The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) took a noticeably strict stance when deciding Employment-Based Second Preference National Interest Waiver (EB-2 NIW) petitions during the first Trump administration. People with advanced degrees or extraordinary skills whose work has significant quality and national significance for the United States are eligible to apply for the EB-2 NIW category. This categorization enables qualified persons to self-petition on the grounds that their contributions benefit the country, avoiding the labor certification process. However, the USCIS made a number of policy changes under the Trump administration that had an immediate effect on how EB-2 NIW petitions were adjudicated.

An increased emphasis on defining “National Importance and Substantial Merit”

USCIS used more stringent interpretations under the Trump administration to determine whether an applicant’s work met the two main conditions for EB-2 NIW eligibility—substantial merit and national relevance. This was a change from earlier administrations’ more lenient evaluations, which gave more weight to an applicant’s experience and professional sector. In order to demonstrate that a person’s efforts not only benefited their particular industry but also had wider ramifications for the national interest, USCIS examiners started to demand more precise proof. Because of this more stringent approach, petitioners had to support the importance of their work with more convincing evidence, such as industry endorsements, research impacts, economic contributions, or policy influence.

The Trump administration’s immigration policy, which promoted stringent limitations on immigration programs and placed a strong emphasis on “America First” ideals, was reflected in this shift. This strategy meant that EB-2 NIW applicants would be subject to a more thorough examination of whether their contributions actually addressed a national priority or offered the United States a tangible economic or security advantage. In areas like science, technology, and engineering, which were considered to be greater national priorities, USCIS adjudicators frequently sought measurable proof of the petitioner’s contributions.

Change to Demand Proof of Immediate U.S. Benefit

It became harder for petitioners to qualify once the Trump administration raised the bar for considering EB-2 NIW petitions. Technically, the “preponderance of evidence” requirement stayed the same, but adjudicators sometimes used a level of scrutiny similar to the “clear and convincing” threshold. USCIS often sent Requests for Evidence (RFEs) to petitioners, requesting more documentation, explanations, or arguments to back up claims that would have otherwise satisfied EB-2 NIW requirements. This includes requests for more thorough proof of the petitioner’s accomplishments, including publications, patents, citation histories, and media attention, in addition to recommendation letters from well-known American specialists.

The agency’s skepticism over the petitioner’s ability to meet the NIW requirements was frequently expressed in these RFEs. The third aspect of the Matter of Dhanasar test, which assesses whether removing the job offer requirement will benefit the US enough to justify skipping the labor certification process, was given more weight by USCIS in particular. This component was examined more closely by adjudicators, who demanded that petitioners provide convincing evidence of how avoiding the labor certification would benefit the country. It was difficult for many to achieve the requirement, which frequently required petitioners to show that their work was so specialized and distinctive that a U.S. worker could not easily fill the same role.

Increased Subjective Criteria and Administrative Discretion Use

A further modification involved a heightened reliance on administrative discretion in rejecting petitions based on subjective criteria. While EB-2 NIW petitions are intended to permit individuals to self-petition without the need for a sponsoring employer, the USCIS officers during the Trump administration began to scrutinize the specific qualifications of petitioners more rigorously. They often made determinations regarding whether the petitioner’s skills and background were particularly aligned with U.S. national interests. This subjective evaluation sometimes resulted in denials for applicants who otherwise satisfied the standard qualifications outlined in the Matter of Dhanasar framework but failed to persuade the adjudicator of their distinct value to the United States.

Applicants from fields deemed to be of “lesser priority” or whose work was more specialized encountered significant obstacles. For instance, while professionals in technology and defense sectors were more likely to receive favorable outcomes, those in social sciences, arts, or humanities frequently faced denials or Requests for Evidence (RFEs) that challenged the national significance of their contributions. This trend indicated a preference for certain academic disciplines over others, mirroring the broader immigration policy objectives of the Trump administration, which prioritized contributions perceived to have immediate economic or security benefits.

Effects on Processing Times and Approval Rates for Petitions

The policies implemented during the Trump administration also had a notable impact on the processing times for EB-2 National Interest Waiver (NIW) petitions. The heightened scrutiny and increased frequency of RFEs led to extended adjudication periods, as each application was subjected to a more thorough review. Furthermore, the surge in RFEs necessitated that petitioners compile additional documentation, which further prolonged the decision-making process by USCIS. Consequently, processing backlogs grew, resulting in petitioners often experiencing several additional months of waiting for adjudication compared to prior years. This delay was further intensified by a series of operational changes within USCIS aimed at enhancing efficiency and reducing costs, which included staff reductions and modifications to case processing protocols that inadvertently led to increased delays.

During this timeframe, not only did processing times slow down, but the approval rates for EB-2 NIW petitions also saw a decline. This downturn can be attributed to a combination of increased evidentiary demands, subjective evaluations, and shifts in policy, which led to a rise in denials, particularly for applicants whose cases were based on broad assertions of future contributions or indirect advantages to the U.S. economy. The prevailing trend suggested that fewer individuals were able to obtain NIWs unless they fulfilled the more stringent criteria established by the administration.

Long-Term Consequences and the Evolving Landscape After the Trump Administration

The approach taken by the Trump administration regarding EB-2 NIW adjudication has had a profound and enduring effect on the manner in which USCIS evaluates petitions within this category. The focus on immediate benefits to the U.S., elevated evidentiary requirements, and a preference for specific fields over others posed significant challenges for self-petitioners aiming to qualify under the NIW category. In response to these changes, many immigration attorneys have modified their strategies, frequently advising clients to compile more extensive evidence and to seek endorsements from esteemed U.S. professionals in their respective fields to bolster their applications.

Following the transition from the Trump administration, USCIS has slowly begun to return to more conventional interpretations of the NIW requirements, striving to reconcile the national interest assessment with the necessary flexibility to acknowledge a variety of contributions. Nevertheless, the influence of the Trump administration’s policies remains, as numerous procedural changes and increased scrutiny levels implemented during that period continue to shape adjudication practices to varying extents

The initial Trump administration represented a notable period of transformation in the evaluation of EB-2 NIW petitions, distinguished by more stringent interpretations, increased evidentiary requirements, and an emphasis on immediate, concrete contributions to the United States. Although these measures aimed to safeguard U.S. interests and prioritize immigration that offers direct benefits to the country, they also created new obstacles for self-petitioners across various fields. Consequently, the EB-2 NIW environment became more selective and demanding, with the results largely dependent on the petitioner’s capacity to provide persuasive, measurable evidence of their distinct value to the United States.

By: Karim Jivani

Karim Jivani is an Associate Attorney at Reddy Neumann Brown PC who focuses on employment-based non-immigrant visas. Karim’s practice covers all phases of the EB-1A and EB-2 NIW visa process including filing petitions, responding to Requests for Evidence (RFE), and drafting motions and appeals. Karim has also worked on all aspects of H-1B, L-1, I-140, and VAWA petitions.