Category: News & Media

By Mike Rodriguez, Senior Policy Advisor

Even before the Trump Administration announced a ban on immigration from 19 “countries of concern,” and this week’s announcement that as many as 30 additional countries may be added to this list, I have noticed that security-based visa delays have been increasing across multiple regions.

We are seeing more 221(g) holds (in which the consular officer needs more time or information before making a final decision), extended Security Advisory Opinions (SAOs), or robust U.S. government background checks for national security reasons, and cases routed through other screening processes.  These tools have existed for years, but they are being applied more frequently and with less visibility.  Applicants often realize something is wrong only when the consulate’s communication shifts from specific to generic and the timeline suddenly stops moving.

Continue reading “US Port Entry & Security Flagging Is Rising Again: What Frequent Travelers, Companies and Institutions Should Know”

By Mike Rodriguez, Senior Policy Advisor

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently announced the launch of the USCIS Vetting Center, a specialized facility dedicated to strengthening the immigration screening process. Located in Atlanta, Georgia, this new center will play a key role in identifying individuals who may present national security or public safety risks.

The USCIS Vetting Center’s primary mission is to centralize and enhance vetting resources, leveraging advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) alongside the expertise and screening capabilities of the Department of Homeland Security, law enforcement, and intelligence agencies.

By reviewing both pending and approved immigration applications—with particular attention to cases from designated “countries of concern” (see list below)—the center aims to detect potential fraud, criminal activity, and other threats as part of implementing an Executive Order designed to protect the U.S. from foreign terrorists and other dangers.

Applicants should anticipate that these expanded security measures may result in longer processing times and more frequent reviews, especially in light of recent changes that have shortened the maximum validity period for certain employment authorization documents (EADs). The center’s operations underscore USCIS’s commitment to safeguarding the country while ensuring the integrity of the immigration system.

Key Details

• Purpose: The center aims to centralize and enhance vetting resources to identify potential fraud, criminal activity, and security concerns as part of efforts to implement an Executive Order focused on protecting the U.S. from foreign terrorists and other threats.

• Operations: The center will use advanced technologies, including AI, and screening capabilities from DHS, law enforcement, and       the intelligence community.
• Scope of Review: It will review both pending and approved applications, prioritizing cases from designated  “countries of concern”.
• Impact on Applicants: Expect potentially longer processing times for some cases due to these new measures. More frequent vetting will occur due to these measures and a recent reduction in the maximum validity period for certain employment authorization documents (EADs).

The term “countries of concern” typically refers to nations identified by the U.S. government as presenting higher security risks due to factors such as terrorism, instability, or insufficient cooperation on vetting processes.  

Applicants from these countries may be subject to increased scrutiny and more rigorous background checks as part of the immigration screening process. While USCIS does not publicly disclose an official list, these designations often align with broader government assessments of national security threats.

The U.S. government does not publicly disclose an official list of the “countries of concern” for immigration vetting purposes, as noted in the context above. However, based on broader U.S. government assessments and previous public references, such lists have often included countries identified as presenting higher security risks due to terrorism, instability, or limited cooperation with vetting processes.

Countries of Concern

While the specific list may change over time, past government sources and policy documents have referenced the following 19 countries as “countries of concern” in relation to heightened security screening:

• Afghanistan
• Algeria
• Bahrain
• Egypt
• Eritrea
• Iran
• Iraq
• Jordan
• Kuwait
• Lebanon
• Libya
• Mali
• Morocco
• North Korea
• Oman
• Qatar
• Saudi Arabia
• Somalia
• Sudan

This list is compiled from general knowledge and prior U.S. government statements. Please note that the official and current list may differ, as the U.S. government updates its designations based on evolving security assessments and does not release an authoritative list for public reference.

Applicants from these countries may be subject to increased scrutiny and more rigorous background checks during immigration screening. Also, note that Cuba and Venezuela have, at various times, been identified by the U.S. government as countries of concern, particularly regarding certain immigration and security policies.

However, the official list of countries of concern may change periodically, and it is recommended to consult current U.S. government sources for the most up-to-date information on their status. The inclusion of these countries can result in heightened scrutiny for applicants from Cuba and Venezuela during immigration processes.

---

About the Author

Miguel “Mike” E. Rodriguez is a Senior Policy Advisor with Poblete Tamargo LLP, focusing on U.S. immigration matters, including consular processing, employment-based immigration, Cuban migration/mass migration, and refugee issues. He brings two decades of experience from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, where he coordinated USCIS engagement with Congress and served as a principal point of contact on Cuba-related inquiries, among other roles.

---

This post is for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Each case turns on its facts.

Poblete Tamargo is a boutique national security law and public policy practice advising clients on complex matters, including complex consular matters, wrongful detention by foreign governments, economic sanctions, export controls, and congressional oversight. We also counsel employers and travelers on compliant travel planning, documentation, and government engagement strategies. To discuss a specific situation, contact our team.

By Mike Rodriguez
Senior Policy Advisor, Poblete Tamargo LLP

(Alexandria, Virginia) Religious worker visas remain among the most closely scrutinized categories in our immigration system. While R-1 visas are not numerically capped, they are heavily policed because of longstanding concerns about fraud and inconsistent documentation across religious organizations. In practice, this means that even small administrative mistakes can create real complications for priests, ministers, and religious workers serving in the United States.

At Poblete Tamargo LLP, we have seen a common pattern: the cases that run smoothly are those in which the parish, diocese, or religious order follows a few basic compliance principles. Cases that encounter avoidable delays tend to involve paperwork inconsistencies, informal communication, or misunderstandings about how USCIS interprets internal Church processes.

To help our clients and partners stay ahead of these issues, we have prepared the following guidelines based on current USCIS trends, site-visit patterns, and real-world case experience.

Guidelines for Maintaining Healthy R-1 Compliance

1. Keep employment records consistent and current. Most R-1 problems start with inconsistencies—payroll does not match the petition, an office staffer incorrectly states someone is “no longer employed,” or a parish describes a role differently than what was filed. USCIS takes these statements literally. Before sharing anything with USCIS, make sure all records align.

2. Treat your R-1 environment as if it’s always subject to inspection. USCIS site visits are routine and unannounced. Every location where the worker is assigned should have a point of contact and a clean file with current R-1 documentation ready for inspection. While these site visits are meant to deter bad actors from committing fraud and not to harass bona fide religious organizations, USCIS Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS) officers take these visits very seriously, so should our clients.

3. Document the religious nature of the work. USCIS wants to confirm the worker’s duties are unmistakably religious. Maintain clear records of sacramental duties, ministry assignments, teaching responsibilities, pastoral work, and weekly schedules.

4. Do not change employers or assignments without legal guidance. A move from one parish to another—even within the same diocese—can require a new petition. Internal Church processes (e.g., supply ministry, temporary assignments, transitions between communities) must be handled in accordance with immigration rules. Please make sure to alert USCIS as soon as possible in advance of a possible change, to prevent any possible lapse in legal immigration status.

5. File extensions early—ideally 90 days before expiration. While a timely filing allows up to 240 days of continued work authorization, processing times vary. Early filing prevents gaps or emergencies.

5a. Do not allow R-1 beneficiaries (clergy, ministerial staff, etc.) to overstay their R-1 status. Any meaningful overstay of R-1 status will at a minimum cause delays in extending or renewing R-1 status, but can also trigger denial of R-1 visa renewal, forcing the beneficiary/employee to return to their home country to apply for a new R-1 at the U.S. Consulate/Embassy in that country.

6. Train staff to avoid casual statements about employment. A single misplaced phrase in an email (“he’s not working here anymore”) can trigger USCIS Requests for Evidence (RFEs), denials, or misinterpretations. Direct all immigration-related inquiries to a designated contact or counsel.

7. Maintain proof of denominational membership. USCIS requires evidence of past and ongoing membership in the religious denomination. Certificates, letters from superiors, and documentation of vows should be organized and accessible.

8. Ensure compensation is documented and consistent.
Whether salary, stipends, housing, insurance, or in-kind support, USCIS expects clear evidence. Unclear compensation is one of the most common red flags.

9. Track the five-year maximum stay. After five years in R-1 status, the worker must spend at least one year abroad before beginning a new R-1 period. Plan ahead to avoid surprises.

10. Assume USCIS compares every new filing with every old one. Your filings must tell a consistent story. USCIS routinely cross-checks older petitions, site-visit notes, payroll records, and communications.

---

Why This Matters

Most issues in the R-1 process are preventable. With a little preparation, parishes and religious communities can avoid delays, prevent misunderstandings, and protect the ability of clergy and religious workers to continue their ministry without disruption. Good compliance also reduces stress on the worker and the parish—allowing them to focus on what matters most: serving their communities. If you would like Poblete Tamargo LLP to review your current R-1 files, help you prepare for a site visit, or assist with an upcoming filing, our team is available to help.

---

By Miguel “Mike” E. Rodriguez, Senior Advisor, Poblete Tamargo LLP

Travelers arriving in the United States pass through a two-step screening process managed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)—primary inspection and, when warranted, secondary inspection. Variations of this screening model also exist when Americans travel abroad, administered by foreign border agencies. I’ll cover that international process in a forthcoming post.

Here in the U.S., most travelers are cleared quickly at “primary inspection.” Some, however, are referred to “secondary inspection” for a closer review of their documents and travel purpose. If you or your employees travel frequently, it’s essential to understand what a secondary inspection is, why referrals occur, what to expect, and how to navigate the process professionally and lawfully.

What is Secondary Inspection?

Secondary inspection is a more detailed review by CBP when questions arise during initial screening—about documentation, purpose of travel, prior visits, or apparent inconsistencies. In limited cases, travelers are selected at random. The goal is to verify admissibility under U.S. immigration law before CBP makes a final decision to admit, defer, or take other action.

Common Reasons for a Referral

• Work-related concerns. A frequent trigger is suspicion that a traveler intends to work in the U.S. without the proper visa classification—for example, arriving on a B-1/B-2 to perform actual, hands-on work for a U.S. company beyond permissible business activities like meetings or conferences.
• Document issues and discrepancies. Name mismatches, incomplete answers, or gaps between stated plans and supporting evidence can prompt additional questions.
• Targeted or random checks. CBP employs risk-based factors and a statistically random selection process as part of its border security mandate.
• National security and law-enforcement screening. CBP may refer a traveler to secondary to resolve watchlist hits, identity verification issues, or other security flags; to run additional database checks; or to coordinate with interagency partners or, foreign governments, when appropriate.
• Outstanding warrants or prior enforcement history. If systems indicate an active warrant, prior removal, overstays, or other immigration or criminal history, officers may conduct a deeper review to confirm status and next steps.

What Happens During Secondary Inspection?

• You may be directed to a separate area while officers conduct a deeper review.
• Officers can ask detailed questions about your itinerary, employment, or prior U.S. travel; they may verify information using law-enforcement databases.
• In rare cases, CBP may examine electronic devices (phones, laptops, cameras) as part of its border search authority.

How long does it take? There is no set timeline. Some secondary inspections conclude in minutes; others take longer depending on the complexity of the case and port traffic.

Your Rights—and Their Limits—at the Border

• Professional treatment. You should be treated with dignity and respect; CBP policy expects professional conduct. If you feel otherwise, you can request a supervisor.
• Right to ask questions. You may ask for clarification about the process and what is being requested of you.
• Right to an interpreter. If English is not your strong suit, you can request language assistance.
• Right to consular contact. Foreign nationals may ask to contact their embassy or consulate.
• Attorney presence. The border inspection process is not a criminal proceeding; travelers generally do not have a right to an attorney during inspection. If a person is detained for a prolonged period or placed into formal proceedings, the ability to consult counsel can change.
• Privacy at the border. Border searches are more permissive than searches within the interior. Officers may examine belongings and, in certain circumstances, electronic devices without a warrant.

Practical Tips for Travelers and Employers

1. Stay calm and courteous. Professionalism matters; frustration rarely helps.
2. Answer truthfully and concisely. Provide consistent, accurate information supported by your documents.
3. Know the boundaries of your visa class. Do not plan to perform activities outside what your classification permits. This is a common pitfall.
4. Request a supervisor, respectfully, if needed. If you believe there is a misunderstanding or policy concern, you can ask to elevate the issue. Record officer names and badge numbers for follow-up.
5. If you’ve had issues before, prepare ahead of time. Create a “secondary folder” with prior decisions (I-797s, I-94 printout, ESTA approval, prior visas), employer letters describing duties, travel itineraries, and proof of ties abroad (employment, lease/mortgage, return ticket).
6. Designate a point of contact. Before travel, pick a family member and a lawyer who can be reached if there’s a prolonged delay. Save their numbers on paper and in your phone. Note: travelers generally don’t have a right to counsel during inspection, but having counsel on standby is invaluable for follow-up, especially after a refusal, withdrawal, or deferred inspection.
7. Consider redress if referrals are recurring. If you suspect misidentification or repeated screening due to watchlist confusion, consider a DHS TRIP redress submission. Counsel can also evaluate targeted FOIA requests to DHS/CBP/USCIS to understand what’s driving referrals and to correct records where possible.

When to Seek Legal Guidance

If you or your employee is frequently referred to secondary inspection, denied entry, issued expedited removal, or asked to withdraw an application for admission, it’s time to speak with counsel. Our team advises on policy-informed compliance strategies at the intersection of immigration, national security, and federal regulatory practice, and we can help align travel plans and job duties with the correct visa pathways to reduce risk.

---

About the Author

Miguel “Mike” E. Rodriguez is a Senior Advisor to Poblete Tamargo, focusing on U.S. immigration matters including consular processing, employment-based immigration, Cuban migration/mass migration, and refugee issues. He brings two decades of experience from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, where he coordinated USCIS engagement with Congress and served as a principal point of contact on Cuba-related inquiries, among other roles.

How Poblete Tamargo LLP Can Help

Poblete Tamargo is a boutique national security law and public policy practice advising clients on complex matters, including complex consular matters, wrongful detention by foreign governments, immigration interfaces with economic sanctions, export controls, and congressional oversight. We counsel employers and travelers on compliant travel planning, documentation, and government engagement strategies. To discuss a specific situation, contact our team.

---

This post is for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Each case turns on its facts; consult counsel about your particular circumstances.

---