KBS Sidhu Urges External Affairs Minister to Oppose US H-1B Grace Period Scrap by November 10, 2026

Former Punjab Special Chief Secretary KBS Sidhu urged Dr. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar to formally oppose a U.S. proposal that could end the discretionary grace period available to some foreign workers after their jobs end. He wants the Indian government to act before the public-comment deadline.

The deadline is November 10, 2026. Sidhu’s appeal to the External Affairs Minister was reported publicly on October 7, 2026.

Sidhu warned that a family’s lawful stay could become tied to the worker’s final day on the job if the proposal becomes a rule. The current proposal is not final.

“If it is finalised, the last day at work becomes the last day of lawful stay, for a family that may have lived in the United States for over a decade and holds a mortgage there.”

He framed the issue as one of family stability and consular support, as well as employment. The proposal would affect workers across several temporary visa categories.

The proposal would end a short window after qualifying work stops

The Department of Homeland Security published its proposal on September 11, 2026. It would remove a regulation that generally lets eligible nonimmigrant workers remain in the United States for up to 60 days after qualifying employment or activity ends, or until their authorized stay expires, whichever comes first.

The categories named in the proposal include E-1 treaty traders, E-2 treaty investors, E-3 Australian specialty-occupation workers, H-1B and H-1B1 workers, L-1 intracompany transferees, O-1 workers with extraordinary ability, and TN professionals from Canada and Mexico. Eligible dependents would also be affected.

Under the existing framework, the worker’s Form I-94 expiration date can shorten the grace period. The worker may use the available time to seek a new sponsoring employer, have that employer file an H-1B petition, seek another lawful status or arrange departure.

The proposal has not taken effect. Eligible workers remain under the current rules while DHS conducts rulemaking and reviews public comments.

DHS says the change would restore a closer link between a worker’s nonimmigrant status and the employment or activity that supports it. The department also says eliminating the period would reduce administrative burdens for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

DHS described the change as the “removal of the up to 60-day discretionary grace period.” The agency said that approach would align regulations with governing statutes and reinforce the expectation that foreign nationals depart when the work or activity supporting their status ends.

Sidhu wants a prospective rule and support for families already in the U.S.

In his letter, Sidhu asked India to submit a formal comment opposing the proposal or seeking changes before the deadline. He also urged the government to press for protections for people already living in the United States.

His requests include:

• Seek a rule that applies prospectively, rather than changing the position of workers already in the country.
• Ask for a “reasonable transition period” for those workers.
• Create a legal-aid and advisory desk at the Consulate General of India in Houston for nationals facing layoffs, employer investigations or immigration-status problems.
• Provide guidance on maintaining lawful status and arranging an orderly departure when staying in the United States is no longer possible.

Sidhu also linked the proposed change to immigration enforcement in Texas, asking for support for Indian families affected by both the rule and related enforcement concerns. His request places consular advice alongside the call for a government comment.

A job loss could leave workers little time to arrange their next status

If DHS finalizes the proposal without transition protections, a worker whose qualifying employment ends could have less time to find a new employer and arrange a petition or another lawful basis to stay. Affected workers may also need to coordinate their departure with spouses and children holding H-4 status.

A worker who secures another U.S. job after leaving the country could still have a new employer file an H-1B petition. But a worker who loses the existing grace period might find an in-country employer change or change-of-status application harder to complete after a termination.

The consequences could reach beyond the principal worker. A sudden layoff may leave a family managing school commitments, a mortgage and long-term residence while addressing the status and travel plans of dependents.

The proposal would not bar a new employer from petitioning for a worker who has departed the United States. It could, however, force some workers to leave and complete visa processing at a U.S. embassy or consulate before returning, rather than transfer employment from inside the country.

Indian nationals are expected to be particularly exposed because they make up the largest group of H-1B beneficiaries and many work in technology. Indian professionals also work in consulting, health care and engineering. The proposal is not written specifically for Indian citizens.

Anushk Sharma, an Indian career coach in the United States, criticized the potential effect on workers facing sudden job loss.

“If the current language of the proposal becomes a rule, the H-1B is absolutely dead because no one can take the risk, because this rule says if you lose your job today, you will have to leave the US tomorrow. This is crazy brutal.”

Immigration firm Fragomen has said ending the period could leave some foreign nationals out of status after a job termination. That could prevent an in-country change of status or employer change unless USCIS used its discretion to forgive the lapse.

DHS must finish rulemaking before any new requirement takes effect

The proposal still must move through the federal rulemaking process. DHS must consider public comments, issue a final regulation and set an effective date before the change takes effect.

If the agency finalizes the rule, it will specify the implementation date and any transition protections. Until then, eligible workers continue to have access to the existing grace-period framework, subject to the current requirements and the expiration date on their Form I-94.