Existem vistos de trabalho para influenciadores de mídia social?
Kris Quadros-Ragar • January 18, 2024
Click here to read this article in English
A resposta é: SIM!
Influenciadores de mídia social e produtores de conteúdo com um grande número de seguidores online podem se qualificar para um visto de trabalho temporário O-1 ou um green card EB-1, frequentemente chamados de "vistos de talento" ou "green cards de habilidade extraordinária".
O papel dos influenciadores de mídia social ganhou importância significativa nos últimos anos, tornando-se um elemento crucial nas estratégias de marketing de empresas e organizações em todo o mundo. Com uma oportunidade de mercado total superior a US$ 14 bilhões em várias plataformas de mídia social, há uma riqueza de oportunidades de emprego disponíveis para influenciadores de mídia social. Em reconhecimento à sua crescente influência e demanda, a política de imigração dos Estados Unidos começou a reconhecer os influenciadores de mídia social como uma profissão legítima, tornando-os elegíveis para vistos de trabalho temporários e green cards.
Uma maneira de provar que você é um influenciador excepcional de mídia social é apresentar evidências dos acordos de marca dos quais você fez parte. Quanto mais famosas e respeitadas forem as empresas, melhor para o seu caso. Mas mesmo se você trabalhou com empresas menores, ainda conta se você ganhou uma boa quantia de dinheiro. O tamanho da sua audiência, visibilidade e número de seguidores também são importantes, pois demonstram sua influência e potencial de ganho por meio do seu público.
Rota do Visto de Não-Imigrante O-1B:
Para solicitar o visto de não-imigrante O-1B, um visto de trabalho temporário, você deve ter uma oferta de emprego ou um agente nos Estados Unidos que atuará como seu patrocinador. Agentes podem ser indivíduos ou empresas que o representarão em vários projetos e acordos de marca nos quais você estará envolvido nos Estados Unidos. Além de apresentar a aplicação O-1B, você deve fornecer documentação de suporte, que normalmente inclui memorandos de acordo, contratos e provas de que continuará envolvido em projetos e oportunidades semelhantes durante a sua estadia.
Rota do EB-1A:
A rota do EB-1A oferece uma opção mais permanente para influenciadores de mídia social interessados em viver e trabalhar nos Estados Unidos. Ao contrário do visto O-1B, o visto EB-1A permite que o solicitante obtenha residência permanente nos EUA, comumente conhecida como green card. Como resultado, a categoria EB-1A possui um padrão de "habilidade extraordinária" muito mais elevado do que o visto O-1B. Portanto, é importante que os candidatos consultem um advogado experiente para avaliar sua experiência e realizações antes de solicitar um EB-1A.
Independentemente de considerar um visto O-1B ou um visto EB-1A, você deve estar preparado para reunir documentação importante para apoiar sua aplicação. Isso inclui evidências de altos ganhos em trabalhos anteriores, prova de colaborações com marcas e organizações renomadas, documentação de sua participação ativa em eventos prestigiosos, cobertura midiática destacando suas realizações, quaisquer prêmios recebidos e cartas de recomendação de outros influenciadores de mídia social respeitados ou figuras notáveis em sua indústria. Esses documentos desempenham um papel vital no fortalecimento da sua aplicação de visto e na demonstração de suas qualificações e realizações.
Por favor, observe que os influenciadores de mídia social que vêm para os Estados Unidos com um visto de turista (conhecido como visto B1/B2) e se envolvem em atividades estritamente proibidas por esse tipo de visto podem enfrentar sérias consequências se as informações se tornarem conhecidas pela imigração, como a possível proibição de entrada nos Estados Unidos e outras repercussões significativas ao reentrar. Por esse motivo, é crucial para os influenciadores de mídia social consultar um advogado de imigração experiente para ajudá-los a navegar no processo de visto e encontrar a classificação de visto adequada.
Se você acredita que pode se qualificar para qualquer um desses vistos, entre em contato com nosso escritório.
Este blog não se destina a fornecer aconselhamento jurídico e nada aqui deve ser interpretado como estabelecimento de um relacionamento advogado-cliente. Por favor, agende uma consulta com um advogado de imigração antes de agir com base em qualquer informação lida aqui.
In recent months, the U.S. government has intensified its vetting procedures for individuals seeking entry into the United States, whether through visa applications abroad or inspection at ports of entry. This shift, prioritized by the current administration, is having a noticeable impact on immigrants, visa holders, and even lawful permanent residents (LPRs). At U.S. consulates worldwide, applicants are experiencing increased delays , often being placed into administrative processing under Section 221(g) or referred for Security Advisory Opinions (SAOs) , which can significantly prolong visa issuance. Officers are now engaging in deeper reviews of applicants' backgrounds, including their t ravel histories, social media accounts, and foreign ties . This scrutiny applies to a wide range of visa categories, from visitor visas to employment-based petitions. Importantly, officers are exercising broader discretion when deciding who qualifies for a visa, making the process more unpredictable, even for applicants with strong cases. This enhanced vetting does not end at the consulate. Individuals entering the U.S. — even those with valid visas or green cards — are increasingly subject to prolonged secondary inspections by Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Officers may ask detailed questions about prior immigration history, travel patterns, and social media activity. In some cases, travelers are asked to provide access to their electronic devices for further inspection. There are also growing reports of travelers being referred to deferred inspection or even issued a Notice to Appear (NTA) for removal proceedings, despite previously lawful entries. While some of these practices have existed in the past, the current administration has formalized and expanded them. Experts warn that additional travel restrictions or targeted bans could also emerge as part of the administration’s enforcement priorities. For employment-based applicants, these delays and complications can severely impact U.S. businesses and foreign nationals who contribute critical skills to the U.S. economy. It is more important than ever to be well-prepared before attending a visa interview or traveling internationally. Understanding your rights and preparing thoroughly can help you navigate this uncertain landscape. At Santos Lloyd Law Firm, P.C. , our immigration attorneys are ready to guide you through this evolving process and ensure you are informed, supported, and protected. Please contact us if you have questions or need assistance.
On March 31, 2024, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) implemented a policy update that limits gender marker selections on all immigration forms and systems to two biological sexes: male and female. This change eliminates the option for applicants to select a non-binary or “X” gender marker—an option that had previously been permitted on some forms. While USCIS emphasizes that this update does not change who qualifies for immigration benefits, it may significantly impact how certain applications—particularly asylum claims based on gender identity-related persecution—are understood and evaluated. What Has Changed? Under the revised policy, applicants may now only choose “Male” or “Female” when completing USCIS forms. The ability to select a non-binary or third-gender option is no longer available. Applicants may still request to change their gender marker with USCIS, but only within the male/female binary. Supporting documentation, such as medical or legal records, is not required to make the change. This means that transgender individuals can still align their gender marker with their identity—if it falls within the two binary categories—but non-binary individuals are no longer represented. The change follows guidance issued by the federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which called for greater consistency in the collection of sex and gender data across federal agencies. Impact on Asylum Applicants This policy update is especially important for individuals applying for asylum based on persecution related to their gender identity. Under U.S. immigration law, asylum is available to people who have suffered persecution—or fear future persecution—based on their membership in a “particular social group.” This includes people targeted for being transgender, gender non-conforming, or otherwise not aligning with socially expected gender roles in their home country. Although the legal standard for asylum remains unchanged, the removal of the non-binary gender marker could make it harder for some applicants to clearly present and document their identity. In asylum cases, credibility and clarity are crucial. The ability to accurately reflect one’s gender identity on official forms can play an important role in establishing the foundation of a persecution claim. Now, applicants who identify as non-binary or outside the traditional male/female categories may be forced to select a gender that does not align with their lived experience. This could lead to confusion in their case file or require additional explanation during interviews or hearings. This policy could weaken the strength of some asylum claims—not because the underlying facts have changed, but because the official forms now fail to reflect the applicant’s true identity. For example: A non-binary person applying for asylum after being targeted in their home country may now have to select “Male” or “Female” on their asylum application, despite not identifying as either. This mismatch may lead adjudicators to question the applicant’s identity, possibly weakening the strength of the claim or requiring added clarification and documentation. In defensive asylum cases—where applicants are in removal proceedings—such inconsistencies could create unnecessary hurdles and complicate the evidentiary presentation. What Can Applicants Do? Despite the change, individuals can still pursue asylum based on gender identity. The underlying eligibility criteria remain the same. However, applicants should be prepared to clearly explain any differences between their stated identity and the gender marker required on USCIS forms. Applicants are encouraged to: Include a personal declaration explaining their gender identity in detail and how it relates to their fear of persecution. Provide evidence such as affidavits, country condition reports, or expert testimony that supports the claim. Work with an experienced immigration attorney who can help present the claim effectively and prepare for any questions that might arise from the new form limitations. The new USCIS policy on gender markers may seem like a technical update, but for asylum seekers fleeing gender-based persecution, it has real implications. While individuals are still legally eligible to seek protection, the limitation to binary gender options could make it more difficult to fully and clearly present their case. If you or someone you know is facing immigration challenges related to gender identity—or is concerned about how this policy may impact an asylum claim—please contact Santos Lloyd Law Firm to schedule a consultation with one of our experienced immigration attorneys. We’re here to help ensure your voice is heard and your case is handled with the care and expertise it deserves.
In 2025, the immigration landscape continues to shift under the weight of national security concerns, ushered in by Executive Order “ Protecting the United States From Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats. ” This directive tasks federal agencies—including the U.S. Department of State—with implementing enhanced screening and vetting protocols for all foreign nationals seeking visas or other immigration benefits. The result? A dramatically intensified vetting process, along with mounting concerns from immigrants, attorneys, and civil liberties advocates alike. Traditionally, airport security focused on verifying travel documents and screening for prohibited items, while consular officers assessed the legitimacy of visa petitions and the admissibility of applicants. Extreme vetting, however, represents a significant shift toward a far more invasive and comprehensive investigative process. It now includes detailed background checks, biometric verification, digital forensics, and expansive scrutiny of an applicant’s online presence and criminal or financial records. Since President Trump’s second term began in January 2025, the implementation of extreme vetting has expanded rapidly. Today, border screenings go far beyond routine document checks, encompassing a full-scale evaluation of a traveler’s digital life. This pivot reflects the administration’s intensified focus on national security, but it has also triggered urgent discussions about privacy, due process, and the fairness of modern immigration enforcement. At U.S. ports of entry—especially airports—noncitizens are now subject to rigorous and invasive procedures, including: Inspection of cell phones, laptops, and other devices (including deleted content) Review of social media activity on platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter) Biometric scanning, including fingerprinting and facial recognition These measures are no longer confined to travelers from high-risk countries. In practice, extreme vetting applies broadly across all nationalities, and increasingly affects lawful permanent residents as well. For noncitizens, this new landscape introduces a heightened level of uncertainty and vulnerability. Delays at U.S. consulates for visa issuance or renewal are becoming routine. Travelers must now be acutely aware of these changes, and those attending consular interviews or seeking visa renewals should be prepared to provide additional documentation verifying their maintenance of status, compliance with visa conditions, and the bona fide nature of their visa applications. It is critical to organize supporting materials in advance and be ready to answer questions about employment, education, travel history, and online activity. As the U.S. government continues to expand its use of data-driven risk assessment tools, travelers must adapt to a new normal, one where preparation is essential to navigating the immigration system without disruption.
