The bill, which had a contentious six month long debate in Congress, was passed in a narrow, party line vote.

The bill provided a $70 billion increase in border security and enforcement funding, primarily going to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Border Patrol

North Carolina’s Senate Bill 153 will become law, after lawmakers overrode a veto by Governor Josh Stein.

The bill would require state law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration authorities.

It also placed restrictions on the use of public benefits by undocumented immigrants.

The forms, including both the paper and online N-400 and the N-336 all increased from around $700 to over $1,200.

Many, but not all, exemptions and fee waivers for both were eliminated

The rule has been proposed, and has not yet been implemented. It is currently open for public comment.

The new option would cost $750 and would expedite appointments for interviews

The visas affected are the B1 and the B2, used for tourism and business travel.

The US Government cited lengthy wait times at many embassies as justification for the change.

Applicants who are facing emergencies or other extenuating circumstances can still request expediated appointments without any additional fees.

Canada saw a 60% drop in international student arrivals, a 1/3 drop in asylum claims, and a 50% drop in temporary worker arrivals.

Canada’s government has ruled out a series of changes imposing tighter requirements on international workers and students, ranging from increased financial requirements and more restrictive policies on work permits

Indian students saw an especially large drop, from about half of international students in the country to less than 10%

The case concerned a legal permanent resident and a Chinese citizen who had been convicted of a crime who was prevented from reentry.

The majority opinion, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, said that the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) did not impose a “clear and convincing evidence burden” on border patrol officers in these cases.

In a widely watched case, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government can turn back asylum seekers prior to entering the United States.

The court ruled in a 6-3 decision that while federal law permits immigrant already in the United States to apply for asylum, this provision does not cover prospective asylees who have arrived at, but not crossed, the border

An additional aspect of the ruling involved the Refugee Act of 1980 as well as the US’ obligation under several international treaties; the majority opinion found that these provisions forbid the returning of refugees to their country of origin where they would be in danger, it did not require the US to admit someone who was not already in the United States.

Justice Alito wrote the majority opinion, while Justice Sotomayor wrote the dissenting one.

Saying that the practice, among other things, disincentivized immigrants from attending hearings, Judge Casey Pitts ruled in the class action case in favor of the plaintiffs.

A blanket waiver from last year allowing for extended detention of ICE detainees was also blocked.

The case is expected to be challenged

The controversial $100,000 fee for H-1B applicants was struck down in federal court, a major ruling in a case that saw 20 states sue the federal government.

The new fees were rolled out last year in an attempt to prevent American workers from being undermined by the program.

Notably, the government had not seen many people pay the fee, as applicants who were transferring from another visa were exempt.

​A June 2026 Supreme Court ruling allowed for the Trump administration to cancel Temporary Protected Status for nationals of Syria and Haiti

Temporary Protected Status (TPS) was created by congress, but the designation of countries who’s citizens are protected lies with the executive branch.

The 6-3 ruling allows for the administration to remove protections for two countries, Haiti and Syria, who were designated by previous administrations and who’s status was revoked by the Department of Homeland Security.

In the majority opinion, Justice Alito wrote that federal judges who ruled against the administration overstepped their authority, and constitutionally were unable to review the designation of specific countries.