Washington, D.C. (January 29, 2026) – A new episode of the Center for Immigration Studies podcast examines the U visa program, originally created by Congress in 2000 under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), and explains how a narrowly tailored law-enforcement tool has evolved into a large-scale immigration benefit program, riddled with fraud and abuse.
The U visa was designed to help law enforcement agencies detect, investigate, and prosecute crimes by offering legal status to unlawfully present victims of serious crimes who might otherwise be reluctant to have contact with authorities, in exchange for their cooperation. Congress capped the program at 10,000 visas annually, excluding family members.
Key findings discussed in the episode include:
- The program has been overwhelmed, with roughly 250,000 pending applications from principal applicants and 150,000 more from family members – about 400,000 total cases.
- The surge is not driven by increased victimization, but by policy changes under the Biden administration that created incentives to apply regardless of merit.
- Under the Biden administration, applicants received work permits and protection from deportation upon filing an application, even before meaningful vetting or adjudication.
- USCIS officers were stripped of authority to place fraudulent applicants into deportation proceedings, eliminating consequences for false or frivolous filings.
- Evidence of abuse includes staged crimes, forged law-enforcement certifications, and an underground industry marketing the U visa as a means to a work permit.
- An internal USCIS study found that one-fifth of applicants were already in removal proceedings when they applied.
- Some sanctuary states, including California and Illinois, have leveraged the U visa as an amnesty tool, pressuring local law-enforcement agencies to certify applications.
Recommendations include:
- Administrative actions to prioritize legitimate cases and reopen questionable approvals.
- Congressional reforms to restrict benefits before approval and tighten statutory eligibility.
- State and local standards for certification, centralized review, and increased oversight.
|
|
