The US seems hellbent on destroying its own economy, immigrants have always played a key part in it. Looking forward to Trump yelling about how the radical left has somehow undermined the US economy in a few months.
reaperducer · 2026-08-26 18:40:05 UTC
Everything is someone else's fault. The buck never stops with him.
nielsbot · 2026-08-26 18:45:35 UTC
I’d guess Miller is the main
driver of this given what we know about that loser (and freak).
timcobb · 2026-08-26 19:39:16 UTC
Huge freak
dogsgobork · 2026-08-26 19:48:30 UTC
I often think about how far the Republican party has fallen from Truman with his "The Buck Stops Here" plaque on his desk to Trump's "I don't take any responsibility at all" response to poor Covid testing in 2020.
FireBeyond · 2026-08-26 20:07:09 UTC
Meanwhile, just this week, he's taking credit for Biden's legislative efforts on cost reductions for pharmaceuticals that every single Republican voted against, and Trump campaigned against.
something98 · 2026-08-26 20:23:01 UTC
Truman was a Democrat.
retvrn · 2026-08-26 20:26:53 UTC
Plus he outright stole government money, not even the pretense of some kind of pass-through contracting entity or something, just brazenly stole cash. And later went on a PR tour lying about being destitute to get Congress to give him a big pension (presidents didn’t get one before that; and he was doing quite alright financially without it).
Whatever the party affiliation, he was an actual thief and scam-artist at the public’s expense, so wouldn’t be a great example of some high water mark for public service.
geodel · 2026-08-26 18:43:26 UTC
Well, others can bent in other direction and boost their economy by taking in all immigrants that were US bound.
forgetfreeman · 2026-08-26 18:47:09 UTC
And they are. I read somewhere a few days ago that France is vacuuming up academics and advanced students that have been displaced by various recent policy changes that have proven to be hostile towards academia and research.
dnautics · 2026-08-26 18:50:16 UTC
As a former academic scientist, I suspect it's not gonna work out like they think it will--the process will self select for mostly lemons.
Terr_ · 2026-08-26 18:45:11 UTC
Looking forward? He never stopped. It's been 10+ years of narcissistic scapegoating, even for times when he was President, even while Republicans controlled congress, and even over trade-deals, policies, and laws that he took-credit for and bragged about. (e.g. USMCA in 2020.)
> Without words said, a wave of understanding rippled through the crowd. Oceania was at war with Eastasia! The next moment there was a tremendous commotion. The banners and posters with which the square was decorated were all wrong! Quite half of them had the wrong faces on them. It was sabotage! The agents of Goldstein had been at work!
-- 1984
bakies · 2026-08-26 19:50:53 UTC
Most damage will be realized after he's dead
FireBeyond · 2026-08-26 20:05:46 UTC
And in the interim he's positioning his family and cronies to benefit from any rebuilding. Just as he literally sat in the White House and said, verbatim, "My children insider trade all the time".
As noted clearly in the article, this is a temporary pause while personnel are brought up to speed on the protocols. The real question is how just or unjust the refusals will be once it is unpaused. It's bad enough that the process is excruciatingly slow.
Users keep downvoting my comment even though it is the only literal interpretation supported by the evidence, without any evidence to the contrary. I would rethink only if it lasts over three months.
Note also that courts would easily overrule Trump if the pause became unreasonable.
DataDive · 2026-08-26 18:49:26 UTC
Or as the saying goes: nothing is more permanent than a temporary solution.
orthecreedence · 2026-08-26 22:43:17 UTC
Also, lol @ "the courts will fix it!" Fat fucking chance. I'm looking into my crystal ball: I see a 6-3 supreme court ruling supporting the administration's executive order to liquidate congressional power and fold it into the executive branch (as the founding fathers intended...)
OutOfHere · 2026-08-27 00:19:06 UTC
If you believe such nonsense, go bet on it on Polymarket. Put your money where your mouth is. Don't post such ridiculous assertions here.
eviks · 2026-08-26 20:04:40 UTC
You're obviously wrong, it obviously doesn't make sense to close down instead is implementing the training for the new protocols in parallel. And the current disruption is just as real of a question as the future refusals.
And obviously courts couldn't do it easily.
By the way, you also haven't provided any evidence for your opinion, why would you burden type replies with it?
OutOfHere · 2026-08-26 23:33:56 UTC
The evidence is the title and the content of the article, so read it. I am not the one to jump to conclusions.
FireBeyond · 2026-08-26 20:12:09 UTC
Consular staff are trained on this as-is. It is hard to imagine a re-training on process that could take any more than two days.
And yet we have an entirely open-ended "We have nooooo idea how long this will take!"
Garbage. This is the same administration that paused all immigration from Africa except for "Caucasian South Africans" who were classified as refugees by default, regardless of their motivation on immigration.
This is just Stephen Miller doing exactly what he said he intended to do, and exactly what Project 2025 said the government should do (meanwhile, Trump, "What's that? Never heard of it").
orthecreedence · 2026-08-26 22:45:14 UTC
> "We have nooooo idea how long this will take!"
It will take about two weeks. Is that right, two weeks? We'll have it done in about two weeks I'm told by some, very intelligent people.
BatFastard · 2026-08-26 18:52:36 UTC
What will be next in Trump's destruction of the American Economy?
So far he has driven away allies, put huge tariff on our most loyal allies. Driven away manufacturing by tariff policies. Driven away immigrants and academics. Pushed a last century oil based economy. Shown us how our exquisite weapon tech will fail (this might actually be good in the long run). Along with crippling our cybersecurity and state departments.
Jare · 2026-08-26 18:56:19 UTC
Well at least you're healt... oh wait.
cosmicgadget · 2026-08-27 03:22:30 UTC
Replacing Lisa Cook or Jerome Powell and cutting rates to 0.
tialaramex · 2026-08-27 11:09:56 UTC
It's funniest if the economic collapse begins with Republicans still in power everywhere to pretend that things are fine. Once Democrats are elected, even if they're not actually doing anything yet and so couldn't plausibly have any role in the problem the US media will insist it's their fault which is very boring to watch.
cosmicgadget · 2026-08-27 14:09:16 UTC
I think we are primed for the doublethink with six months of Iran being totally defeated and the Strait of Hormuz being open.
But yeah, as we saw with covid, cutting rates and qe now means markets surge now and $15 burritos in three years.
hvb2 · 2026-08-26 18:53:06 UTC
So for those that don't know, it's quite common for a visa renewal to be required to leave the country. Depending on the visa, you might have to do this every year.
So just imagine, having a normal job in the US and you're asked to leave to renew your visa and this stuff happens.
That's no more appointment, not even a new date and you're now very likely unable to work and possibly can't even enter the country to get your belongings if you were to leave.
Just 'putting a pause' on people with existing appointments with no answer for when they might resume is.... Inhumane
apercu · 2026-08-26 18:56:01 UTC
In Canada I had to leave and re-enter for my permanent resident status to complete. It’s not that uncommon - but it’s a pain.
PierceJoy · 2026-08-26 19:04:13 UTC
OP isn't criticizing the practise of leaving to renew. He's criticizing the this new policy of not letting you back in when you leave.
smnrchrds · 2026-08-26 19:11:48 UTC
In Canada you never have to leave to renew or change status; it's just sometimes faster to do so. It's always the applicant's choice. I went through the whole work permit to PR to citizenship pipeline without ever having to leave the country.
sanswork · 2026-08-26 19:32:23 UTC
I'm not sure if its the same in Canada but when I went through the process for Australia it depended on where you started the process. I started the process while outside the country so to activate my visa I had to leave and come back but if I had filed while in the country I could have stayed.
I do remember Canada telling my partner she wouldn't be guaranteed reentry while they were processing her PR visa until it was finalised if we left the country though so we just ended up doing the Australian half first and I never went back.
flamedoge · 2026-08-26 23:40:59 UTC
... It's always applicant's choice
euio757 · 2026-08-26 19:46:09 UTC
> I went through the whole work permit to PR to citizenship pipeline without ever having to leave the country.
You're comparing apples to oranges.
People going from non-immigrant visa (H1B, F1 etc.) to Green card via i485 "adjustment of status" do not need to leave the country either.
Only consular processing (ds 260) are in scope of this pause
I don't think the practice of the change is significant. Reddit has numerous stories of people who are still receiving it, so whatever that release says, things haven't changed. People seem to be receiving AoS based Green Cards the same way I did under the Biden Administration. It does seem to be a bit more uncertain which is always troubling.
smnrchrds · 2026-08-26 20:19:21 UTC
I had a study permit at first. I renewed my permit, got a work permit, renewed my foreign passport and extended my work permit, got PR and got citizenship, getting visas to match my work and study permits, over a period of 10 years, without ever having to leave Canada. So my experience is that in Canada you never have to leave but in the US you do.
My classmates who had gone to the US for PhD programs, even those who were fortunate enough to get multiple entry visas, had visas that allowed re-entry for only the first two years of the PhD program. After that, if they wanted to leave the US, say for a conference or to visit family, they would have had to apply for a visa from abroad and hope to be granted one. In Canada, I could apply for the visa and get it while in Canada. Even comparing like with like, the American system seems bizarre to me, looking at it from a Canadian lens.
apercu · 2026-08-26 20:27:20 UTC
I did it 20+ years ago and I had to “land”. They’ve relaxed a lot of immigration rules since then so it might have changed.
kashunstva · 2026-08-26 23:23:12 UTC
Really? My spouse and I lived in Canada on work permits and were not required to leave in order to achieve PR status; nor to achieve citizenship status.
jbm · 2026-08-26 23:32:59 UTC
Prior to Covid, my wife had
to exit the country to get photos taken as part of the permanent resident process. We took a trip to Montana for
that purpose.
This seems to have changed in the past 3-4 years, but as the GP said, the original process did involve leaving.
apercu · 2026-08-27 14:58:10 UTC
Thanks. And yea, my PR was in 2004. Citizen now but living in the US again.
fidotron · 2026-08-27 00:24:12 UTC
"Flagpoling" was the beautiful euphemism for this.
prepend · 2026-08-26 18:58:23 UTC
I have friends who are expats and they’ve done this for years. I had one family member who left every six months to renew their visa.
It’s a chore, but very common around the world.
yibg · 2026-08-26 19:05:05 UTC
Were they able to come back when they did this?
goodluckchuck · 2026-08-26 19:30:00 UTC
I think the whole point of making someone leave is the possibility that they may not be allowed back in. If staying was a foregone conclusion then there’d be no point in leaving.
klardotsh · 2026-08-26 20:11:26 UTC
I can’t think of any other rationale. What, only border officers are able to process a visa renewal? Please. We can have offices inside the country handle this stuff, just like offices handle Trusted Traveler applications and Social Security card issuances.
The point is surely to get another chance to grill the immigrant and potentially bar them entry. Other countries don’t always do this: Canada for example has inland changes of status and I believe renewals.
dmix · 2026-08-26 23:24:13 UTC
> I can’t think of any other rationale.
Lack of real domestic enforcement would be an obvious one, so everything gets pushed to the border entry points.
fn-mote · 2026-08-27 01:18:12 UTC
They know who you are and where you work… how hard could it be to enforce rules?
Wait, what’s getting enforced here, anyway? They are getting a new visa, no? I don’t believe this rationale at all.
achierius · 2026-08-27 02:07:49 UTC
No, not necessarily. Sometimes visas are rejected. Unless you're talking about giving everyone who gets a visa a green card?
15155 · 2026-08-27 02:53:26 UTC
> They know who you are and where you work
Most visas don't permit their holder to work.
> Wait, what’s getting enforced here, anyway?
The visa holder is forced to expend nominal financial resources and time in their home country (where they agreed they would return to.) Most people can't afford to maintain a facade of residency or two actual residences (and those who can aren't the intended targets of this type of restriction.)
aveao · 2026-08-27 12:54:10 UTC
You do not need to do it in your "home country" at all, though, is the thing. People plan vacations around appointments they manage to land for this, in countries they want to go for their summer holidays.
Additionally, it doesn't really do that either, you don't need a valid visa (only valid status) if you don't plan to leave and re-enter US, so this mainly forces people to stay within US rather than going elsewhere for visiting family, vacation and whatnot. I'd not be surprised if the net effect was less time/money spent in "home country".
nomel · 2026-08-27 03:29:41 UTC
> how hard could it be to enforce rules?
See the recent events and pushback on immigration enforcement, to answer this, with whole cities (with their judicial system and police) refusing to participate, and governors condemning enforcement.
mrguyorama · 2026-08-27 17:46:05 UTC
Those cities had very little problem when Obama was deporting millions.
Almost like what I have an actual problem with isn't deporting illegal immigrants, but armed thugs kidnapping citizens, harassing my neighbors, and murdering several citizens
Our police department hired a guy, did a background check, yup, he can be here legally. So of course ICE tracks him down and abducts him for a month. That drove our sheriff, who is not fucking liberal, to basically say "Uh, what the fuck, how can you possibly be this incompetent?"
If you have actual evidence of some kind that a human being does not have their paperwork in order, the correct thing is to give them a summons, get a judge to declare them not legal, and deport them. Very simple.
If your complaint is that too many immigrants just come back, then we should try enforcing the law against hiring illegal immigrants which we put on the books under Reagan, 50 years ago, and have never enforced because it hurts the profits of well connected Agriculture industry people.
Why hasn't Trump done that? Why hasn't Trump done the one thing everyone involved has suggested for decades, which is known to be the primary reason immigrants come here? Why did Trump tell Republicans to reject the Boarder bill proposed by democrats in 2024? One which absolutely would have provided more funding for the boarder?
nomel · 2026-08-27 19:13:55 UTC
> Those cities had very little problem when Obama was deporting millions.
Incorrect. They were "sanctuary" cities during Obama, as well.
> the correct thing is to give them a summons, get a judge to declare them not legal, and deport them.
Correct, and this is a popular right wing perspective. You should look into this more. These sanctuary cities and states are specifically against this. They release people with deportation orders back into the public, and ban city and state employees from helping. See "California sanctuary state laws" and "sanctuary city list".
> Almost like what I have
This isn't relevant.
15155 · 2026-08-26 23:37:59 UTC
> I can’t think of any other rationale.
For many visas, people are expected to maintain a home that they intend to return to in their country of origin. Forcing people to leave every once in a while makes this more likely (at least in theory.)
pstuart · 2026-08-27 01:18:40 UTC
They've made no secret of the desire to purge the country of "others". This is part of that plan.
15155 · 2026-08-27 02:55:43 UTC
"Must leave to renew" certain visas has been policy for decades - through at least the Clinton, Obama, and Biden administrations.
Most visas are for temporary guests: obtaining a visa doesn't normally give someone the right to permanently reside, and most don't permit their holders to work.
pstuart · 2026-08-28 04:17:54 UTC
Prior administrations were not full-throated nativists. Having a presidential campaign promise of mass deportation (happily consumed by The Base) is proof positive of the mindset of this administration.
iamjackg · 2026-08-27 03:20:53 UTC
Not sure if things have changed recently, but up until at least 2019 (last time I had to do it iirc) you definitely had to do a "flagpole" (drive through the border and immediately turn back) to change your status in Canada.
mattkrause · 2026-08-27 03:28:56 UTC
Nah, you can renew work permits online—-and in fact, they push you to.
However, the in-country processing takes 6 months while the flagpole option
(If you’re eligible) takes 15 minutes.
jimmydorry · 2026-08-27 03:41:12 UTC
Canada effectively requires leaving and re-entering. It can take multiple months for an online visa to get processed, meanwhile leaving and reentering takes hours.
Scoundreller · 2026-08-27 04:19:08 UTC
there were other dumb factors pushing people to do border runs, like your paperwork says "expired" but your status still being valid while being processed.
Except you had zero paperwork to show to an employer and they had no way to verify themselves. Even if an employer understood the process and accepted some proof that you submitted an application, they would have no idea if you were rejected and became out-of-status.
preg_match · 2026-08-26 22:33:31 UTC
Maybe stimulating the airline economy? Is Big Plane at it again?
aveao · 2026-08-27 12:48:49 UTC
Isn't there's a special case with Canada where you can return within x days even if your visa has expired, if your status is valid? Many go there for "consular processing" for that reason if I recall correctly.
BrandoElFollito · 2026-08-26 19:13:33 UTC
In the EU you do not need to leave to renew your visa. I don't know how common it is elsewhere.
retired · 2026-08-27 01:44:45 UTC
Visa rules are country specific and don’t apply to the EU in general. There are countries that require you to leave.
BrandoElFollito · 2026-08-27 09:30:42 UTC
Do you have any examples? I expected Schengen to have a common set of requirements regarding visas.
retired · 2026-08-27 09:41:14 UTC
An Irish work holiday visa can only be requested from outside the country and has a maximum validity.
That's not a renewal. It's fairly standard for EU countries to require being outside the country to apply for a visa or residence permit when it is your first one, or (in some cases) when changing the type of visa or permit. But renewals never need you to leave.
BrandoElFollito · 2026-08-27 14:28:41 UTC
An in addition Ireland is not part of Schengen
BrandoElFollito · 2026-08-27 14:28:21 UTC
Ireland is not part of Schengen.
pezezin · 2026-08-27 04:42:03 UTC
Japan doesn't require you to leave either.
sega_sai · 2026-08-26 19:37:57 UTC
Sorry, but that is not common around the world. Most countries do not have such a system. I.e. none of the EU/UK/Australia countries have that.
assemblyman · 2026-08-26 20:21:13 UTC
Were the visas for the US? B1/B2?
I know stuff like this happens for digital nomads in southeast asia or Schengen but the US generally doesn't approve of "visa runs".
davidlumley · 2026-08-26 23:09:37 UTC
Visa renewals are processed at a US consulate. You can extend your status (ie you ability to legally be in the US) while staying in the US, but if you want to renew your visa (your ability to leave and re-enter) you need to visit a consulate and those only exist outside of the US.
assemblyman · 2026-08-27 04:39:34 UTC
I was questioning the renewals every six months and asking about US visas which are granted for 6 months (i.e. expire after 6 months). I am aware of renewals requiring leaving the country.
dgellow · 2026-08-26 21:28:36 UTC
Is it? You’re generally able to renew without leaving. Unless you mean abusing a visitor visa?
aveao · 2026-08-27 12:46:36 UTC
Common around the world? I'd be curious what other countries require this, pretty much everywhere else I know has you renew your status within the country (incl. US), and they give you some form of proof of residence that takes the place of a visa (excl. US).
In many cases I've seen this is either a sticker on your passport (incl. possibly a visa) or a physical card, and does not require traveling abroad for it for "consular processing". This is the case for Schengen countries, Canada, UK, Australia, Japan, Thailand, etc.
y-curious · 2026-08-27 12:51:45 UTC
Thailand explicitly requires you to leave the country. There are companies that specialize in bussing expats to nearby countries.
jpgvm · 2026-08-27 13:17:45 UTC
The so called "visa runs" are for getting around not having the appropriate visa.
I was on a proper employment visa 8 years, never needed to leave the country.
aveao · 2026-08-27 15:25:07 UTC
No, you can extend your visa at the local immigration bureau if you have the appropriate type (that lets you work, though even tourist visas are extendable¹) and pay the cost².
People who do visa runs are doing so to extend their tourist visas for cheap.
¹: I've done it before at Si Racha Immigration Bureau. In my case it was more expensive than doing a visa run or paying the fine for 3 days of overstaying, but it was less hassle and left a positive/neutral mark on my passport, not a suspicious one.
²: This can sadly also require bribery just to get them to do their job, even if you do everything by the book. People around us were bringing bribes in form of food. We weren't asked for a bribe, probably because the person I was traveling and applying with had an official passport.
mlrtime · 2026-08-28 10:27:16 UTC
Hong Kong and the UK at least when I lived there, had to leave and come back, easy in HK to go to China and come back with a fresh stamp.
glimshe · 2026-08-26 19:08:59 UTC
In the mid 2000s, I had to leave the US for renewal while leaving all my hard assets behind. I had a plan in place in case I couldn't go back to the country, which did happen to some people. These people had their interviews, but they got held back outside the US, sometimes for months, waiting for the renewal process to finish. I had an immediate renewal, but was almost held back for some red tape reasons.
This sucks but it isn't new, unfortunately.
dbspin · 2026-08-26 23:11:28 UTC
The scale is new. Obviously a nightmare or even a tragedy for individual people that it happens at all. But this happening to (tens of?) thousands of people all at once is a whole different thing.
garbawarb · 2026-08-26 19:16:33 UTC
Or imagine if an employee works for you and this happens to them.
nostrademons · 2026-08-26 19:24:12 UTC
I've had a couple of reports that this applied to. It's incredibly disruptive. "I've got to fly back to India to renew my visa." "Okay, when will you be back?" "I have no idea, it depends when I can get an appointment. It could be next week, it might be in a month." "[State department] We're pausing all visa appointments." "Well fuck."
Meanwhile I've got a tech lead who is 12 hours away from the rest of the team. He was at least willing to work US-East hours while in India (basically staying up all night and sleeping during the day), but there was a huge amount of management overhead and inconvenience for the employee involved.
assemblyman · 2026-08-26 20:30:32 UTC
At least the procedure used to be that one would try to get an appointment at the US consulate in one's home country and then arrange the trip around it. Also, at least in my experience (but importantly, not with this administration) was that one was never required to leave the US.
The main constraint is re-entry into the US and being able to travel outside the US. If one stayed here, there was no problem switching schools, programs, jobs, adjusting status to permanent residency or naturalization. On the other hand, for re-entry, one needs a valid visa stamped on a passport which necessitated a trip to one's home country. This stamping visit could be unpredictable.
Ideally, one would like to travel freely to see family and friends but I see a lot of comments implying that one is forced to leave. It might be true now but a lot of comments here are conflating several issues together.
nostrademons · 2026-08-26 20:45:17 UTC
The first time it happened (2023) it was a non-issue; he did exactly as you said, appointment happened as planned, and then he was back on his scheduled plane trip a week later.
Everything post-2025 has been a shit-show. There's no predictability or clear guidance, either from our lawyers or from the state department.
Predictability matters a lot in business. If you know what the procedure is and how long it will take, you can plan around it. If the rules change in the middle of the game you're left scrambling to keep up.
macintux · 2026-08-27 00:48:52 UTC
Predictability flew out the window with the last election. I simply do not understand how any business leaders supported this, but I suppose the ability to bribe their way out of chaos was appealing.
Comments
Whatever the party affiliation, he was an actual thief and scam-artist at the public’s expense, so wouldn’t be a great example of some high water mark for public service.
> Without words said, a wave of understanding rippled through the crowd. Oceania was at war with Eastasia! The next moment there was a tremendous commotion. The banners and posters with which the square was decorated were all wrong! Quite half of them had the wrong faces on them. It was sabotage! The agents of Goldstein had been at work!
-- 1984
So like the DMV then?
Users keep downvoting my comment even though it is the only literal interpretation supported by the evidence, without any evidence to the contrary. I would rethink only if it lasts over three months.
Note also that courts would easily overrule Trump if the pause became unreasonable.
By the way, you also haven't provided any evidence for your opinion, why would you burden type replies with it?
And yet we have an entirely open-ended "We have nooooo idea how long this will take!"
Garbage. This is the same administration that paused all immigration from Africa except for "Caucasian South Africans" who were classified as refugees by default, regardless of their motivation on immigration.
This is just Stephen Miller doing exactly what he said he intended to do, and exactly what Project 2025 said the government should do (meanwhile, Trump, "What's that? Never heard of it").
It will take about two weeks. Is that right, two weeks? We'll have it done in about two weeks I'm told by some, very intelligent people.
So far he has driven away allies, put huge tariff on our most loyal allies. Driven away manufacturing by tariff policies. Driven away immigrants and academics. Pushed a last century oil based economy. Shown us how our exquisite weapon tech will fail (this might actually be good in the long run). Along with crippling our cybersecurity and state departments.
But yeah, as we saw with covid, cutting rates and qe now means markets surge now and $15 burritos in three years.
So just imagine, having a normal job in the US and you're asked to leave to renew your visa and this stuff happens.
That's no more appointment, not even a new date and you're now very likely unable to work and possibly can't even enter the country to get your belongings if you were to leave.
Just 'putting a pause' on people with existing appointments with no answer for when they might resume is.... Inhumane
I do remember Canada telling my partner she wouldn't be guaranteed reentry while they were processing her PR visa until it was finalised if we left the country though so we just ended up doing the Australian half first and I never went back.
You're comparing apples to oranges.
People going from non-immigrant visa (H1B, F1 etc.) to Green card via i485 "adjustment of status" do not need to leave the country either.
Only consular processing (ds 260) are in scope of this pause
https://www.ellis.com/resources/immigrant-visa-pause-2026
Has more details than the paywalled article
https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/news-releases/us-citizenship-...
I don't think the practice of the change is significant. Reddit has numerous stories of people who are still receiving it, so whatever that release says, things haven't changed. People seem to be receiving AoS based Green Cards the same way I did under the Biden Administration. It does seem to be a bit more uncertain which is always troubling.
My classmates who had gone to the US for PhD programs, even those who were fortunate enough to get multiple entry visas, had visas that allowed re-entry for only the first two years of the PhD program. After that, if they wanted to leave the US, say for a conference or to visit family, they would have had to apply for a visa from abroad and hope to be granted one. In Canada, I could apply for the visa and get it while in Canada. Even comparing like with like, the American system seems bizarre to me, looking at it from a Canadian lens.
This seems to have changed in the past 3-4 years, but as the GP said, the original process did involve leaving.
It’s a chore, but very common around the world.
The point is surely to get another chance to grill the immigrant and potentially bar them entry. Other countries don’t always do this: Canada for example has inland changes of status and I believe renewals.
Lack of real domestic enforcement would be an obvious one, so everything gets pushed to the border entry points.
Wait, what’s getting enforced here, anyway? They are getting a new visa, no? I don’t believe this rationale at all.
Most visas don't permit their holder to work.
> Wait, what’s getting enforced here, anyway?
The visa holder is forced to expend nominal financial resources and time in their home country (where they agreed they would return to.) Most people can't afford to maintain a facade of residency or two actual residences (and those who can aren't the intended targets of this type of restriction.)
Additionally, it doesn't really do that either, you don't need a valid visa (only valid status) if you don't plan to leave and re-enter US, so this mainly forces people to stay within US rather than going elsewhere for visiting family, vacation and whatnot. I'd not be surprised if the net effect was less time/money spent in "home country".
See the recent events and pushback on immigration enforcement, to answer this, with whole cities (with their judicial system and police) refusing to participate, and governors condemning enforcement.
Almost like what I have an actual problem with isn't deporting illegal immigrants, but armed thugs kidnapping citizens, harassing my neighbors, and murdering several citizens
Our police department hired a guy, did a background check, yup, he can be here legally. So of course ICE tracks him down and abducts him for a month. That drove our sheriff, who is not fucking liberal, to basically say "Uh, what the fuck, how can you possibly be this incompetent?"
If you have actual evidence of some kind that a human being does not have their paperwork in order, the correct thing is to give them a summons, get a judge to declare them not legal, and deport them. Very simple.
If your complaint is that too many immigrants just come back, then we should try enforcing the law against hiring illegal immigrants which we put on the books under Reagan, 50 years ago, and have never enforced because it hurts the profits of well connected Agriculture industry people.
Why hasn't Trump done that? Why hasn't Trump done the one thing everyone involved has suggested for decades, which is known to be the primary reason immigrants come here? Why did Trump tell Republicans to reject the Boarder bill proposed by democrats in 2024? One which absolutely would have provided more funding for the boarder?
Incorrect. They were "sanctuary" cities during Obama, as well.
> the correct thing is to give them a summons, get a judge to declare them not legal, and deport them.
Correct, and this is a popular right wing perspective. You should look into this more. These sanctuary cities and states are specifically against this. They release people with deportation orders back into the public, and ban city and state employees from helping. See "California sanctuary state laws" and "sanctuary city list".
> Almost like what I have
This isn't relevant.
For many visas, people are expected to maintain a home that they intend to return to in their country of origin. Forcing people to leave every once in a while makes this more likely (at least in theory.)
Most visas are for temporary guests: obtaining a visa doesn't normally give someone the right to permanently reside, and most don't permit their holders to work.
However, the in-country processing takes 6 months while the flagpole option (If you’re eligible) takes 15 minutes.
Except you had zero paperwork to show to an employer and they had no way to verify themselves. Even if an employer understood the process and accepted some proof that you submitted an application, they would have no idea if you were rejected and became out-of-status.
https://enterprise.gov.ie/en/what-we-do/workplace-and-skills...
I know stuff like this happens for digital nomads in southeast asia or Schengen but the US generally doesn't approve of "visa runs".
In many cases I've seen this is either a sticker on your passport (incl. possibly a visa) or a physical card, and does not require traveling abroad for it for "consular processing". This is the case for Schengen countries, Canada, UK, Australia, Japan, Thailand, etc.
I was on a proper employment visa 8 years, never needed to leave the country.
People who do visa runs are doing so to extend their tourist visas for cheap.
¹: I've done it before at Si Racha Immigration Bureau. In my case it was more expensive than doing a visa run or paying the fine for 3 days of overstaying, but it was less hassle and left a positive/neutral mark on my passport, not a suspicious one.
²: This can sadly also require bribery just to get them to do their job, even if you do everything by the book. People around us were bringing bribes in form of food. We weren't asked for a bribe, probably because the person I was traveling and applying with had an official passport.
This sucks but it isn't new, unfortunately.
Meanwhile I've got a tech lead who is 12 hours away from the rest of the team. He was at least willing to work US-East hours while in India (basically staying up all night and sleeping during the day), but there was a huge amount of management overhead and inconvenience for the employee involved.
The main constraint is re-entry into the US and being able to travel outside the US. If one stayed here, there was no problem switching schools, programs, jobs, adjusting status to permanent residency or naturalization. On the other hand, for re-entry, one needs a valid visa stamped on a passport which necessitated a trip to one's home country. This stamping visit could be unpredictable.
Ideally, one would like to travel freely to see family and friends but I see a lot of comments implying that one is forced to leave. It might be true now but a lot of comments here are conflating several issues together.
Everything post-2025 has been a shit-show. There's no predictability or clear guidance, either from our lawyers or from the state department.
Predictability matters a lot in business. If you know what the procedure is and how long it will take, you can plan around it. If the rules change in the middle of the game you're left scrambling to keep up.