The Trump administration’s proposed regulation on asylum work permits could drastically alter the landscape for those seeking refuge in the United States, potentially leaving thousands unable to legally support themselves while their cases are processed.

At a Glance

• President Trump issued ten executive orders on his first day back in office, dramatically reshaping U.S. immigration policy
• A proposed regulation would prevent most asylum seekers from obtaining work permits until their claims are processed
• Even after reaching processing goals, asylum seekers would need to wait one year before becoming eligible for work authorization
• The administration aims to deter migrants from using the asylum system as a pathway to work in the U.S.
• Critics argue the change would harm both asylum seekers and U.S. employers who rely on this workforce

Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy

President Trump wasted no time implementing his immigration agenda upon returning to the White House, issuing ten executive orders on his first day that seek to fundamentally reshape U.S. immigration law and policy. These orders employ novel legal arguments involving potential use of the U.S. military through the Insurrection Act and Alien Enemies Act, signaling a dramatic shift in enforcement approaches. Key changes include expanding expedited removal processes, requiring noncitizens to register with authorities, restricting work permits, and threatening sanctuary jurisdictions with funding cuts.

The executive actions bar asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border and involve military personnel in border enforcement operations. The administration has also reinstated the controversial “Remain in Mexico” policy and declared a national emergency to justify enhanced border control measures. These changes represent significant challenges to existing asylum protections and legal frameworks that have governed U.S. immigration for decades.

Work Permit Restrictions Target Asylum System

Among the most consequential proposed changes is a regulation that would prevent most asylum seekers from obtaining work permits while their cases are pending. This would pause a longstanding policy that has allowed migrants with pending asylum claims to legally work in the United States after meeting certain requirements. The proposal creates a two-part obstacle: first, no new work permits would be issued until U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) processes all asylum claims within an average of 180 days—a significant challenge given current backlogs.

Second, even if this processing goal is achieved, asylum seekers would then have to wait a full year after filing their application before becoming eligible for work authorization. With USCIS currently handling approximately 1.5 million asylum applications and immigration courts reviewing an additional 2 million cases, the practical effect would be to deny work authorization to a vast majority of asylum seekers for extended periods.

Economic and Humanitarian Concerns

Critics of the proposed regulation argue it would create significant hardship for legitimate asylum seekers who need to support themselves and their families during what is often a lengthy legal process. Without legal work authorization, these individuals may face homelessness, food insecurity, and increased vulnerability to exploitation. Some immigration advocates warn that the policy could force asylum seekers into unauthorized employment situations where they lack legal protections and may be subject to abuse.

The proposal comes amid other significant changes to refugee policy, including the suspension of refugee resettlement programs. A federal judge has already expressed frustration with the administration for not complying with a Ninth Circuit order to resume refugee processing and resettlement. Approximately 14,000 refugees remain stranded, with about 25% having “Must Travel By” dates that would allow for swift resettlement without repeating security screenings if the programs were to resume.

Legal Challenges Mounting

Several aspects of the Trump administration’s immigration agenda are already facing legal challenges. A federal judge in Texas recently ruled against the use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants without due process, setting an early precedent that could affect other executive actions. Pro-immigrant advocates are also challenging the administration’s emergency order to deport most migrants entering the country without authorization.

The administration argues these measures are necessary to restore integrity to an asylum system they claim was undermined by previous policies. Officials maintain that restricting work permits will help deter migrants from using asylum claims primarily as a means to gain employment authorization in the United States, rather than out of genuine fear of persecution. However, immigration experts note that addressing the massive backlog of asylum cases would require significant investments in processing capacity rather than simply restricting benefits to applicants.