(UNITED STATES) — A January 1, 2026 USCIS memo expanding hold-and-review of pending and previously approved benefits, paired with DHS’s Operation PARRIS, is reshaping how green card holders and related statuses are vetted at ports of entry.
For many Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs), the change shows up in a simple way. More people are being sent to secondary inspection, with some facing long questioning, extra document requests, or case “re-interviews” that feel like reopening the past.
Two separate government actions are driving much of the shift: a USCIS hold-and-review policy that can pause or revisit immigration benefits, including benefits that were already approved, and a DHS enforcement initiative, Operation PARRIS, that focuses on post-admission reverification and integrity checks, with reported detentions and referrals in some cases.
Key policy actions and dates
| Policy/Action | Date Introduced / Effective | Scope / Affected Population | Current Status or Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| USCIS “Hold and Review” policy memo (builds on prior directive) | January 1, 2026 (building on December 2, 2025) | Pending and previously approved benefits tied to individuals from 39 high-risk countries; applies to approvals on or after January 20, 2021 | More holds in adjudications and more referrals for screening at entry |
| DHS Operation PARRIS (Operation Post-Admission Refugee Reverification and Integrity Strengthening) | January 2026 | Post-admission reverification, initially centered on refugee-related case reviews in Minnesota, with spillover effects for some LPRs | Increased re-interviews, detentions reported; limited by a court order in Minnesota |
| DHS social media vetting framework (release remains in effect) | April 9, 2025 | Social media may be reviewed in security and inadmissibility contexts during screenings and benefit reviews | Can trigger additional questions, supervisory review, or referrals |
| Biometric entry/exit rollout at major airports | December 26, 2025 | Identity matching for entries and exits; creates more consistent travel records | Can make travel-history discrepancies easier to detect |
| Minnesota District Court order limiting detentions under PARRIS (Minnesota) | January 28, 2026 | Refugee detentions tied to Operation PARRIS in Minnesota | Restricts certain detention practices in that jurisdiction |
The table above summarizes major policy actions and their practical impacts on screening and adjudication.
Section 1: Official USCIS/DHS Policies and Announcements
USCIS uses the term hold-and-review to describe an internal decision to pause action on a case, or to take a second look at a benefit request. The January 1, 2026 USCIS Policy Memorandum expands a December 2, 2025 directive.
Its core feature is scope: it reaches pending filings and also certain previously approved benefits. “pending” means the person is still waiting for a decision. “Previously approved” means a person already received a favorable decision, but the government may re-check eligibility, identity, or security-related information when a trigger appears.
USCIS framed the policy as a security-driven tradeoff. The memo states: “USCIS has determined the burden of processing delays which will fall on some aliens is necessary and appropriate, when weighed against the agency’s obligation to protect and preserve our national security.”
The memo applies to people from 39 high-risk countries, as designated under Presidential Proclamation 10998, and it focuses on approvals on or after January 20, 2021. “High-risk country” targeting, in practice, usually means deeper identity and background screening and more frequent referrals between agencies.
DHS’s Operation PARRIS runs on the enforcement side. The name stands for Operation Post-Admission Refugee Reverification and Integrity Strengthening. While described as a refugee-focused integrity effort, it has affected some LPRs in travel settings.
The typical sequence can look like this: database match or “hit,” questioning, file review, and then either release or an enforcement step. Enforcement initiatives can interact with USCIS adjudications through routine data sharing.
A port-of-entry encounter can lead to notes, referrals, or follow-up review. That can matter for benefit types where discretion and credibility are assessed, including adjustment-related histories, naturalization screening, or document renewals tied to travel.
✅ Note: Hold-and-review applies to pending and previously approved benefits for individuals from 39 high-risk countries; impact includes possible delays, secondary inspections, and referrals
Section 2: SEVIS Status Flagging and System Cross-Referencing
SEVIS is the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System used by SEVP to track F-1 and J-1 records. Even after someone becomes an LPR, older SEVIS entries can remain visible as historical data, and that persistence matters because DHS components can access overlapping databases for identity and status checks.
Ports of entry are where cross-referencing becomes real. CBP officers can compare current LPR status, travel patterns, and older immigration records. USCIS data and prior nonimmigrant histories may also appear in connected systems.
A traveler may feel like they are being asked about a chapter that ended years ago. The computer may still treat it as relevant. A major driver has been the way older “events” stay logged; a mass termination-and-restoration episode can leave residual markers, such as audit trails and annotations.
Even if a record was later corrected, the historical “terminated” entry may still be displayed and treated as a discrepancy that needs an explanation. For an LPR who once held F-1 or J-1 status, that can mean practical friction at inspection: expect more questions, more waiting, and requests for supporting paperwork.
Referrals for follow-up review are also possible, depending on what the databases show and what the traveler says.
Section 3: Key Facts and Policy Details
Time outside the United States often becomes the simplest screening signal. Long trips can raise questions about ties to the United States and, in some situations, whether someone maintained residence.
Officers commonly look for evidence of continuing connections, such as a U.S. home, job, tax filing history, and close family ties. DHS has also described pattern-based screening tied to travel history.
In January 2026, DHS confirmed a framework that flags LPRs for extra screening when certain thresholds appear in a rolling 36-month period. Two stated indicators are 180 days abroad and a 50% presence ratio. Those numbers function as screening triggers in this framework but are not a promise that every person meeting them will be found inadmissible.
Technology makes these comparisons easier. Since December 26, 2025, a biometric facial recognition system has been active at major airports. Biometric entry/exit tools aim to confirm identity and match entries to exits, reducing ambiguity in travel records and making discrepancies harder to explain.
Another area drawing attention is social media. A DHS release dated April 9, 2025 remains in effect and allows social media activity to be considered in certain security and inadmissibility contexts. In practice, social media review tends to surface when officers believe content suggests links to prohibited activity or threats.
Allegations still require support, and procedural protections vary by setting. A border inspection is not the same process as a courtroom hearing. Individualized legal advice is often worth considering when risk factors pile up.
Prior arrests or charges, prior immigration violations, earlier SEVIS problems, prior removal proceedings, or pending applications can all change how a case should be handled.
Section 4: Impact on Affected Individuals
Secondary inspection is a controlled setting, not an arrest by itself. For LPRs, it typically involves document review, database checks, and questioning about travel, residence, and prior immigration history. Officers may compare answers to what the systems show and sometimes ask for supporting records on the spot.
Delays can be substantial. Many travelers report 4–8 hour delays when screening expands to older records, travel analytics, and supervisory review. The time often reflects waiting for database responses, checking file notes, and escalation to specialized units.
Extra vetting at the airport can spill into later benefits processing. A border encounter may lead to a request for evidence, a hold in adjudication, or additional internal review. Timelines become hard to predict once a file is routed for screening.
Operation PARRIS adds a sharper enforcement edge. Reported outcomes include reverification interviews, detention in some cases, and issuance of an NTA (Notice to Appear). An NTA starts removal proceedings before an immigration judge; the person can contest the case and present evidence.
Individuals generally have a right to counsel at their own expense, but the government does not provide a free attorney in removal court.
Minnesota has been a focal point. On January 28, 2026, Judge John Tunheim of the Minnesota District Court blocked the detention of refugees under Operation PARRIS in Minnesota. He wrote: “Refugees have a legal right to be in the United States. and a right not to be subjected to the terror of being arrested and detained without warrants.”
District court orders can limit practices in a jurisdiction or fact pattern but do not automatically change screening nationwide.
If you are an LPR with a history of student/refugee status, document travel history, SEVIS records, and any prior entry issues; seek individualized legal advice if facing detentions, NTAs, or requests for additional documentation
Section 5: Official Government Sources and References
USCIS policy documents matter most when they connect to adjudication standards. The USCIS Policy Manual is the public-facing reference that explains how USCIS applies law and policy in case decisions. Policy memos can guide internal handling, including when hold-and-review is used. Start here: USCIS Policy Manual
CBP issues traveler-facing guidance and maintains entry records that can shape future screenings. Reviewing your admission history and spotting errors early can reduce problems later. Many travelers check their I-94 and related notifications directly through CBP’s official channels.
SEVIS issues often require school documentation. SEVP communications go to designated school officials, and travelers sometimes need letters or printouts confirming historical corrections. Keeping copies of restored or corrected records can help when an older termination appears during inspection.
Legal readers often want primary references. Federal immigration concepts like admissibility, removal proceedings, and agency authority are rooted in statutes and regulations. For accessible references, Cornell Law School’s legal library is commonly used: Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute
Record consistency is a quiet risk reducer. Name spelling, passport numbers, and A-number entries should match across filings and travel documents. Small mismatches can trigger manual review when systems compare records.
Treat these changes as a screening shift, not a single rule that fits every traveler. If you face detention, an NTA, or a benefits hold, get qualified help quickly and keep your records ready.
This article discusses government actions and enforcement policies; readers should consult official sources for current guidance.
Information about potential detentions or removal proceedings is legal in nature; seek qualified legal counsel for individual circumstances.
