Biden Administration’s USCIS Reinstates Longstanding, Employer-Friendly Deference Policy

10 May 2021 Labor & Employment Law Perspectives Blog
Author(s): Roy J. Barquet

As of April 27, 2021, the Biden administration has reinstated a longstanding policy of U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) that the Trump administration revoked in its first year.  The reinstated policy, commonly referred to as the “Deference Policy,” had been in place since April 2004.  The policy instructed USCIS officers to give deference to prior employment visa determinations when adjudicating visa extension requests involving the same parties and facts unless there was a material error, material change in circumstances or new material information that adversely impacts the eligibility of the petitioner, applicant, or beneficiary of a sought-after visa extension petition.

The Trump administration’s revocation of the Deference Policy was a linchpin of the administration’s efforts to depart from the adjudication policies of previous Republican and Democratic administrations.  Revocation of the policy required USCIS officers to adjudicate employment visa extension requests as if there had never been a previous approval of the same visa benefit for the same employer, employee and job.  The result was that employers’ visa extension petitions were subjected to more scrutiny, and burdensome requests for evidence (RFEs), resulting in processing backlogs and delays of otherwise previously adjudicated matters.

The Biden administration’s policy change, effective immediately, reinstates the 2004 policy of deferring to prior determinations of eligibility when extension requests involve the same employer, employee and employment terms as the initial petition or application.  In practice, reinstatement of the Deference Policy means USCIS must give weight to its previous approval of an employment visa status.  Under the reinstated policy, USCIS can only depart from a previous approval if it finds that the original approval was materially wrong based on the visa’s legal requisites or a material change in facts has transpired since the original approval that now makes extension of the employment visa status unwarranted.

Under the reinstated policy, if a USCIS officer does not defer to the prior approval, the officer must:

  • Acknowledge the previous approval in the denial, RFE, or NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny);

  • Articulate the reason for the lack of deference;

  • Provide the petitioner or applicant an opportunity to respond to any new information, and;

  • Importantly, obtain supervisory approval before deviating from prior approval.

Reinstatement of the Deference Policy is a consequence of President Biden’s February 2, 2021, Executive Order, Restoring Faith in Our Legal Immigration Systems and Strengthening Integration and Inclusion Efforts for New Americans.  U.S. employers expect the reinstatement to expedite processing of employment visa extensions and restore predictability in employers’ retention and professional development of globally sourced human resources.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services