New Comment Period for Immigrant Social Media Data Collection

(UNITED STATES) The Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services are advancing a plan to require millions of applicants to list their social media identifiers on nine major immigration forms, with a new 60-day public comment period running through May 5, 2025. The proposal, announced in a March 5, 2025 Federal Register notice, stems from Executive Order 14161 signed by President Trump on January 20, 2025, which directs agencies to raise vetting standards to protect national security and public safety. The rule is not yet in effect, but it marks the broadest shift in immigration screening in years, placing social media data collection at the center of identity checks and security reviews.

What the proposal would require

Under the plan, USCIS would add questions asking for social media “handles” and platform names to nine core applications:

• Naturalization form N-400 (N-400)
• Travel document request I-131 (I-131)
• Waiver for certain noncitizens I-192 (I-192)
• Green card application I-485 (I-485)
• Asylum application I-589 (I-589)
• Refugee registration I-590 (I-590)
• Refugee/asylee family petition I-730 (I-730)
• Petition to remove conditions on residence I-751 (I-751)
• Investor petition to remove conditions I-829 (I-829)

According to USCIS, more than 3.5 million applicants each year would be affected, spanning naturalization, refugee and asylum processing, family unity requests, investor cases, and key travel authorizations.

How USCIS says it will use the data

• Applicants would provide identifiers, not passwords.
• USCIS states it will review public-facing content to:
  • Verify identity
  • Detect fraud
  • Screen for national security and public safety risks

This review could include posts, photos, videos, comments, check-ins, group memberships, and connections on widely used platforms. The agency says it will not access private messages or closed-group content unless it has legal authority such as a court order.

Civil liberties groups warn that “private” content can still surface when shared or cached, and that posts are often misread without cultural context or language nuance.

Scope and retention concerns

• The proposed review period generally covers the last five years of social media history, although officials may go further back if they see red flags.
• Critics warn the plan could enable ongoing monitoring, because DHS retains pre-naturalization records and may revisit them later.
• Several legal groups have raised concerns under the Privacy Act of 1974, arguing this could chill speech among immigrants and their U.S.-based contacts.
• Attorneys are reportedly advising clients to review old posts, correct profile details, and prepare explanations for jokes, slang, or sarcasm that automated systems might misinterpret.

Policy changes overview

The March 5, 2025 notice outlines three core elements:

1. Collection of social media handles and platform names on nine USCIS forms.
2. Use of that data for identity checks and security screening.
3. A 60-day public comment period ending May 5, 2025.

Anyone can submit feedback through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at regulations.gov (Docket USCIS-2025-0003). DHS will review comments and may adjust the scope, privacy protections, or procedures before issuing a final rule later in 2025.

Background and precedent

• USCIS created a Social Media Division in 2016 for fraud detection.
• “Extreme vetting” efforts expanded in 2017.
• In 2019, the State Department began asking visa applicants to list social media identifiers on consular forms DS-160 and DS-260.
• In 2021, monitoring widened to include non‑U.S. platforms.
• Executive Order 14161 now formalizes social media questions on nine USCIS forms, extending the practice into domestic immigration processing rather than only overseas visa cases.

Reactions from civil liberties groups and practitioners

Civil liberties and immigrant advocacy organizations—such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the National Immigration Project, and the Brennan Center—have filed or plan to file formal comments opposing the proposal. Their concerns include:

• Chilling lawful speech
• Increased profiling risks
• Potential harm to asylum seekers whose families abroad could face pressure

The American Immigration Lawyers Association has raised concerns about:

• Longer processing times
• Inconsistent decisions
• Vague rules for data retention, access, and corrections

Impact on applicants — what to expect

The change would generally require listing every social media handle used in the past five years—across platforms old and new, personal and professional. Officers could review a broad set of public content, including dormant accounts and profiles in other languages.

Potential impacts:

• People with common names may face extra identity checks.
• Public content from friends or family could be included if it’s publicly visible and connected to the applicant.
• Automated tools and keyword scans may produce false positives for satire, slang, or culturally specific content.
• References to joint initiatives like “Catch and Revoke” have raised fears about political or religious screening.

USCIS states the focus is on identity fraud and public safety, not ideology, but privacy advocates warn of mistakes that are difficult to appeal because screening criteria are typically not publicly disclosed.

Practical steps applicants and attorneys recommend now

1. Keep a list of all social media handles used in the past five years.
2. Ensure names, dates, and contact details on profiles match your immigration forms.
3. Review public posts for errors, impersonation, or old content that could be misunderstood.
4. Save screenshots of any corrections you make, in case you need to explain changes later.
5. If a profile using your name is not yours, document that clearly.

Applicants who receive a request for evidence may need to explain controversial posts, language they did not write, or old comments that lack context. USCIS reiterates it will not request passwords and cannot view private messages without legal authorization, but applicants should assume any public content can be reviewed and copied into a case file.

How to participate in the public comment period

DHS and USCIS emphasize the rule is still proposed and could change after review. Individuals, employers, schools, and community groups can submit comments at regulations.gov (USCIS-2025-0003) by May 5, 2025.

To make comments most effective:

• Cite specific parts of the proposal and explain how they would affect applicants, families, or employers.
• Offer concrete alternatives, such as shorter look‑back periods, clearer privacy limits, or stronger notice and correction rights.
• Address real-world effects on processing times and error rates.
• Describe risks for refugee and asylum cases where social media connections could expose relatives abroad.

The legal and procedural debate

Key legal questions include whether the plan is arbitrary or lacks clear standards. Attorneys point to uncertainties about:

• Data retention
• Inter-agency sharing
• How to correct misidentified posts
• Whether broad, ongoing monitoring conflicts with existing privacy rules—especially after someone becomes a U.S. citizen

Advocates call for guardrails: well‑defined time limits, strict sharing controls, and a clear path to fix mistakes.

Processing times and practical consequences

Adding social media review to forms like the I-485 green card application and the N-400 naturalization form could extend already long timelines. That matters for:

• Families waiting to reunite
• Refugees hoping to travel
• Investors facing deadlines to remove conditions on residence

Any increase in requests for evidence tied to online content could slow adjudications further—especially if applicants must translate posts or explain cultural references for officers who do not speak the language.

Current status and possible next steps

• As of September 15, 2025, the process remains in flux.
• DHS will decide after the comment window whether to adopt the rule as written, scale it back, or withdraw it.
• If adopted, USCIS would update form editions and instructions to add social media questions.
• Agencies may also publish guidance explaining how officers should consider context, satire, or duplicate accounts.

Applicants and lawyers will watch closely for clarity on what triggers extra checks and how to challenge errors.

For now, the scope is clear: a plan to attach social media data collection to nine widely used immigration forms, affecting more than 3.5 million people each year. The debate captures a broader tension in U.S. immigration policy—how to weigh security aims against privacy, speech, and fairness in complex, multilingual digital spaces.

Supporters view the change as a needed tool for modern vetting. Critics see it as a dragnet with significant privacy and fairness risks. The outcome will shape how future immigrants present their lives online and how the government reads those digital footprints when making decisions that carry life-changing consequences.