If your fiancé(e), spouse, or their child will interview at a U.S. consulate on a K-1, K-2 or K-3 visa, the State Department now expects every one of their social media profiles to be set to "public" or "open." The instruction took effect March 30, 2026. Listing five years of social media usernames on the visa application is not new; that question was added years ago. What changed is that these visa categories were added to the group whose online presence the Department says it reviews, with the instruction that no profile be locked.
What changed on March 30, 2026, and what did not
The State Department calls it "online presence review." It began in June 2025 with student and exchange visitor visas (F, M and J), reached H-1B workers and their H-4 dependents on December 15, 2025, and on March 30, 2026 was extended to A-3, C-3 domestic workers, G-5, H-3 and their H-4 dependents, K-1, K-2, K-3, Q, R-1, R-2, S, T and U visa applicants. Everyone on that list is "instructed to adjust the privacy settings on all of their social media profiles to 'public' or 'open.'"
The disclosure itself is older, and it is a different, narrower thing. In 2018 the Department proposed adding the question to the nonimmigrant application (DS-160) and the immigrant application (DS-260) alike, and sent both revisions on for approval that August: the form lists social media platforms and requires every identifier the applicant used on those platforms "during the five years preceding the date of application"; identifiers on platforms not listed are an optional field on both forms. The Department's November 2025 notice on the DS-260 treats its social media fields as existing ones. So two things are being asked, and they have different reach: five years of identifiers on the listed platforms go on the form, and, for the categories on the March 30 list, all profiles are to be open.
The Department's stated purpose is to identify applicants who are inadmissible, including security and public-safety concerns, and to confirm that each applicant "credibly establish[es] their eligibility for the visa sought, including that they intend to engage in activities consistent with the terms for their admission." For a K-1, the activity the visa exists for is a marriage to the petitioner within 90 days of admission.
Where the answer splits for couples
The list is a list of nonimmigrant visa categories, and that is exactly where marriage cases divide.
- Engaged, partner abroad → K-1. On the list. The K-2 for the partner's children is on it too.
- Already married, spouse abroad → an immigrant visa on the DS-260 (the CR-1 and IR-1 spouse categories). Immigrant visa categories are not named in the March 30 instruction. The DS-260 carries the same five-year question, and the Department says it vets every applicant thoroughly; the announcement does not instruct immigrant visa applicants to change privacy settings. The K-3, a nonimmigrant visa for a spouse of a U.S. citizen who has a petition pending and wants to wait in the United States for its approval and for an immigrant visa to become available, is on the list.
- Spouse in the United States who files for adjustment of status → USCIS, not a consulate. The consular instruction does not reach an I-485 filing. USCIS has, however, published Federal Register notices (March 5 and September 16, 2025) to collect social media identifiers on its own forms, naming the I-485, N-400, I-131 and I-751 among others. Our note on the proposed USCIS disclosure has the details.
A couple choosing between a K-1 and marrying first for a CR-1 or IR-1 immigrant visa is therefore also choosing whether the public-profile instruction applies to them. It is one of several places the two paths differ; the others are in K-1 fiancé visa vs. marrying first.
What a public timeline can be compared against
The announcement publishes no checklist and does not say how officers use what they see. What it does say is what the review is for: inadmissibility, and whether the applicant's stated purpose is credible. In a fiancé(e) or spouse case the stated purpose is the relationship, and the officer already holds the couple's own account of it: the petition, the visa application, the interview answers, with their dates, addresses and employers. A public profile is one more version of the same story. Where the versions agree, it is, in practice, one more account that matches the rest. Where they do not, a relationship status that changed on a different date, a city that does not match the address history, a photo that places someone where the forms say they were not, an officer may have a question, and the interview is where it can be asked.
An account that was used in the past five years on a listed platform but left off the form is a different problem: it is a missing answer on the application. The inadmissibility ground for fraud reaches anyone who "by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to procure" a visa or another immigration benefit; whether a missing account meets that test is decided case by case, and the statute puts no time limit on the ground. Our guide on prior visa denials explains how it works.
What to have straight before the interview
- The five-year list. Every identifier used on the listed platforms since five years before the application date, including accounts that were used and later abandoned. The question asks what was used, not what still exists.
- All profiles, not only the listed ones. The public-or-open instruction covers "all of their social media profiles"; it is not limited to the five-year list.
- Whether the timeline matches the forms. Dates of the relationship, addresses, employers, travel. A mismatch is worth understanding, and explaining, before the interview rather than during it.
- What the announcement does not address. It says nothing about deleting posts and nothing about when settings may be changed back. This guide does not recommend deleting anything.
FAQ
Does the public-profile instruction apply to a CR-1 or IR-1 spouse visa? The March 30, 2026 instruction names nonimmigrant categories only. The DS-260 immigrant visa application carries the five-year social media question, and the Department states that it vets all applicants, but this announcement does not instruct immigrant visa applicants to change privacy settings.
We are filing inside the United States. Do we need to make our accounts public? The instruction quoted above is the State Department's, addressed to visa applicants at consulates. USCIS has published notices to collect social media identifiers on its own forms, including the I-485; whether and how those questions appear on a given edition of a form is something to check on the form itself.
Do accounts I no longer use count? The form asks for identifiers used on the listed platforms during the five years before the application. An account used within that window is within the question whether or not it is still active. Identifiers on platforms the form does not list are an optional field on both the DS-160 and the DS-260.
Does the requirement end after the visa is issued? The announcement ties the instruction to visa vetting and does not say when settings may be changed back. It is silent on what happens after issuance.
General information, not legal advice for your specific case. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Written for GC4S readers; the attorney's Korean-language newspaper column on the same topic is linked above as the original.
Free eligibility checkServices & pricing
Cho & Associates · 35-24 154th St., Flushing, NY 11354 · jd@choattorneys.com