Can I Apply for Work Authorization while my Asylum Application is Pending?
Angelica Rice • February 11, 2022
Click here to read this article in Portuguese
Each year, many people come to the United States seeking refuge from harm or persecution that they suffered in their home country. Those people apply for Asylum (Form I-589) either before USCIS or in removal proceedings before the Immigration Court.
A common question amongst all Asylum Applicants, no matter where they are applying, is can I obtain authorization to work while my Asylum application is pending?
As a result of a change in the law on August 25, 2020, for many Asylum Applicants, the answer to that question is NO.
However, there are some exceptions and circumstances where an Asylum Applicant may be eligible for and be granted work authorization while their Asylum case is pending. Read on to find out more.
You cannot apply for permission to work (employment authorization) in the United States at the same time you apply for asylum. You may apply for employment authorization 365 calendar days after you file your complete asylum application.
Due to a recent change in the Immigration Court’s case adjudication policies, Court’s are prioritizing the expeditious adjudication of immigration cases, especially for Respondent’s who entered the United States unlawfully on or after November 1, 2020. Many of those cases are being adjudicated within 1 year of the NTA being filed. This means that for most Asylum Applicants in Court, their cases will not be pending for 365 days and so they will not become eligible for work authorization.
If there is a delay in the adjudication of the Court case, that was not caused by you, or if an Applicant is applying for Asylum before USCIS, then you may be eligible to receive employment authorization based on a pending asylum application if:
- You entered the United States lawfully on or after Aug. 25, 2020 (under limited exceptions, you may still be eligible if you entered the United States unlawfully on or after Aug. 25, 2020);
- For asylum applications filed on or after Aug. 25, 2020, you filed your asylum application within one year from the date of your last arrival into the United States (alternatively, an asylum officer or immigration judge determined that you qualify for an exception to the one-year filing deadline, or you are an unaccompanied alien child on the date the asylum application was first filed);
- You appeared for any scheduled biometric services appointments related to your application for asylum or employment authorization;
- You appeared for your interview with a USCIS asylum officer, or your hearing before an immigration judge, if requested or scheduled;
- You are not described in 8 CFR 208.7(a)(1)(iii);
- You do not have an outstanding applicant-caused delay related to your asylum application when you file your initial application for employment authorization; and
- No final decision has been made on your asylum application (note that a referral to an immigration judge after an interview with USCIS is not a final decision).
If, on the date that your initial application for an employment authorization document (EAD) is filed, there is an unresolved delay in your asylum adjudication that you caused, your EAD request may be denied. Examples of these applicant-caused delays include, but are not limited to:
- Requesting to amend or supplement an asylum application and causing a delay in its adjudication or in proceedings;
- Failure to appear to receive and acknowledge receipt of the decision;
- Requesting to provide additional evidence for an interview, or requesting an extension to submit additional evidence less than 14 days before the interview date, and causing a delay in the asylum application adjudication;
- Failure to appear for an asylum interview, unless USCIS excuses you;
- Failure to appear for scheduled biometrics collection for the asylum application, unless USCIS excuses you;
- Requesting to reschedule an interview for a later date;
- Requesting to transfer a case to a new asylum office or interview location, including when the transfer is for a new address;
- Failure to use a USCIS contract interpreter or provide a competent interpreter at an interview; or
- Failure to comply with any other request needed to determine asylum eligibility.
*Certain criminal offenses or convictions will make you ineligible for an EAD.
If you have questions about work authorization eligibility through a pending Asylum application, please contact one of our experienced immigration attorneys.
This blog is not intended to be legal advice and nothing here should be construed as establishing an attorney client relationship. Please schedule a consultation with an immigration attorney before acting on any information read here.
On January 14, 2026, the Trump administration announced a freeze on immigrant visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries . The administration states that this “visa freeze” is intended to review security protocols, “reduce risks,” and control immigration flows. However, the immediate reality is that this change in policy has temporarily suspended visa processing and restricted travel for applicants from numerous countries across the globe. While the legal landscape surrounding these suspensions is highly fluid and subject to change, it is important to consider how this “visa freeze” might impact your current status or immigration plans. The scope of the restrictions varies drastically depending on your country of origin and specific visa category. Most notably, a nationality-based travel ban restricts visa issuance for 19 countries : Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela. Beyond this targeted ban, a broader freeze affects applicants from a designated list of up to 75 countries, leading to indefinite delays for many visa petitions. However, it is important to note that immigrant visa applications first need to be processed through USCIS, which has not paused processing applications from the 75 countries. Thus, it is important to contact an attorney to understand at what point in the process this visa freeze may affect your case. While Brazil is included in the list of 75 countries, at the time of this publication, the freeze does not include non-immigrant visas for Brazil . Non-immigrant visas are granted to foreign nationals seeking to enter the United States on a temporary basis for specific purposes, such as tourism, studying, or temporary work. This means that Brazilian applicants can still safely pursue non-immigrant employment options, such as O visas for individuals with extraordinary ability or P visas for internationally recognized athletes, without being subjected to the current travel bans or suspensions. This alert is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. There are many changes and uncertainties, so please consult with a qualified attorney at Santos Lloyd Law Firm, P.C. to understand how these evolving policies might affect your specific case
Recent data in 2026 shows a sharp increase in Requests for Evidence across employment-based visa categories such as EB-1, EB-2 NIW, O, and H-1B. Requests for Evidence (RFEs) are no longer reserved for borderline cases; even robust petitions for high-level talent are facing unprecedented scrutiny. The expansion of the USCIS Vetting Center means automated tools are cross-referencing every petition, triggering RFEs for even the smallest inconsistencies. For EB-2 NIW petitions, adjudicators are increasingly questioning the "National Importance" of a candidate’s endeavor. Even for those with impressive credentials, USCIS now demands evidence of how their work specifically benefits the U.S. on a prospective basis. For O-1A and O-1B visas, officers are applying narrower interpretations of "distinction" and "extraordinary ability," often mischaracterizing evidence already present in the record. Additionally, a troubling 2026 trend is the correlation between Premium Processing and RFEs . For discretionary categories like EB-1A and EB-2 NIW, Premium Processing has increasingly become a "fast track" to a poorly reasoned RFE. Reports indicate that adjudicators, pressured by 15-business-day timelines, may be relying on AI-assisted vetting tools that trigger automated RFEs with general and boilerplate language, rather than a thorough review and analysis of supporting documents and evidence filed. With USCIS employing more rigorous AI-driven vetting and a narrower interpretation of visa criteria, the margin for error has disappeared . As such, ensure you consult with an experienced immigration attorney before filing a petition. ' If you have any questions, please schedule a consultation with one of our experienced attorneys, and we will be more than happy to assist you.
In recent weeks, the U.S. government has moved to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for multiple countries, sparking a wave of last-minute litigation and creating significant uncertainty for beneficiaries. This shift is having a profound impact on those who rely on TPS for lawful presence and work authorization in the United States. Across the country, federal courts have intervened to pause or block scheduled TPS terminations for several countries, including Burma (Myanmar), Ethiopia, Haiti, South Sudan, and Syria. In response to these court orders, USCIS has updated its webpages to indicate that TPS status and related Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) are extended for these populations. However, USCIS is intentionally not providing specific new end dates for EAD validity while the litigation remains in flux. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has prominently noted that it "vehemently disagrees" with these court orders and is actively working with the Department of Justice on next steps. This legal landscape remains highly unpredictable and varies drastically depending on the country of origin. For example, on February 9, 2026, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals granted a stay allowing the government to proceed with the termination of TPS for Nicaragua, Honduras, and Nepal while the underlying legal challenges continue. Because of this ruling, the automatic extension of work authorization for these individuals has ended, and employers are now required to reverify the work authorization of affected employees, who must present alternative valid documentation to continue their employment. These rapid changes and the lack of clear end dates are causing complications beyond the workplace. Because driver's licenses often track the length of an individual's authorized stay, many DMVs are currently declining to issue or renew driver's licenses for impacted TPS populations. For employers, managing internal communications, avoiding onboarding errors, and navigating Form I-9 compliance has become increasingly complex. It is more important than ever to be well-prepared and proactive in monitoring these rapid changes. At Santos Lloyd Law Firm, P.C., our immigration attorneys are ready to guide you through this evolving process and ensure you are informed, and supported. Please contact us if you have questions or need assistance.
