1. United States
2. Maine
3. Letter

As a constituent, I urge you to intervene before the State Department carries out its reported plan to revoke up to 200,000 business and tourist visas because their holders later applied for asylum in the United States. The New York Times reported on August 24, 2026, that the administration is preparing large-scale visa revocations targeting asylum applicants. Filing for asylum is lawful and should not automatically be treated as evidence of visa fraud. Congress should act now to prevent categorical revocations, require individual review, and protect asylum claims. SEEKING ASYLUM IS NOT VISA FRAUD Federal law allows a person physically present in the United States to apply for asylum regardless of immigration status. Yet the reported policy would target people who entered legally on temporary visas and later sought asylum. Some applicants may have lied when seeking a visitor visa, and the government should investigate actual fraud. But a later asylum application does not prove an earlier lie. Conditions at home or personal circumstances can change after entry. VISA FRAUD SHOULD BE PROVEN, NOT PRESUMED Fairness requires judging people on evidence, not presuming wrongdoing because they exercised a legal right. For some applicants, visa revocation could mean facing removal proceedings while the United States determines whether returning home would expose them to persecution. CONGRESS SHOULD PROTECT THE ASYLUM PROCESS IT CREATED Congress created the asylum system and has an independent responsibility to oversee how the executive branch administers it. The Secretary of State has broad visa-revocation authority, but it should not be used to penalize people merely for invoking a right Congress expressly provided. Whatever one’s views on immigration, fraud should be proved, not presumed, and people should not be punished for asking to have a legal claim heard. Please act before these revocations are carried out on a large scale. Exercising a lawful asylum process should not itself become grounds for punishment. I urge you to take these actions: (1) PAUSE THE POLICY. Urge the State Department and Department of Homeland Security to suspend categorical revocations while Congress reviews the policy, and support legislation or appropriations language preventing implementation based solely on an asylum filing. (2) REQUIRE INDIVIDUAL REVIEW. Support legislation providing that an asylum application alone cannot establish visa fraud or automatically justify revocation. (3) PROTECT ASYLUM CLAIMS. Clarify that revoking a visitor visa cannot cancel a pending asylum application or, by itself, be treated as evidence that the asylum claim is improper. (4) CONDUCT OVERSIGHT. Hold hearings and obtain the legal opinions, policy documents, criteria, and data underlying the proposed revocations. Thank you.