USCIS Gender Policy Shift Raises Concerns for Asylum Applicants Based on Gender Identity
Angelica Rice • April 17, 2025
On March 31, 2025, 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.
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.
This Facebook widget is no longer supported.
Angelica Rice
Similar Posts
On September 14, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued a nationwide preliminary injunction in Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security , halting the implementation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) final rule that was scheduled to eliminate “duration of status” (D/S) on September 15, 2026. As a result of this nationwide order, DHS is blocked from enforcing fixed periods of admission for F-1 students, J-1 exchange visitors, and I media representatives while the litigation moves forward. Because the current “duration of status” framework remains in full effect, F, J, and I visa holders are not required to file Form I-539 extension of stay applications to remain in valid status beyond program end dates at this time. Furthermore, restrictions on academic transfers, constraints on enrolling in second programs at the same degree level, 240-day caps on continued employment while extensions are pending, and shortened grace periods do not apply during the injunction. F-1 nonimmigrants retain the full 60-day post-completion grace period, and J-1 holders maintain their 30-day grace period. However, please note that this preliminary injunction is not a final ruling invalidating the rule , and a status conference is scheduled for October 2, 2026, to determine next steps in the litigation. Immediate Practice Tips: Inspect I-94 Travel Records Upon Reentry: F, J, and I visa holders currently admitted under D/S retain their status and should continue to be readmitted under D/S following international travel until the injunction is lifted. However, because the I-94 record controls legal stay, travelers must inspect their CBP-issued Form I-94 immediately upon reentry to confirm the "Admit Until Date" states "D/S" rather than a specific expiration date. If a specific date is mistakenly recorded, contact a local CPB Deferred Inspection Site. Notify HR and Review Workplace Compliance: Employers sponsoring F-1 or J-1 employees should inform HR and hiring managers that the September 15 fixed-period rule is postponed and standard D/S rules govern. This development does not alter standard filing windows or Form I-9 verification procedures for post-completion OPT or STEM OPT extensions. Maintain Operational Readiness and Defer Unnecessary Filings: Visa holders and employers should defer travel or filing strategy decisions made solely in anticipation of the fixed-admission rule. Because DHS may appeal or the court could alter the timeline on short notice, institutions and visa holders should maintain readiness to adjust plans if implementation resumes. There are many evolving components to this litigation. If you are an F-1, J-1, or I visa holder, sponsoring institution, or employer, you should proactively coordinate with your international student office and legal counsel to protect your status and monitor upcoming court proceedings.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published its final rule eliminating the longstanding "duration of status" (D/S) policy for F, J, and I visa holders, replacing it with a fixed period of admission effective September 15, 2026. This rule requires that those who need additional time to complete their programs must file Form I-539 with USCIS or travel abroad and seek to reenter to extend their authorized period of stay. F and J visa holders present in the U.S. and in valid status on September 15, 2026, will be allowed to remain in the United States until the Program End Date listed on their current Form I-20 (for F-1s) or Form DS-2019 (for J-1s), up to a maximum of four years (until September 15, 2030) plus a 60-day grace period for F-1s and a 30-day grace period for J-1s, without filing an Extension of Status request with USCIS. However, this safety net only applies while staying in the U.S.; international travel and subsequent reentry after September 15, 2026 will result in readmission under the new rule with an I-94 that expires on the Program End Date or Employment Authorization Document (EAD) expiration, but no later than four-years after their date of re-entry. Additionally, once re-admitted under the new rules, F-1s will only receive a 30-day grace period. Immediate Practice Tips: Any F-1 or J-1 nonimmigrant currently in the U.S. who plans to change programs, start a new degree level, or needs more time to complete their studies must work with their school or program sponsor to update their SEVIS record and receive an extended Form I-20 or DS-2019 before September 15, 2026. Eligible F-1 students should submit their post-completion OPT or STEM OPT work authorization applications (Form I-765) before September 15, 2026, to secure their status and drastically reduce the likelihood of needing a Form I-539 extension application. Any F-1 student who is eligible to apply for OPT or STEM OPT before March 18, 2027, should do so as soon as they are eligible to file their Form I-765. Since F-1s can file OPT applications up to 90 days in advance of graduation, F-1 students graduating before June 15,2027, should be able to file their OPT applications before March 18, 2027, and should do so to avoid also having to file Form I-539 to extend their stay. Thus, most F-1 students graduating in December 2026 and May/June 2027 should be able to take advantage of the transition rule’s delay in having to file Form I-539 applications and should only need to file Form I-765 to apply for OPT. Incoming F-1 and J-1 students who can enter the United States before the September 15, 2026 effective date (within the permissible 30-day window prior to their program start) should do so to benefit from the transition rules, including the full 60-day F-1 grace period and deferred extension requirements. Students (F-1 and J-1) who are planning international travel should return before the effective date if possible to preserve their transition benefits. There are many parts of the rule that are not discussed here. If you are currently an F-1 or J-1 visa holder, you should proactively coordinate with your institutions and international office to protect your status and stay informed.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has released updated policy guidance detailing how officers will evaluate "public charge" inadmissibility for individuals applying for green cards through adjustment of status. This update follows a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) final rule that rescinds the 2022 public charge regulations. The new policy takes effect on September 18, 2026 , and applies to all green card applications (Form I-485) postmarked or submitted on or after that date. Who Is Subject to the Public Charge Rule? Most family-based and employment-based green card applicants will be subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility. This includes spouses, children, and parents of U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents, as well as most employment visa preference categories, investors, and diversity visa applicants. Certain categories remain explicitly exempt under immigration law. These include: Asylees and refugees Victims of human trafficking (T visa) or crime (U visa) Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petitioners Special Immigrant Juveniles Temporary Protected Status (TPS) applicants Certain military-related applicants and other designated humanitarian groups How USCIS Will Make Determinations USCIS officers will evaluate whether an applicant is likely to become a public charge by reviewing the totality of their circumstances on a case-by-case basis. Key factors include: Five Statutory Factors: Age, health, family status, assets/financial resources, and education or skills. Affidavit of Support: Submission of Form I-864 executed by a sponsor. Use of Public Benefits: USCIS will look at means-tested public benefits, such as cash assistance for income maintenance, housing assistance, food stamps (SNAP), or college financial aid. Note on timing: For benefits received before September 18, 2026, USCIS will only consider public cash assistance for income maintenance and long-term institutionalization at government expense. For benefits received on or after September 18, 2026, the broader consideration of all listed means-tested benefits will apply. Public Charge Bonds If an officer determines that an applicant is inadmissible solely on public charge grounds, USCIS may issue a Notice of Intent to Deny that invites the applicant to post a public charge bond using Form I-945. If an invited applicant successfully posts the required cash or surety bond, USCIS may approve the application for permanent residence. Public charge bonds can only be submitted if explicitly invited by USCIS. Santos Lloyd Law Firm will continue to monitor immigration developments closely and provide updates as further implementation details are released. For more information, please access: https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/alerts/uscis-issues-guidance-on-making-public-charge-inadmissibility-determination
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is considering a regulatory proposal that would remove the discretionary 60-day grace period currently available to certain nonimmigrant visa holders (including H-1B, L-1, TN, E, and O-1) and their dependents. The draft rule is currently undergoing interagency review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and has not yet been formally published for public feedback. What This Means Right Now Nothing changes today. The 60-day grace period remains in effect while this rule goes through the approval process. Under current rules, if your job ends early, you have up to 60 days (or until your I-94 expires) to leave the U.S., find a new sponsor, or apply to change status. What Could Change If approved, foreign workers who lose their jobs would no longer get automatic time to find a new employer or change status from within the U.S. They would generally be required to leave the country immediately. Next Steps Once the OMB finishes its initial review, the proposed rule will be published in the Federal Register, opening a public comment period of 30 to 60 days. Based on feedback received during this time, DHS may decide to alter, withdraw, or proceed with the proposal. If the government decides to finalize the rule, the entire process will likely take several months before taking effect. Santos Lloyd Law Firm will continue to monitor developments closely and will share updates on our immigration blog and social media pages as more details emerge.
An artist receives an invitation to join a new production. A business professional is offered a consulting role alongside an existing position. A musician wants to perform for several organizers during the same season. For professionals whose careers involve multiple projects, an important immigration question often follows: can an O-1B visa cover work for more than one employer? The answer can be yes, but the employment arrangements must be covered by the appropriate petition structure. An O-1B approval does not provide unrestricted permission to accept any job in the United States. Your approved work arrangements matter The O-1B category allows qualifying individuals with extraordinary ability or achievement to work in their area of expertise. However, eligibility based on professional accomplishments is only part of the case. The petition must also establish the proposed work and the relationship between the professional and the petitioner. Before accepting an additional position, your attorney should review who filed the existing petition, the work it covers, and how the proposed opportunity fits into that arrangement. A valid visa and an unexpired approval notice do not answer those questions on their own. Separate employers or an agent petition When an O-1B beneficiary works for multiple employers during the same period, each employer generally files a separate petition unless an established U.S. agent files a petition covering the arrangement. An agent petition can be useful when a professional’s work involves several employers or engagements. Depending on the arrangement, the agent may act as an actual employer as well or only represent the employers and the professional. The petition must document the agent’s role and the proposed employment. For an agent petition involving multiple employers, the supporting documents include contracts and an itinerary identifying the engagements, their dates, the actual employers, and the locations where services will be performed. Your attorney will determine the documentation needed for your particular structure. A new opportunity may require another filing If you change employers while in the United States, a new petition is generally required. When the original case was filed through an agent, an amended petition may be necessary to address the new employer. Material changes to the approved employment terms can also require an amendment. There is a specific provision allowing petitioners for artists and entertainers to add qualifying performances or engagements during the petition’s validity without an amended petition. That flexibility should not be treated as blanket permission to change employers or accept unrelated work. Your attorney should assess whether it applies to the proposed engagement. Review the opportunity before agreeing to a start date A promising offer can come with a short deadline. Sharing the proposed contract, duties, employer information, and anticipated dates with your attorney early can help clarify the immigration requirements before business commitments are made. Your attorney will confirm whether the work is already covered, whether another petition is needed, and when you may begin. Do not assume that submitting a new petition automatically authorizes work for the new employer. Contact Santos Lloyd Law Firm, P.C. If you believe you may qualify for the O-1B status and to discuss a filing strategy that fits your professional plans.
Receiving a two-year green card through marriage is an important step, but it leaves another process ahead: removing the conditions on permanent residence. For couples preparing a joint Form I-751 petition, understanding the filing window and organizing evidence early can make the preparation more manageable. The starting point is your own record. Locate the green card, the notice granting residence, and copies of the earlier immigration filing. Check the date conditional residence began and the card’s expiration date. Do not calculate the next deadline solely from your wedding anniversary or the date an attorney first submitted your case. Understand the joint filing window Under 8 CFR 216.4 , a joint I-751 petition generally must be filed during the 90-day period immediately before the second anniversary of obtaining conditional permanent residence. This is a window before that anniversary, not an additional 90 days after the card expires. Preparing early and filing early are different things. You can begin gathering records well before the window opens, while coordinating the correct submission date with your attorney. A joint petition also requires the appropriate signatures, fee, and supporting documentation. Confirm the current form instructions, accepted filing method, and applicable fee when the case is ready to submit. Build a record of the marriage over time The regulation identifies several types of evidence that may help show the marriage was not entered into to evade immigration law: jointly owned property, a lease for a shared home, combined financial resources, children’s birth certificates, and statements from people with personal knowledge of the relationship. These examples do not mean every couple must have a mortgage, joint accounts, or children. The evidence should accurately reflect your circumstances. A clear explanation of how you manage your household can be more useful than forcing your relationship into a checklist that does not fit. As a practical preparation step, organize records by date and type. Review whether they help explain the course of the marriage, rather than collecting only documents created shortly before filing. Flag separate addresses, name changes, or gaps in the records for your attorney. Never alter a document to make the history appear simpler. Tell your attorney if circumstances change This article addresses joint filing. Divorce, the death of a spouse, abuse, or other significant changes may require a different filing basis or an individualized assessment. Separate waiver provisions exist, with their own requirements. A spouse’s unwillingness to sign does not, by itself, establish eligibility for every waiver. Do not assume that the joint 90-day window answers every question about a non-joint case. If the relationship changes while preparing the petition or while it is pending, inform counsel promptly. You should not need to invent a continuing relationship to seek advice about the options that may actually apply. Keep tracking the case after submission The regulation provides that conditional resident status is automatically extended, when necessary, upon receipt of a properly filed I-751 until adjudication. Proof of that status is a separate practical matter: keep the receipt notice and have counsel review its wording before relying on it for travel or employment documentation. This article does not promise a particular receipt-extension period or processing time. A missed deadline calls for prompt legal attention. The regulation allows some late joint filings where USCIS accepts a written showing of good cause, but acceptance is not automatic. Do not assume a late petition cures the problem without further review. Santos Lloyd Law Firm, P.C. can help you assess the filing window, organize relevant evidence, and identify changes that may affect your I-751 strategy. Contact the firm early enough to review the facts before the deadline approaches.
October begins a new federal fiscal year, but that does not mean every green card applicant moves to the front of the line. The Department of State’s October 2026 Visa Bulletin sets out the visa availability that applicants in family-sponsored and employment-based preference categories need to review this month.
