Understanding the Extreme Hardship Requirement for I-601A Waiver Cases
Angelica Rice • January 20, 2022
Click here to read this article in Portuguese
The test that is used for the I-601A Waiver is “Extreme Hardship”. It requires the Qualifying Relative to show that, as a United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident, they would experience "extreme hardship" if their alien spouse or child was refused admission to the United States and their waiver application was denied.
This term, "extreme hardship" is very subjective and USCIS considers many factors when determining whether or not extreme hardship exists in a case. These factors include, but are not limited to: health, financial considerations, education, personal considerations (family ties) and other special factors. See more detail below:
Health.
Examples include: Ongoing or specialized treatment required for a physical or mental condition, availability or quality of such treatment in the foreign country, anticipated treatment duration, whether the condition is long term, and whether it is chronic or acute;
Financial considerations.
Examples include: Future employability, loss due to sale of home or business or termination of a professional practice, a decline in standard of living, ability to recoup short-term losses, cost of extraordinary needs (such as special education or training for children with special needs), or the cost of care for family members such as elderly or sick parents;
Education.
Examples include: Loss of opportunity for higher education, lower quality or limited scope of education options, disruption of a current program, requirement to be educated in a foreign language or culture with ensuing loss of time or grade, and availability of special requirements, such as training programs or internships in specific fields;
Personal considerations.
Examples include: Close relatives in the United States and country of birth or citizenship, separation from spouse or children, ages of involved parties, and length of residence and community ties in the United States; and
Special factors.
Examples include: Cultural, language-related, religious, and ethnic obstacles; valid fears of persecution, physical harm, or injury; social ostracism or stigma; and lack of access to social institutions or structures (official or unofficial) that provide support, guidance, or protection.
USCIS will evaluate all of these categories when making a decision on the I-601A application. A strong I-601A case will provide as much evidence as possible for each category.
Additionally, the application needs to indicate and focus on one of two arguments. One is whether the Qualifying Relative would remain in the United States without the spouse or child (if the application is denied). The other is whether the Qualifying Relative would relocate to the foreign country with the spouse or child (if the application is denied). The kind of evidence required for the I-601A application, and which of the hardship criteria the Qualifying Relative may be able to meet, differ based on which argument is used. Strong I-601A cases may attempt to make the dual argument and argue the potential outcomes of both scenarios.
If you have questions about applying for an I-601A Waiver or whether this kind of application is right for you, please consult 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.
