Will the USCIS Asylum Halt Lead to Stricter Criteria and Denials?

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) The recent USCIS Asylum Decision pause announced by President Trump after a deadly shooting in the nation’s capital marks one of the sharpest shifts in U.S. asylum practice in years, even though the legal definition of who qualifies for protection has not changed on paper. Instead, the administration is tightening screening, adding new fees, and reopening past approvals in ways that are widely expected to push asylum denial rates higher and make protection much harder to secure in practice.

Asylum Decision Pause After Washington Shooting

On November 27, 2025, following the shooting of two National Guard members in Washington, D.C., President Trump said he would “permanently pause migration” from certain countries, referring generally to “Third World Countries.” He did not list which countries would be covered in that first announcement, leaving many asylum seekers and refugees in sudden uncertainty.

The political spark for this Asylum Decision Pause was the case of Rahmanullah Lakanwal, a 29‑year‑old man accused in the shooting. According to the source material, Lakanwal arrived in the United States in 2021 during the Biden administration, but was granted asylum in April 2025 under the Trump administration. His case is now held up by officials as an example of why they argue tougher screening is needed, and it sits at the center of the public debate over how the USCIS Asylum Decision process is being reshaped.

New USCIS Screening Rules for Asylee and Refugee Green Cards

Instead of rewriting the core asylum law, the administration has focused on how officers screen cases. Effective August 1, 2025, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) updated its Policy Manual to create new interview referral rules for refugees and asylees who apply for a green card through Form I-485 (Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status).

The official form instructions are available on the USCIS website at Form I-485. According to USCIS Spokesman Matthew Tragesser, this policy update is meant to “ensure program integrity by better detecting fraud, misrepresentation, national security threats, and public safety risks.”

Under the new guidance, officers are directed to send more cases to in‑person interviews. Interviews will now be required when any of the following apply:

• The officer cannot verify the applicant’s identity through records or background checks
• The applicant claims a new identity or has unresolved or conflicting identities
• Immigration records do not clearly show whether the person has refugee status
• There are signs the person may have received refugee or asylum status through fraud or misrepresentation
• The officer cannot decide admissibility without an interview
• The officer has an “articulable concern” about national security or terrorism‑related grounds of inadmissibility

These standards do not change who qualifies for asylum under the law, but they raise the bar in practice by making it easier for officers to question earlier grants and to slow or block a person’s move from asylum or refugee status to permanent residence.

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, the combination of the Asylum Decision Pause rhetoric and these new interview rules sends a clear message: the government intends to treat many more cases as suspicious, especially where identity, background, or travel history is not crystal clear.

Systematic Review of 233,000 Refugee Cases

The change to green card interview rules is only one part of a broader push. A separate memo cited in the source material states that USCIS will relitigate the refugee status of about 233,000 people, including refugees and their family members (“derivatives”).

This means officers will go back and re‑examine earlier approvals, looking for reasons to revoke or deny status when cases are reviewed again. For many refugees who thought their status was settled, this raises the risk that old files will come back under a harsher lens.

While the memo’s exact internal language is not reproduced, the stated purpose—checking for fraud, misrepresentation, and security issues—matches the new posture described by Matthew Tragesser.

This large‑scale review ties directly into the way the USCIS Asylum Decision process is now framed: not only are new applicants facing more pressure, but hundreds of thousands of already approved refugees can no longer assume that past decisions are final.

New Fees for Asylum Applications

On top of tighter screening, the administration has added financial barriers for people seeking protection. Effective July 22, 2025, Form I-589 (Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal) now carries:

• A $100 filing fee, and
• A $100 annual fee for each year the case remains pending

The current version of the form and its instructions are posted on the USCIS site at Form I-589. USCIS has made clear that any asylum application filed without the correct fee after August 21, 2025 will be rejected.

Previously, asylum applications did not carry a filing fee. The new charges mean that people fleeing persecution may now have to find money just to submit their claim and to keep it alive year after year if their case moves slowly. For families filing together, the total cost can mount quickly, especially when combined with legal fees and living expenses while waiting for a decision.

For many low‑income applicants, this financial requirement turns the USCIS Asylum Decision process from a purely legal hurdle into an economic one as well.

Southern Border Proclamation and Limits on Protection

Another major barrier set out in the source material is a January 20, 2025 presidential proclamation by the Trump administration. That proclamation claims to block most people crossing the southern border from applying for any forms of protection, including:

• Asylum
• Withholding of removal
• Protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT)

The source notes that, at the time of publication, courts had not yet decided whether these limits are lawful. Until judges rule, people at the border face extra confusion about what rights they actually have and whether they can even ask for protection in the first place.

For those who might once have walked up to a border post and asked for asylum, the combination of the proclamation and the Asylum Decision Pause talk sends a clear warning that the door may be mostly shut.

Official background on U.S. asylum eligibility and procedures is available from USCIS at its main asylum page: USCIS – Asylum.

Practical Effects on Asylum Seekers and Refugees

Formally, the legal standard for asylum remains the same: a person must show persecution or a well‑founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. The source material is clear that these formal eligibility criteria have not been rewritten.

In reality, though, the mix of policy shifts means many more people will struggle to obtain or retain protection in practice. Key components of that mix include:

1. The post‑shooting Asylum Decision Pause announcement linked to Rahmanullah Lakanwal
2. Stricter interview rules for Form I-485 cases
3. The plan to re‑examine 233,000 existing refugee approvals
4. New filing and annual fees for Form I-589
5. The January 20, 2025 proclamation affecting the southern border

Together, these changes mean that many applicants will never reach the point where they can meet the legal standard—or will see their claims rejected or reopened under far tougher conditions.

For current and future applicants, practical steps to consider include:

• Collecting and preserving clear, corroborating documentation of identity and persecution
• Maintaining consistent identity records and travel histories
• Carefully tracking fee rules and submission deadlines
• Seeking qualified legal counsel early in the process

People who already hold refugee or asylum status also face the new reality that their past approvals may be questioned again, especially when they apply for a green card.

Key takeaway: While the statutory definition of asylum has not changed, administrative changes — including expanded interviews, mass reviews, fees, and border restrictions — are likely to make protection harder to secure and easier to lose.

The shooting tied to Rahmanullah Lakanwal has become more than a criminal case; it now serves as the political backdrop for a sweeping reset of how the United States 🇺🇸 handles the USCIS Asylum Decision process for both new arrivals and those already granted protection.