(NEW YORK, UNITED STATES) — Representative Grace Meng, chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), led 74 members of Congress on January 29, 2026 in a demand that the Trump administration reverse its suspension of immigrant visa processing for nationals of 75 countries.
Meng, a Democrat who represents New York’s 6th congressional district, pressed the administration to unwind a policy that took effect on January 21, 2026 and that, in practice, halts the issuance of immigrant visas tied to U.S. permanent residency, often referred to as green cards.
The pushback from lawmakers followed a series of administration statements and directives that framed the pause as a measure to protect the U.S. welfare system, while critics described it as a sweeping barrier based on country of origin.
Policy framing and official statements
A State Department official statement on January 14, 2026 cast the policy in public-charge terms and explained the administration’s rationale for the pause.
“The State Department will use its long-standing authority to deem ineligible potential immigrants who would become a public charge on the United States and exploit the generosity of the American people. Immigration from these 75 countries will be paused while the State Department reassess immigration processing procedures to prevent the entry of foreign nationals who would take welfare and public benefits,” said Tommy Piggott, principal deputy spokesperson.
Meng and her colleagues argued that the suspension reaches far beyond individual financial assessments and blocks people who have already spent years pursuing lawful immigration pathways.
The CAPAC lawmaker called the policy a “de-facto wealth test” and said it disproportionately targets the Global South and Asian American communities.
How the suspension operates at consulates
In practical terms, the suspension targets immigrant visa processing at U.S. consulates for nationals of the designated countries, meaning cases can stop at intake, be refused, or be held depending on their stage.
Applicants often reach a “documentarily qualified” point before an interview, while others have completed interviews and await final steps such as printing and issuance; the policy can interrupt each of those points differently.
Consular processing guidance described using section 221(g) to refuse or hold cases that had moved close to issuance. In practice, a 221(g) refusal can signal administrative processing, missing documents, or a policy-based action that prevents final issuance.
Applicants often receive a refusal worksheet or instructions about what remains outstanding, and the policy description suggested the new guidance can use 221(g) to keep cases in a holding pattern.
Scope of the suspension: which visas are affected
The suspension centers on immigrant visas, which cover the principal family-based and employment-based routes to permanent residence. The affected classes were described to include immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, family-sponsored visas, employer-sponsored visas, religious worker visas, diversity lottery winners, and returning resident visas.
Because the trigger is nationality, not simply where an interview takes place, the implications extend to applicants who live and interview in third countries. The administration’s stated focus is on “nationals of 75 countries”, and the policy description presented the suspension as a categorical pause rather than an individualized assessment.
This section is designed to lead into an interactive tool that lists the specific visa classes and examples of how each type of case may be affected at different stages of consular processing.
Excluded nonimmigrant categories
At the same time, the policy as described excludes several major nonimmigrant categories that many travelers use for temporary entry.
The pause does not currently apply to B-1/B-2 tourist visas, F-1 student visas, or H-1B temporary work visas, a carveout the administration linked to keeping travel possible for events like the 2026 FIFA World Cup.
That distinction matters because visa issuance at a U.S. consulate is separate from admission at a U.S. port of entry. Even when a category is “not affected” by an immigrant-visa processing suspension, a traveler still must satisfy the separate screening that applies at the border, while immigrant visa applicants first need a consular issuance step that the policy targets.
Legal authority and agency actions
The legal authority cited for the suspension was Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which grants the president broad power to suspend the entry of any class of aliens deemed “detrimental to the interests of the United States”.
That type of authority typically appears in presidential proclamations that then drive instructions to agencies, including the State Department’s consular operations.
USCIS also moved on its own lane of the system through what it described as an adjudication pause. A USCIS policy memorandum dated January 1, 2026 established an “adjudicative hold” on all pending benefit requests for individuals from high-risk countries identified in Presidential Proclamation 10998.
“USCIS will place an adjudicative hold on all pending benefit requests submitted by or for aliens from the high-risk countries identified in PP 10998, allowing for a thorough case-by-case review,” the memo said.
Separate reports indicated Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a classified cable to consular posts instructing officers to refuse all new immigrant visa applications from the designated countries starting January 21, citing the need to re-evaluate “public charge” risks.
The description of the cable in those reports underscored how a White House action can translate into day-to-day consular outcomes, including refusals and administrative holds.
Administration rationale vs. critics
The administration’s framing pushed “public charge” from an individual analysis to a country-based filter. The policy description said the administration argues these 75 nations have “unacceptable rates” of welfare usage among their migrants, while critics said it functions as a categorical barrier.
Meng and other critics disputed the nationwide characterization and highlighted the broader consequences for lawful applicants who have already completed extensive steps in the immigration process.
Practical effects and case-specific risks
For families and employers, a country-based suspension can change planning overnight, especially when cases are time-sensitive. Immigrant visas frequently involve expiring medical examinations and police certificates, and long waits can create risks tied to children aging out of eligibility or to employers’ start dates and staffing plans.
The impact estimates cited by critics and outside analysts described a large potential backlog and prolonged separations. Over 135,000 individuals from Asian countries—representing 44% of all Asian immigrant visa holders—are estimated to be impacted.
Experts from the Cato Institute estimated that approximately 315,000 legal immigrants could face denial or indefinite delay over the next 12 months. The estimate focused on scale, not on a defined endpoint, as the policy description characterized the freeze as indefinite.
Beyond numbers and procedures, the policy’s immediate effect is separation. The pause “has left thousands of thoroughly vetted family members of U.S. citizens in a legal limbo, unable to join their families in the United States despite having completed years of the lawful immigration process,” the policy summary said.
Impact on individuals and families
The policy description emphasized that eligibility and impact turn on the official designation list and the applicant’s nationality, including how consulates handle dual nationals and which passport an applicant uses.
Because the policy centers on nationality as the trigger, it can complicate decisions for applicants who hold multiple passports and must choose how to present their citizenship in the visa process.
This section is intended to lead into an interactive tool that illustrates specific family and employer scenarios, timelines, and potential remedies or next steps for affected applicants and petitioners.
Examples of affected countries
For readers trying to determine whether their situation could be implicated, the policy summary described the designated list as a set of 75 countries and provided notable examples across regions.
In Asia and the Pacific, the examples included Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Cambodia, Laos, Pakistan, Thailand, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam.
Across the Americas, the examples included Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, Haiti, Jamaica, and Nicaragua. In Africa and the Middle East, the examples included Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Russia, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen.
Eligibility and impact still turn on the official designation list and the applicant’s nationality, including how consulates handle dual nationals and which passport an applicant uses.
Official sources and tracking
CAPAC’s response was formalized through a press release dated Jan 29, 2026, describing the lawmakers’ demand that the administration reverse the suspensions. Readers can find CAPAC’s statement in a CAPAC press release that identifies Meng as chair and outlines the caucus position.
For case tracking, the policy summary pointed to official channels where applicants and petitioners can monitor updates. USCIS publishes policy changes and announcements through its official newsroom, while the State Department posts updates through its visa news page.
Current status and concluding summary
Even as Meng and her colleagues pressed the White House to reverse the measure, the suspension remained described as an indefinite halt on immigrant visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries.
The move reshaped the final steps for families and workers already deep into the process and created ongoing uncertainty for thousands of applicants with cases at different stages of consular processing.
