The Trump administration is preparing to revoke business and tourism visas for up to 200,000 people who have applied for asylum in the United States or are seeking asylum there, the Associated Press reported.

The measure would target non-immigrant visas held by foreign nationals who entered on short-term visas and later sought asylum to remain in the country, potentially marking the largest mass visa revocation of its kind.

The State Department is expected to announce the action, in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), to revoke B1 and B2 visas issued since 2016, according to two US officials and department documents seen by the AP.

State Department Plans Rolling Revocations

State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said the department was working with DHS to identify and revoke visas held by foreigners who “came to the United States claiming to be short-term visitors, but then file for asylum to stay here permanently”.

Pigott declined to give a specific total, adding that the number of revocations would be “dynamic” and carried out on a rolling basis.

Under the approach described by officials, the visa revocations are linked to asylum applications filed after the person received a B1 or B2 visa, covering those seeking asylum while in the US under the business or tourism categories.

Revocations Not Immediate Deportations

The officials told the AP that removing the visas would not lead to immediate deportation. They said pending asylum cases would be recategorised so they would no longer be treated as claims from people admitted as business or tourism travellers.

Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau wrote on social media that “people in the U.S. and all over the world are fed up with bogus asylum claims”. He said asylum was not intended to serve as a “loophole” to bypass immigration rules, describing it as a narrow protection for people facing persecution based on specific grounds.

Landau also said the asylum system has been “swamped” by claims that take years to process, during which time applicants typically are able to work and have families while their cases are adjudicated.

Requirements for Current Visa Applicants

The AP reported that people applying for B1 and B2 visas are being asked to confirm they will not seek asylum in the United States and to show they plan to return to their home countries.

The State Department’s planned action follows earlier steps by the Trump administration to restrict asylum-related pathways since the president returned to the White House last year.

Past Visa Revocations and Asylum Access Changes

Since then, the State Department has revoked about 175,000 visas for people convicted or accused of various crimes, as well as for those who have spoken out against US policies in the Middle East, according to the report.

Last month, the administration also began limiting asylum seekers’ access to interviews that were intended to assess their claims. Instead, officers were directed to route migrants into immigration court proceedings for deportation cases, according to the AP. The report said that process could move people through the court system without an opportunity to present their arguments to US Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Join the discussion?

25 August 2026

View full article

Well done. It's only a tip of the iceberg. This swamp needs to be drained. Send them all back to their home countries.

Asylum was not intended to serve as a “loophole” to bypass immigration rules

Edited 15 hours ago15 hr by Hakuna Matata

"The Trump administration is preparing to revoke business and tourism visas for up to 200,000 people who have applied for asylum in the United States or are seeking asylum there, the Associated Press reported."

"State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said the department was working with DHS to identify and revoke visas held by foreigners who “came to the United States claiming to be short-term visitors, but then file for asylum to stay here permanently”.

So this makes perfect sense, if they are not allowed in they cannot claim asylum?

UK TAKE NOTE!😅

Well done Donald.

Let's hope the UK follows suit once we've got rid of the current traitorous leftist government.

18 hours ago, webfact said:

officers were directed to route migrants into immigration court proceedings for deportation cases

Remember US immigration court is an administrative court within the Department of Justice (DOJ) which in practice operates under POTUS Trump. Immigration Court is not part of the independent federal court system.

Proceedings are administrative hearings rather than formal criminal or civil jury trials. The formal Federal Rules of Evidence do not apply and judges may admit any relevant and material evidence, ie., from ICE.

Trump has already terminated or pushed out over 130 immigration judges, including trial-level, supervisory, and appellate positions. DOJ would be responsible to backfill such vacancies.

57 minutes ago, Hakuna Matata said:

Well done. It's only a tip of the iceberg. This swamp needs to be drained. Send them all back to their home countries.

Since most criminals in America were US Citizens born in America, should we send them back to Europe?

And who's going to change your diapers in your Nursing home if we do that? 😭

Germany: Represents one of the largest self-reported ancestry groups, with over 40 million Americans tracing roots to German-speaking regions.

United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland): Forms the foundational colonial heritage for a large portion of early American history.

Ireland: Millions of Americans claim Irish heritage, heavily tied to 19th-century immigration waves.

You're not a xenophobic racist, you're just tough on crime, and definitely not a hypocrite.

Show us your sturdy high class Anglo-Saxon values 🫢

Edited 14 hours ago14 hr by SiSePuede419
high class Anglo-Saxon values

3 minutes ago, SiSePuede419 said:

Since most criminals in America were US Citizens born in America, should we send them back to Europe?

And who's going to change your diapers in your Nursing home if we do that? 😭

Germany: Represents one of the largest self-reported ancestry groups, with over 40 million Americans tracing roots to German-speaking regions.

United Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland): Forms the foundational colonial heritage for a large portion of early American history.

Ireland: Millions of Americans claim Irish heritage, heavily tied to 19th-century immigration waves.

Not to mention the estimated 500,000 Dutch that immigrated to the U.S. Legally in the 1800's and built churches and schools and settled peacefully, observed laws, started businesses, and helped to make American great again.

9 minutes ago, Screaming said:

Not to mention the estimated 500,000 Dutch that immigrated to the U.S. Legally in the 1800's and built churches and schools and settled peacefully, observed laws, started businesses, and helped to make American great again.

Narrators Voice:

Most Europeans who came to the USA "legally" in the 1800s had no visa or prior permission from the U.S. government.

They bought a ship ticket, were recorded on a passenger manifest.

Coming to America was easy!

No ID was required upon arrival.

If you're White, you'll fit Right in 🇺🇸

Those uptight Dutch religious wackos who settled in "Holland" Michigan fit right in. ✅

48 minutes ago, SiSePuede419 said:

Since most criminals in America were US Citizens born in America, should we send them back to Europe?

We have prisons for them.

But that's expensive, so the ones that we can legally deport, we should. Let their own countries pay to warehouse them in prison. Generally, they also do it a lot cheaper. Fish heads are cheap.

Edited 14 hours ago14 hr by impulse

Both Europe and the USA need to get a grip on immigration control, immediately. While the USA appears to be, at least, starting to do that, most of Europe seems reluctant to move seriously on this issue. Strange.

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Well done Donald.

Let's hope the UK follows suit

Yeah. He's done a lot of good things that he doesn't get credit for, and this seems to be another.

It might also answer why a lot of people do not get tourist visas for the US when they might ordinarily have got them; US Immigration may have been seeing this system being abused by people from some countries and they been acting to curtail it. Just a guess from me.

And, I hope the UK does the same thing too, but I don't want to wait until the next parliament for it to happen.

Yet another reason confirming that the USA isn not to be trusted. Grated a Visa only to have it taken away as av matter of politicsl policy ... not based on cause ...

1 hour ago, wwest5829 said:

Yet another reason confirming that the USA isn not to be trusted. Grated a Visa only to have it taken away as av matter of politicsl policy ... not based on cause ...

23 hours ago, webfact said:

The measure would target non-immigrant visas held by foreign nationals who entered on short-term visas and later sought asylum to remain in the country

If it were permanent residents or US nationals, or whatever the category is called to allow someone to live in the USA forever without re-applying for another visa on a regular basis, then I'd totally agree with you. But the OP is not about those, it's for those mentioned in the OP. See the screen cap for some examples, the OP is about the B1 & B2 visas.

There may be very many people who genuinely deserve, after entering on a B1/B2, to stay if they have a genuine asylum claim - again, I have zero issue with that and the US (or UK) should respect that claim and assess it fairly and quickly. But those who do not have a valid asylum claim or are gaming the system need to get kicked out - they ruin it for the genuine claimants!

While I think it’s generally a good policy for the US, I have a genuine question. Would this affect an Afghani citizen who worked as an interpreter for the Americans in Afghanistan? He would be at best imprisoned and at worst executed by the Taliban if he was returned to Afghanistan.

5 hours ago, SiSePuede419 said:

Most Europeans who came to the USA "legally"

Yasss Puta ...

The others need to feck baxk off to India or wherever they are claiming asylum from , USA is cleaning up it's visa messiness same same TH is currently doing

40 minutes ago, BexMan said:

While I think it’s generally a good policy for the US, I have a genuine question. Would this affect an Afghani citizen who worked as an interpreter for the Americans in Afghanistan? He would be at best imprisoned and at worst executed by the Taliban if he was returned to Afghanistan.

Unless someone on this forum works for US Immigration then I doubt you'll get a firm answer that can be stood behind. Of course, this would appear to me to be a decent reason for granting asylum.

7 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Remember US immigration court is an administrative court within the Department of Justice (DOJ) which in practice operates under POTUS Trump. Immigration Court is not part of the independent federal court system.

Proceedings are administrative hearings rather than formal criminal or civil jury trials. The formal Federal Rules of Evidence do not apply and judges may admit any relevant and material evidence, ie., from ICE.

Trump has already terminated or pushed out over 130 immigration judges, including trial-level, supervisory, and appellate positions. DOJ would be responsible to backfill such vacancies.

And the Article 3 courts have ruled that administrative courts do not meet due process standards. Another illegal move by Miller.

49 minutes ago, BexMan said:

While I think it’s generally a good policy for the US, I have a genuine question. Would this affect an Afghani citizen who worked as an interpreter for the Americans in Afghanistan? He would be at best imprisoned and at worst executed by the Taliban if he was returned to Afghanistan.

Many of them have already been revoked and deported. No honor in Trumpworld.

56 minutes ago, BexMan said:

While I think it’s generally a good policy for the US, I have a genuine question. Would this affect an Afghani citizen who worked as an interpreter for the Americans in Afghanistan? He would be at best imprisoned and at worst executed by the Taliban if he was returned to Afghanistan.

Are you stating the Afghani is currently in the U.S. on a visa and what might happen if his visa were revoked?

If yes, he is screwed if caught. The Special Immigrant Visa for Afghani’s who assisted the American war effort has had all of 3 admissions to the U.S. this year, apparently (this despite ample visa availability and thousands of vetted applicants in the pipeline) - IMO that pretty much sums up the current attitude towards any Afghani, including those who put their lives on the line to help, sadly.