L'USCIS met à jour les directives sur le calcul de l'âge en vertu de la loi sur la protection du statut de l'enfant (CSPA)
Angelica Rice • October 17, 2024
Click here to read this article in English
Le 25 septembre 2024, les services américains de la citoyenneté et de l'immigration (USCIS) ont récemment mis à jour leurs directives relatives à la loi sur la protection du statut de l'enfant (Child Status Protection Act - CSPA) afin de clarifier la manière dont l'âge d'un demandeur est calculé en cas de circonstances extraordinaires. Cette mise à jour a pour but d'aider les demandeurs et leurs familles à mieux comprendre comment leur éligibilité à certaines prestations d'immigration peut être affectée par des retards ou des conditions spéciales au cours de la procédure.
Le CSPA est une loi cruciale qui aide à protéger les enfants contre le « vieillissement » de la procédure d'immigration, c'est-à-dire le fait d'atteindre l'âge de 21 ans en attendant que les demandes d'immigration fondées sur la famille soient traitées. Normalement, lorsqu'un enfant atteint l'âge de 21 ans, il ne peut plus prétendre à une carte verte dans le cadre de certaines catégories de visas familiaux. Toutefois, le CSPA autorise un calcul spécial de l'âge de l'enfant pour déterminer s'il peut encore être considéré comme un « enfant » à des fins d'immigration, même s'il a dépassé l'âge de 21 ans.
La récente mise à jour de l'USCIS porte sur deux points essentiels:
- Tout d'abord, elle clarifie la manière dont des circonstances extraordinaires peuvent dispenser un demandeur de l'obligation habituelle de demander une carte verte (ou de « chercher à acquérir » la résidence permanente) dans un délai d'un an à compter de la date à laquelle son visa est devenu disponible. Si des circonstances extraordinaires, telles que des problèmes médicaux ou d'autres situations inévitables, empêchent un demandeur de respecter ce délai, il peut toujours bénéficier de la protection du CSPA s'il peut prouver ces circonstances.
- Deuxièmement, les orientations précisent comment calculer l'âge du demandeur au regard du CSPA dans les cas où ces circonstances extraordinaires s'appliquent.
Si un visa d'immigrant a été disponible pendant une période continue d'un an, l'âge du CSPA est calculé à partir de la date à laquelle le visa est devenu disponible pour la première fois. Toutefois, si le visa est devenu disponible puis indisponible avant que le demandeur ne puisse déposer sa demande, le calcul de l'âge du CSPA peut toujours utiliser la date à laquelle le visa est devenu disponible pour la première fois - si le demandeur peut prouver qu'il n'a pas pu déposer sa demande en raison de circonstances extraordinaires.
Cette mise à jour traite d'une question qui n'était pas couverte en détail par la politique de l'USCIS. Avant cette clarification, il n'était pas clair comment l'âge du CSPA serait calculé pour les non-citoyens qui avaient des raisons extraordinaires de ne pas demander une carte verte pendant la période où leur visa était disponible. En fournissant cette mise à jour des orientations, l'USCIS vise à garantir que ces cas sont traités de manière cohérente et équitable.
En conclusion, cette récente mise à jour de l'USCIS offre une orientation plus claire sur la façon dont les circonstances extraordinaires affectent le calcul de l'âge du CSPA. Si vous pensez que votre famille pourrait bénéficier de cette mise à jour, n'hésitez pas à contacter l'un de nos avocats spécialisés en droit de l'immigration, qui pourra vous aider à comprendre comment ces changements s'appliquent à votre situation. Pour de plus amples informations, vous pouvez consulter
le manuel de politique de l'USCIS ou
l'annonce officielle de l'USCIS.
Ce blog n'est pas destiné à fournir des conseils juridiques et rien ici ne doit être interprété comme établissant une relation avocat-client. Veuillez prendre rendez-vous avec un avocat spécialisé en droit de l'immigration avant d'agir sur la base de toute information lue ici.
In recent months, the U.S. government has intensified its vetting procedures for individuals seeking entry into the United States, whether through visa applications abroad or inspection at ports of entry. This shift, prioritized by the current administration, is having a noticeable impact on immigrants, visa holders, and even lawful permanent residents (LPRs). At U.S. consulates worldwide, applicants are experiencing increased delays , often being placed into administrative processing under Section 221(g) or referred for Security Advisory Opinions (SAOs) , which can significantly prolong visa issuance. Officers are now engaging in deeper reviews of applicants' backgrounds, including their t ravel histories, social media accounts, and foreign ties . This scrutiny applies to a wide range of visa categories, from visitor visas to employment-based petitions. Importantly, officers are exercising broader discretion when deciding who qualifies for a visa, making the process more unpredictable, even for applicants with strong cases. This enhanced vetting does not end at the consulate. Individuals entering the U.S. — even those with valid visas or green cards — are increasingly subject to prolonged secondary inspections by Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Officers may ask detailed questions about prior immigration history, travel patterns, and social media activity. In some cases, travelers are asked to provide access to their electronic devices for further inspection. There are also growing reports of travelers being referred to deferred inspection or even issued a Notice to Appear (NTA) for removal proceedings, despite previously lawful entries. While some of these practices have existed in the past, the current administration has formalized and expanded them. Experts warn that additional travel restrictions or targeted bans could also emerge as part of the administration’s enforcement priorities. For employment-based applicants, these delays and complications can severely impact U.S. businesses and foreign nationals who contribute critical skills to the U.S. economy. It is more important than ever to be well-prepared before attending a visa interview or traveling internationally. Understanding your rights and preparing thoroughly can help you navigate this uncertain landscape. At Santos Lloyd Law Firm, P.C. , our immigration attorneys are ready to guide you through this evolving process and ensure you are informed, supported, and protected. Please contact us if you have questions or need assistance.
On March 31, 2024, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) implemented a policy update that limits gender marker selections on all immigration forms and systems to two biological sexes: male and female. This change eliminates the option for applicants to select a non-binary or “X” gender marker—an option that had previously been permitted on some forms. While USCIS emphasizes that this update does not change who qualifies for immigration benefits, it may significantly impact how certain applications—particularly asylum claims based on gender identity-related persecution—are understood and evaluated. What Has Changed? Under the revised policy, applicants may now only choose “Male” or “Female” when completing USCIS forms. The ability to select a non-binary or third-gender option is no longer available. Applicants may still request to change their gender marker with USCIS, but only within the male/female binary. Supporting documentation, such as medical or legal records, is not required to make the change. This means that transgender individuals can still align their gender marker with their identity—if it falls within the two binary categories—but non-binary individuals are no longer represented. The change follows guidance issued by the federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB), which called for greater consistency in the collection of sex and gender data across federal agencies. Impact on Asylum Applicants This policy update is especially important for individuals applying for asylum based on persecution related to their gender identity. Under U.S. immigration law, asylum is available to people who have suffered persecution—or fear future persecution—based on their membership in a “particular social group.” This includes people targeted for being transgender, gender non-conforming, or otherwise not aligning with socially expected gender roles in their home country. Although the legal standard for asylum remains unchanged, the removal of the non-binary gender marker could make it harder for some applicants to clearly present and document their identity. In asylum cases, credibility and clarity are crucial. The ability to accurately reflect one’s gender identity on official forms can play an important role in establishing the foundation of a persecution claim. Now, applicants who identify as non-binary or outside the traditional male/female categories may be forced to select a gender that does not align with their lived experience. This could lead to confusion in their case file or require additional explanation during interviews or hearings. This policy could weaken the strength of some asylum claims—not because the underlying facts have changed, but because the official forms now fail to reflect the applicant’s true identity. For example: A non-binary person applying for asylum after being targeted in their home country may now have to select “Male” or “Female” on their asylum application, despite not identifying as either. This mismatch may lead adjudicators to question the applicant’s identity, possibly weakening the strength of the claim or requiring added clarification and documentation. In defensive asylum cases—where applicants are in removal proceedings—such inconsistencies could create unnecessary hurdles and complicate the evidentiary presentation. What Can Applicants Do? Despite the change, individuals can still pursue asylum based on gender identity. The underlying eligibility criteria remain the same. However, applicants should be prepared to clearly explain any differences between their stated identity and the gender marker required on USCIS forms. Applicants are encouraged to: Include a personal declaration explaining their gender identity in detail and how it relates to their fear of persecution. Provide evidence such as affidavits, country condition reports, or expert testimony that supports the claim. Work with an experienced immigration attorney who can help present the claim effectively and prepare for any questions that might arise from the new form limitations. The new USCIS policy on gender markers may seem like a technical update, but for asylum seekers fleeing gender-based persecution, it has real implications. While individuals are still legally eligible to seek protection, the limitation to binary gender options could make it more difficult to fully and clearly present their case. If you or someone you know is facing immigration challenges related to gender identity—or is concerned about how this policy may impact an asylum claim—please contact Santos Lloyd Law Firm to schedule a consultation with one of our experienced immigration attorneys. We’re here to help ensure your voice is heard and your case is handled with the care and expertise it deserves.
In 2025, the immigration landscape continues to shift under the weight of national security concerns, ushered in by Executive Order “ Protecting the United States From Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats. ” This directive tasks federal agencies—including the U.S. Department of State—with implementing enhanced screening and vetting protocols for all foreign nationals seeking visas or other immigration benefits. The result? A dramatically intensified vetting process, along with mounting concerns from immigrants, attorneys, and civil liberties advocates alike. Traditionally, airport security focused on verifying travel documents and screening for prohibited items, while consular officers assessed the legitimacy of visa petitions and the admissibility of applicants. Extreme vetting, however, represents a significant shift toward a far more invasive and comprehensive investigative process. It now includes detailed background checks, biometric verification, digital forensics, and expansive scrutiny of an applicant’s online presence and criminal or financial records. Since President Trump’s second term began in January 2025, the implementation of extreme vetting has expanded rapidly. Today, border screenings go far beyond routine document checks, encompassing a full-scale evaluation of a traveler’s digital life. This pivot reflects the administration’s intensified focus on national security, but it has also triggered urgent discussions about privacy, due process, and the fairness of modern immigration enforcement. At U.S. ports of entry—especially airports—noncitizens are now subject to rigorous and invasive procedures, including: Inspection of cell phones, laptops, and other devices (including deleted content) Review of social media activity on platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter) Biometric scanning, including fingerprinting and facial recognition These measures are no longer confined to travelers from high-risk countries. In practice, extreme vetting applies broadly across all nationalities, and increasingly affects lawful permanent residents as well. For noncitizens, this new landscape introduces a heightened level of uncertainty and vulnerability. Delays at U.S. consulates for visa issuance or renewal are becoming routine. Travelers must now be acutely aware of these changes, and those attending consular interviews or seeking visa renewals should be prepared to provide additional documentation verifying their maintenance of status, compliance with visa conditions, and the bona fide nature of their visa applications. It is critical to organize supporting materials in advance and be ready to answer questions about employment, education, travel history, and online activity. As the U.S. government continues to expand its use of data-driven risk assessment tools, travelers must adapt to a new normal, one where preparation is essential to navigating the immigration system without disruption.
