USCIS Immigration Fees and Related Procedures Required by H.R.1 Reconciliation Bill

The AFL-CIO, a federation of 65 national and international unions, opposes the rule because it creates severe consequences for asylum seekers and TPS holders who cannot pay the annual asylum fee or maintain work permits. They argue the rule creates wealth-based barriers to relief, causes significant economic harm, and unlawfully bypasses required notice-and-comment procedures.

The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) opposes the rule, arguing it creates severe consequences for asylum seekers and TPS holders by imposing new fees and making it difficult to maintain work permits. They contend the rule causes significant economic harm, ignores reliance interests, and unlawfully bypasses required notice-and-comment procedures.

The Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP), a national membership organization representing over 700,000 asylum seekers, opposes the proposed rule. They argue that the rule "silently" eliminates the 30-day processing requirement for initial asylum-based work permits, which they claim is arbitrary, capricious, and violates the Administrative Procedure Act.

The Cedar Rapids Metro Economic Alliance, Chillicothe Ross Chamber of Commerce, and Global Detroit are submitting a joint comment on behalf of Midwest business organizations. They argue that the proposed rule's automatic termination of work authorization for asylum applicants and restrictions on TPS holders will cause labor shortages, increase turnover costs, and harm the economy.

A group of Members of Congress is writing to strongly oppose the interim final rule regarding USCIS immigration fees. They argue that the rule creates a punitive fee system that threatens the legal status and work authorizations of asylum seekers and TPS holders, causes significant economic harm to industries, and improperly bypasses the required notice-and-comment rulemaking process.

Mormon Women for Ethical Government (MWEG), a faith-based organization, opposes the interim final rule because it imposes harsh penalties and procedural barriers on asylum seekers and TPS holders. They argue that the rule creates "procedural dead ends," threatens employment authorization, and lacks congressional authorization, ultimately harming both individuals and the economy.

Roots Reborn, an advocacy organization, opposes the proposed rule because it codifies fee increases that will cause financial strain on immigrant families and children. They argue that the fees are disproportionate to income and create a "Catch-22" for asylum seekers, recommending that the government prioritize clearing the court backlog instead of seeking new funding through fees.

The City of New York opposes the Interim Final Rule because it imposes harsh consequences on asylum applicants for failing to pay fees and creates significant barriers for TPS holders to maintain work authorization. The City argues that these measures will harm the local economy, strain public services, and negatively impact the well-being of residents.

The New York Immigration Coalition (NYIC), an umbrella organization representing over 200 immigrant and refugee groups, opposes the proposed Interim Final Rule regarding immigration fees. They argue that the rule imposes punitive consequences for nonpayment—such as terminating asylum claims and employment authorization—that are not required by statute and fail to account for government-created delays and the needs of vulnerable populations.

Cities for Action, a coalition of nearly 200 U.S. mayors and county executives, opposes the Interim Final Rule because it creates barriers to asylum and work authorization for millions of residents. They argue the rule will harm regional economic development, strain local emergency systems, and reduce state and local tax revenues.