados: “¿Ha sufrido daño o maltrato en su país?” y “¿Tiene miedo de sufrir daño o maltrato si regresa a su país?”

This is extremely important. If an applicant answers “yes,” the visa may be refused. But if an applicant answers “no” when the truthful answer is “yes,” that answer may later be used against the applicant in an asylum case or another immigration matter.
Esto es muy importante. Si la persona responde “sí,” la visa podría ser negada. Pero si la persona responde “no” cuando la respuesta verdadera es “sí,” esa respuesta podría usarse en su contra más adelante en un caso de asilo u otro trámite migratorio.

A short answer at a visa interview can become part of the government record. Later, an asylum officer, immigration judge, or immigration agency may compare that answer to future claims of fear, persecution, threats, violence, or mistreatment.
Una respuesta breve en una entrevista consular puede quedar en el récord del gobierno. Más adelante, un oficial de asilo, un juez de inmigración o una agencia migratoria podría comparar esa respuesta con futuras declaraciones sobre miedo, persecución, amenazas, violencia o maltrato.

The safest rule is simple: do not guess, do not minimize serious harm, and do not give an answer that is not true because you are afraid of a visa denial. La regla más segura es simple: no adivine, no minimice daños graves y no dé una respuesta que no sea verdadera solo por miedo a que le nieguen la visa.

If you have experienced harm, threats, violence, political persecution, religious persecution, gang threats, domestic violence, or any serious fear of returning to your country, speak with an immigration attorney before attending a visa interview.
Si usted ha sufrido daño, amenazas, violencia, persecución política, persecución religiosa, amenazas de pandillas, violencia doméstica, o tiene un miedo serio de regresar a su país, hable con un abogado de inmigración antes de asistir a una entrevista de visa.

This post is for general information only and is not legal advice.
Esta publicación es solo información general y no es asesoría legal.