1. United States
2. Maine
3. Letter

I urge you to oppose the Department of Homeland Security’s Interim Final Rule, “Affirmative Asylum Referrals Without Interview,” and work to suspend its implementation, conduct oversight, and restore meaningful asylum interviews. The rule allows U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to send certain affirmative asylum cases to immigration court without first interviewing the applicant. THE RULE REMOVES AN IMPORTANT SAFEGUARD An asylum interview allows a trained officer to ask follow-up questions, clarify inconsistencies, and understand claims involving trauma, language barriers, or complex facts. A written application may not reveal whether an applicant can overcome the one-year filing deadline, explain apparent contradictions, or show why asylum should be granted as a matter of discretion. Without that interview, an applicant may be placed directly into adversarial removal proceedings, where finding counsel and presenting a complete claim can be far more difficult. THE RULE MAY SHIFT, NOT SOLVE, THE BACKLOG The Department says the change will reduce USCIS’s backlog and save resources. Yet the rule itself acknowledges that referrals may initially increase the immigration-court backlog and require Justice Department personnel to develop facts that USCIS previously explored in interviews. The Department also acknowledges that some people who could have received asylum from USCIS may instead be sent into lengthy removal proceedings. It estimates that as many as 444,724 pending cases, representing 31 percent of the affirmative asylum backlog, could potentially be affected. THE RULE TOOK EFFECT BEFORE PUBLIC INPUT The Department imposed this major change on July 28, 2026, and began applying it before reviewing public comments or demonstrating that less harmful alternatives would be inadequate. The rule also permits referral based not only on clear filing or statutory bars, but on paper determinations that an applicant lacks merit or does not deserve asylum as a matter of discretion. Efficient administration matters, but efficiency should not come at the cost of accurate decisions or simply move work from one overloaded system to another. I urge you to: (1) CONDUCT OVERSIGHT. Hold hearings on the rule’s legal basis, implementation, and effects on applicants, USCIS, and immigration courts. (2) REQUIRE ACCOUNTABILITY. Direct DHS to report publicly on referral rates, processing times, court workloads, asylum outcomes, and the number of referred cases later granted by immigration judges. (3) PROTECT FAIR PROCEDURES. Support legislation requiring a meaningful USCIS interview before most affirmative asylum referrals, with narrow, clearly defined exceptions established by law or regulation. Please act promptly to suspend this rule and preserve a fair, accurate, and workable asylum process. Thank you.