Fighting Back USCIS Harmful New Proposed Fee Rule

By Admin

|

November 18, 2019

ASISTA stridently opposes the proposed fee rule published in the Federal Register yesterday as it further advances the Administration’s callous agenda to create significant barriers to equal access to immigration relief. The new proposed rule makes sweeping changes, including but not limited to:

I. Fee Increases

  • An increase in fees for N-400 naturalization application, from $640 to $1,170 (83% increase) 
  • An increase in fees for I-929: Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U–1 Nonimmigrant, $230 to $1515 (an increase of 559%).
  • An increase in fees for I-485: Application for Adjustment of Status 
  • A new fee for affirmative asylum applications and increase in fees for DACA renewal requests.

II. Elimination of Fee Waivers for Many Applications

The new rule also calls for the elimination of fee waivers for many applications including N-400, I-90, I-765, I-485 and I-751; however, fee waivers for forms related to VAWA self-petitioners (including I-751 waivers based on domestic violence and VAWA cancellation), U visa and T visa applications, battered spouses of certain nonimmigrant visa holders under INA §106, and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) are statutorily mandated by Congress and cannot be eliminated by agency action.**

Even before this new fee rule was published, USCIS had taken action to limit the criteria to determine fee waiver eligibility through its revisions to the I-912 fee waiver form and corresponding guidance, which will create significant barriers for immigrants, including survivors of violence. While those changes are currently being challenged through litigation efforts, the new proposed fee rule published yesterday further limits the criteria for fee waivers, as those seeking fee waivers based on the federal poverty guidelines will now need to demonstrate that they earn less than 125% of the federal poverty guidelines, rather than the current level of 150%. The proposed rule also eliminates the financial hardship criteria for fee waivers.

III. Transferring Funds to ICE

In addition, the new fee rule calls for over $200 million to be transferred to ICE, citing their role in investigating and enforcing laws related to potential immigration fraud. It is unconscionable that immigrants applying for immigration benefits should shoulder the financial burden of transforming USCIS into a third enforcement arm of DHS.

TIME TO TAKE ACTION

While there have been advocacy efforts to seek an extension, the deadline for comment on this significant proposed rule is December 16, 2019. In the upcoming days, ASISTA will be sending out template comments and sharing additional resources for organizations that serve immigrant survivors of domestic and sexual violence to voice their strong opposition to this new rule. We will also be posting updates on ASISTA’s Fee Waiver Advocacy Page.

For more information on the new proposed rule, [click here] for a factsheet developed by NALEO. For additional background on the proposed fee schedule, from CLINIC [click here]. For further questions on this proposed rule, contact ASISTA at questions@asistahelp.org

** For example, the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, specifically stated that DHS shall permit applicants to apply for a waiver of any fees associated with filing a VAWA self-petition, a T or U visa application, or an application for VAWA cancellation or suspension of deportation.

Recent Posts

ASISTA Practice Alert: USCIS Extreme Vetting Policies and Their Implication for Immigrant Survivors (Dec. 12, 2025)

By Maria Lazzarino • December 12, 2025
This Practice Alert summarizes USCIS’s new extreme vetting policies, including broad adjudication holds, re-review of previously approved cases, and heightened discretionary scrutiny, and explains their serious implications for immigrant survivors seeking safety and stability. It also provides practical guidance for practitioners on preparing clients for the impact of these measures and on developing case strategies and potential legal challenges.

ASISTA Practice Alert: Impact of HR-1 on Trafficking Survivors (Oct. 1, 2025)

By Maria Lazzarino • December 12, 2025
On July 4, 2025, President Trump signed HR-1, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA), which significantly impacts immigrant survivors of human trafficking. The law imposes new filing fees for immigration benefits, motions, and appeals before USCIS and EOIR, establishes additional financial penalties for certain immigration violations, and eliminates eligibility for a range of federal public benefits for many immigrants who were previously considered “qualified,” including trafficking survivors. This Practice Alert reviews these fee and penalty changes, explains the new restrictions on public benefits, and outlines the impact on trafficking survivors seeking T visas and other forms of humanitarian relief, offering guidance for practitioners on how to mitigate the law’s potential harms.

Amicus Briefs on Birthright Citizenship Executive Order (Spring 2025)

By Maria Lazzarino • June 11, 2025
In May and June 2025, ASISTA joined partners at Boston College School of Law, Harbor COV, and Tahirih to submit an amicus briefs to the First and Fourth Circuit Courts of Appeals in cases challenging the executive order on birthright citizenship. ASISTA and partners highlighted the importance of maintaining a preliminary injunction against implementing the order. If the order were implemented, many immigrant mothers of U.S.-born children would only be able to prove their child’s citizenship by submitting documentation about the child’s father’s immigration status. For survivors of intimate partner violence, just knowing the need for this documentation could make it difficult or impossible to leave the abusive relationship. For survivors of sexual assault or trafficking, contacting the perpetrator for the paperwork could put them and their families in immediate physical danger. Using real-life examples, the brief illustrates the stakes if immigrant parents were forced to choose between maintaining their safety and establishing their children’s rights. It urges the court not let this become reality. Read the First Circuit Brief, Doe v. Trump , here ; read the Fourth Circuit Brief, Casa, Inc., et al. v. Trump , here .

Alien Enemies Act Alert (May 29, 2025)

By Maria Lazzarino • May 30, 2025
On March 14, 2025, President Trump attempted to invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to justify carrying out deportations without the due process of immigration proceedings. Since then, multiple federal courts have ruled the invocation was unlawful, but the government continues to fight for its usage, including before the U.S. Supreme Court. On May 16, 2025, the Supreme Court maintained a temporary prohibition on the deportations planned in Texas and sent the issue back to the lower courts. ASISTA celebrates the positive rulings but notes with condemnation that the push against them is ongoing. Check ASISTA’s alert: The Fight to Protect Survivors from the Alien Enemies Act Continue.

ASISTA Practice Alert: USCIS Wet Ink Signature RFEs & NOIDs (April 24, 2025)

By Maria Lazzarino • April 28, 2025
Practitioners have reported receiving RFEs and NOIDs in cases submitted with electronically reproduced signatures for original, wet ink signatures where USCIS has requested the original, wet ink signatures. This Practice Alert describes what USCIS’ current signature policy is and what options practitioners have in these cases.