u/BestTogether8998

Thought to share my card delivery timeline and sincere appreciation to everyone.

EB2 NIW Category
August 6th case approved!
August 11th card produced
August 12th card mailed, tracking number received
August 15th card delayed by USPS
August 19th card delivered 💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻💃🏻

To Judge McConnell, the Lord bless you, the Lord keep you, and cause His face to shine upon you and your children and their children. No harm will come to you and your family; you will live many, many beautiful years of joy, peace, and happiness.

To the entire Dorcas Team, I love you, whatever you lay your hands to do will prosper. Because you choose to be a voice for the voiceless and fight for those who couldn’t fight for themselves, you will find help whenever you need it. Your individual lives will continue to flourish and shine brighter and brighter.

To Edlow, Angelica Afonso, and USCIS, I forgive you! I forgive you for the pain, I forgive you for the tears, the anxiety, the sleepless nights. I forgive you not because you deserve it, but because it is the right thing to do for my peace of mind. I forgive you, for you know not what you do. I pray your eyes of understanding open to see how much pain, distress, and deep frustration those policies caused to real human lives. The pain was real, the anxiety was real, the devastation was real. The impact of those unlawful policies was real. And the fact that you are still fighting to bring back those unlawful policies that negatively affected real people in the land of the free and home of the brave is unbelievable. I hope you find peace.

To everyone still waiting to hold your green cards in your hands, I pray you receive yours soon! Amen!

Sharing my Approval timeline for anyone still waiting. Don’t loose hope!
Timelines from others who were approved before me, helped keep my hope alive, so I thought to share mine to help do the same.

I-485 (Green Card) - Approved on Aug 6, 2026
I-765 & I-131 - still pending

From the 39 Affected Countries
Category: EB2 NIW
Priority Date: March 2024
I-485 / I-765 / I-131 Filed: October 2025
Biometrics: November 2025

Field Office for I-485
API & USCIS agents says New York Field Office but pdf of approval notice online says NBC

I-485 Silent Updates

Before JJM ruling
API codes: IAF, FTA0, FTA1- case is actively being reviewed in March 2026

After JJM ruling
API Updated time stamps: June 16, June 28, July 16, August 5, & August 6.

H008 -August 6th, exactly same time as when I received we have taken action on your case email

1 FTA0 on July 23 but could have been a glitch because the event date did not concern my application

Called and chatted USCIS multiple times, but it felt like I was hitting a brick wall almost each time.

Congressional enquiry Mid July
Received Congressional email on August 5th saying USCIS will adjudicate my I-485 within 30 days.
I-485 (Green Card) approved next day August 6th.

To everyone still waiting, I hope you find relief soon! 🙏🏻

Hi everyone,

I’m looking to see if anyone with a similar timeline to the one below has seen any approvals since the policy was vacated.

Category: EB2 NIW, I-140 already approved
Priority Date: March 2024
I-485 / I-765 / I-131 Filed: October 2025
Biometrics: November 2025

Has anyone with a similar timeline received any approval?

Thanks!

Checked my API code and noticed the updated timestamp on my I-485, I-765 and I-131 changed. The updated timestamp on my I-485, which was previously dated as 2026-06-28, had changed to 2026-07-16. And on both my I-765 and I-131, which were previously dated as 2026-06-23, they had changed to 2026-07-14.

Is this a silent update? Is this change the silent update that everyone speaks about? And did anyone else notice a similar updated timestamp on their API?

I’ve not been a believer in timestamp updates. However, I had spoken to a USCIS agent who mentioned that June 28. was the day the hold was removed on my I-485.

Any similar experience would be helpful here.

Is anyone from the 39 affected countries whose case is at the NYC field office seeing any I-485, I-765, or I-131 approvals for employment-based NIW, family-based, or marriage-based categories since the court ruling?

Also, are people who were not impacted by the 39-country pause currently receiving I-485, I-765, or I-131 approvals at the NYC field office, or is the NYC field office generally stalled for everyone?

I have noticed that people with later priority dates are getting approved before those with earlier dates. I am not completely sure if USCIS is currently jumping the queue, but it appears that cases are not being processed in the order they were received. Last time I checked, USCIS stated that they process cases in the order that they are received. Could this be an intentional tactic, or could it be that the New York field office is intentionally dragging their feet on following court orders? I wish I had the answers to these questions. I also wish the DORCAS lawyers would ask these questions during the July 15th motion to stay court hearing.

Sending love and hugs 🫂 to everyone still anxiously waiting. This one too will pass!

So many friends shared with me the Supreme Court’s recent 6-3 ruling in Mullin v. Doe (which allowed the government to end TPS for Haiti and Syria). They mentioned that this means the Supreme Court will potentially side with the government on the 39-country freeze case (Dorcas v. USCIS) affecting asylum, work permits, and Green Cards for people inside the US.

However, because I believe that the Supreme Court goes strictly by the written laws passed by Congress, I decided to dig deeper into the actual text of those laws. As I dug deeper, it becomes clear that these cases are completely different legal animals. The government won on TPS because of a highly specific legislative loophole that simply does not exist for the benefits protected under Dorcas.

The TPS Case: Mullin v. Doe
In the TPS case Mullin v. Doe, the Supreme Court ruled for the government because they were following the exact text of the law written by Congress. When Congress created Temporary Protected Status under the Immigration Act of 1990, codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1254a(b)(1), they explicitly wrote nationality requirements into the law. The statute dictates that the government can grant or end TPS based strictly on whether a specific foreign country is facing temporary disasters or civil war.

More importantly, Congress explicitly locked the courthouse doors in the text of that exact law. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1254a(b)(5)(A), Congress wrote: "There is no judicial review of any determination of the Secretary with respect to the designation, or termination or extension of a designation of a foreign state under this subsection."

The Supreme Court ruled for the government because the written law passed by Congress explicitly banned judges from interfering with TPS decisions. The conservative majority simply concluded that because the text of the law gives the executive branch total control over this specific program, the courts do not have the legal authority to review how the government executes it.

The 39-Country Freeze Case: Dorcas v. USCIS
The Dorcas v. USCIS lawsuit covers a completely different set of rules. Unlike the TPS statute, Congress did not write a court-blocking shield into any of the laws governing Green Cards, Asylum, or temporary work permits. Because Congress left the courthouse doors wide open, the courts have full authority to step in and stop USCIS if the agency goes against the laws passed by congress regarding green cards, green card EADs, Asylum and OPT EADs.

Since the Supreme Court operates strictly by evaluating the exact written text of the law, they will most likely dissect these three benefits through the actual statutes Congress passed:

1. For Green Cards and Green Card EADs: Congress strictly and explicitly banned nationality-based discrimination. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1152(a)(1)(A), the written law commands that "no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence." Crucially, the law passed by Congress does not give USCIS broad discretionary authority or a blank check over Green Cards and Green Card EADs. Because these work permits are a direct, mandatory component of a pending Green Card application, the law gives them absolutely no permission to freeze them based on nationality. By basing this discrimination entirely on the happenstance of a person's birth, USCIS completely violated the strict, mandatory anti-discrimination rules laid out by Congress, giving the Supreme Court a direct reason to strike them down.

2. For Asylum: Congress built asylum as a permanent humanitarian pathway with strict processing rules, not an area of broad executive discretion. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1158(d)(5)(A)(iii), the explicit text written by Congress commands that "in the absence of exceptional circumstances, final adjudication of the asylum application shall be completed within 180 days after the date an application is filed." The law does not give USCIS permission or a blank check to selectively halt cases based on where an applicant was born. By implementing a blanket freeze, USCIS directly violated the 180-day statutory timeline mandated by Congress. Asylum applicants can confidently lean on this strict 180-day statutory timeline when showing the court that the agency is operating completely outside its legal bounds.

3. For Temporary Work Permits (OPT EADs): While the government points to laws like 8 U.S.C. § 1184(a)(1) and 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(h)(3) to claim they have broad discretion over temporary student work permits, Congress never gave them permission to violate standard administrative laws. Because Congress did not block judicial review here, these work permits are fully protected by the Administrative Procedure Act at 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A), which explicitly dictates that a court "shall hold unlawful and set aside agency action... found to be arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law." Freezing applications indefinitely based entirely on an applicant's country of birth completely violates these statutory rules of fair administration.

A Dangerous Split Versus a Holistic Win at the Supreme Court: What I Think

Because the Supreme Court goes strictly by the letter of the law passed by Congress, there is a realistic chance they could look at this case as a split decision.

The Justices could rule that the government has broader executive discretion over temporary student work permits under its nonimmigrant authority. This is because, unlike Green Cards (which have a strict anti-discrimination law) and Asylum (which has a mandatory 180-day clock), Congress used very broad language when writing the laws for international students. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1184(a)(1), Congress wrote that the government can set whatever "conditions" it wants for nonimmigrants, and under 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(h)(3), Congress left non-immigrant work authorizations up to the discretion of the agency. Because these laws regulate temporary students rather than permanent residents, the Supreme Court could decide that the executive branch has the legal authority to pause or restrict these specific benefits based on its own internal policy goals and reverse that specific piece.

Even though the government has broader discretion over student work permits, the law does not give them a license to be lawless. The critical distinction is that Congress never stripped the courts of their power to review student applications. Because Congress left the courthouse doors wide open for OPT EADs, these benefits are fully governed by the Administrative Procedure Act at 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A). This explicit law commands that the court shall step in and set aside any agency action found to be "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law."

Therefore, even if the government claims it has broad nonimmigrant authority, the law gives the court full power to intervene because a blanket, nation-based freeze is completely arbitrary. USCIS cannot use "discretion" as an excuse to completely pause a lawful program for thousands of students based entirely on the geography of their birth.

However, if the Supreme Court steps back and evaluates Dorcas v. USCIS as a whole, the plaintiffs have an incredibly strong path to a complete victory. When looked at altogether, the 39-country freeze wasn't a minor procedural tweak; it was a massive, sweeping, unauthorized hold that completely ignored the statutes Congress wrote. Because there is no judicial review bar for these standard benefit applications, Chief Judge McConnell was fully empowered by the written law to step in and strike the freeze down on June 5th. From my heart, I say long live the judge! Long live Judge McConnell! Long live Dorcas International!

This personal research is shared just to keep hope alive because all hope is not lost on this case. Approvals have already started rolling out for individuals from the affected 39 countries. Although a lot of cases that are at the National Benefits Center (NBC) appear to not be seeing approvals rolling yet, and practically everyone I know whose case is at the NBC has not seen approvals rolling, my hope is that just like the other service centers and field offices that are experiencing some approvals, the NBC will see approvals rolling soon. My prayer is that every one who was affected by the unlawful policy and is still waiting gets an approval notice soon.

Hopefully USCIS doesn’t go all the way to the Supreme Court, but with the way they have responded to the case so far, I think they will most likely take it to the super court. I am really curious to see how the Supreme Court handles the Dorcas v. USCIS case. How they judge this case based on the written laws of Congress will make a lot of things clear.

It will be interesting to see what next month looks like for those stuck in the NBC queue. In the meantime, the hope is that these approvals keep rolling and eventually reach everyone who has been impacted by these unlawful policies. While the case battles its way up until the supreme court, there is strong reason to remain hopeful that the government's motion for a stay will not be granted and that the freeze stays dead.

I hope this post brings a lot of clarity and hope to everyone reading it.

After taking the time to read the government’s 40-page emergency stay motion and the sworn declaration of USCIS Deputy Director Angelica Alfonso-Royals, I am left with one undeniable conclusion: This policy is a textbook abuse of power, designed to oppress vulnerable, voiceless people under the false flag of national security.

When you strip away the legal jargon, the government’s own words completely dismantle their case. Here are some of the facts that prove this policy is a cruel, arbitrary sham:

1. The Alfonso-Royals Contradiction (The Pretext Exposed)

Here is the fatal flaw: None of these three countries are on the 39-country freeze list. A Pakistani, Liberian, or Ethiopian national has their paperwork processed normally. Meanwhile, applicants from the 39 frozen nations are completely blocked and plucked out of line under the exact same corrupt data infrastructure excuse. This proves Judge McConnell was 100% correct in his judgment: The national security excuse is a total pretext. The banned list wasn't built on data; it was built on pure maliciousness.

2. Hiding the Truth Behind the Discriminatory Social Media Posts
   The government argues that the court must ignore the discriminatory public and social media statements exposing the true, biased motives behind this policy, under a legal shield called "Rational Basis." But that shield only works if the government's policy is actually rational. Because the government has failed to show a consistent, data-driven security threat, explicitly letting other "untrustworthy" nations like Pakistan, Liberia, and Ethiopia pass through, they have not proven this policy is about public safety.

3. The Physician Loophole Proves It’s Not About Security
   If a country is truly such a massive national security threat that every single citizen must be blocked, that threat doesn't care about a person's job title. Yet, the moment rural American hospitals faced a staffing crisis and raised a massive public outcry, USCIS secretly exempted physicians from this unlawful policy. All of a sudden, on paper, a doctor from a frozen country is no longer a security threat, but an engineer, a spouse, or a child from that exact same country is? If this were a genuine national security emergency, USCIS would not have compromised. Exempting doctors proves that the "emergency" is entirely fake, malicious, and capricious.

4. Lifting the Hold for Individual Plaintiffs
   Furthermore, whenever federal judges ruled in favor of specific groups of plaintiffs, the government quietly agreed to lift the hold for only those individuals who sued them. If these applicants genuinely posed an unvetted threat to the American public, a federal agency tasked with national security would not have compromised on those individual plaintiffs. Instead, they folded to buy compliance.

5. Weaponizing “Existing Delays” to Gaslight the Innocent
   In a deeply insulting paragraph, the government argues that because the immigration system is already notoriously slow, a temporary pause shouldn't matter since cases take a long time in regular processing anyway. Mind you, I have seen numerous standard green card cases and EADs get approved within a fast 3 to 4 months for the unaffected countries. They are literally attempting to gaslight the court by suggesting that because these applicants are already accustomed to systemic delays, forcing them into an indefinite review hold with no clear completion date shouldn't cause them any real harm. This is cruel!

A total pause on real human lives and livelihoods is not a temporary delay. It is an intentional, active, indefinite, and discriminatory barrier. It is very cruel of USCIS to minimize the pain, hardship, and suffering of real, innocent people. Real people have lost their sources of livelihood. Many are facing severe, paralyzing anxiety issues due to the mental drain caused by this unlawful policy. The actual suffering of real people can never be minimized.

6. Moving the Goalposts for 7 Months
   The government's main defense is that they need this freeze to build a "new vetting process." They instituted this pause seven months ago (late 2025). It is now June 2026, and Alfonso-Royals is still telling the court they need "the coming weeks/months" to figure out how to implement it. How long does USCIS need to do their job? 10 years? If the courts do not step in, this "temporary pause" will last for years, and USCIS will keep repeating the exact same script: "We are still working on the process." This is the very definition of capricious behavior. They are weaponizing their own administrative stalling to hold human lives hostage indefinitely.

In my opinion, this stay motion by USCIS is not stay worthy, but let's see what the judges think.🤞

"The counsel of Ahithophel shall be turned into foolishness. Amen."

A friend of mine came to me crying today after receiving a personalized response to their case inquiry today, Monday, June 15th.

They put in the inquiry almost over two months ago, and USCIS explicitly wrote back today, Monday, June 15th, with this exact message:

"We regret the time it is taking to process your application. USCIS records show that the processing of this case has been delayed because the required USCIS review is still in process. Until the required review is completed, this agency cannot move forward on this case.

Please understand that the review is part of the process for adjudicating cases of a similar nature. While an exact date for completion of the review is not known at this time, USCIS will make every effort to make a decision on your case as soon as the review is completed.

We appreciate your continued patience and understanding."

Per this message, it shows that this review is completely indefinite. It could take years to complete, and no one knows when it would end. This is completely unfair. It appears that USCIS is still keeping the freeze alive through the back door, still operating the exact same unlawful policy that blocks applications for people from the 39 countries inside the US, just under a different name. They are possibly dragging their feet despite the federal court vacating the designated country freeze.

Despite the fact that the court has vacated the unlawful policy, and despite the fact that USCIS Deputy Director Angelica Alfonso-Royals swore under oath to comply, the reality on the ground is completely different. From this official USCIS response sent to my friend today, it greatly appears that they have absolutely no intention of backing down on this illegal hold policy.

Please, can anyone who knows the Dorcas lawyers share this piece of information with them? My friend is very devastated. They’ve been crying and it breaks my heart to see them this way.

My heart bleeds for this great injustice that’s been done to innocent lives. This is so cruel. What a sad time to be in America. We’ve done everything right, followed the rules, lived here for decades, kept the laws of the land, contributed to society professionally and otherwise and this is how we are treated? This is inhuman, America can do better than this.