After the Nov. 3 Election, Marriage Green Card Interview Prep Stays the Same

Democrats' demands to reform enforcement contained no specific provision to prevent arrests at interviews, and the arrests continued until just before the election

In the Nov. 3 midterm elections, Democrats won both the Senate and the House. Many point to prices and the war in Iran for the Republican loss, but exit polls also show opposition to immigration enforcement. In an NBC News exit poll (updated late Nov. 4), 58% of voters said the Trump administration's immigration enforcement had "gone too far." For couples preparing for a green card through a spouse who is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident, this column sorts out what the election changes and what stays the same.

Voters Turned Against Enforcement, and the Lame-Duck Period Has Begun

"According to the NBC News exit poll, Republican House candidates won 34% of Latino voters in this election, a sharp drop from the 46% who voted for President Trump in the presidential election two years ago."

In the same poll, 90% of those who said enforcement had gone too far voted for Democratic candidates. In a separate question, 60% of voters disapproved of how Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is doing its job.

The backlash grew after two U.S. citizens were shot and killed by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis in January. In March, Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson said the party had "a little hiccup" with some Hispanic and Latino voters because some immigration enforcement was viewed as over-zealous, and that the party was "in a course-correction mode."

In a September campaign ad, Republican Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar of Miami told the president directly that some of the enforcement had gone too far.

The new Congress begins on Jan. 3, 2027. Under the Constitution, President Trump cannot be elected again, and now his party has also lost its majority in Congress. His remaining two years are a lame-duck period.

Robert Garcia, the incoming chair of the House Oversight Committee, named the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and ICE as targets for investigation. If hearings and subpoenas for witnesses follow, agents in the field may become more careful. Even inside the administration, Vice President JD Vance said in a Nov. 4 social media post that he was open to changing enforcement by focusing more on businesses that hire illegal labor.

Democrats' 10 Reform Demands Did Not Include a Ban on Interview Arrests

"A Feb. 4 letter from Democratic leaders to Republican leaders listed places where enforcement should be avoided: 'medical facilities, schools, child-care facilities, churches, polling places, courts, etc.'"

The letter came from Democratic leaders Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer and was addressed to Speaker Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune. In it, Democrats, who will soon be the majority party, listed 10 reforms they demanded at the time in return for supporting DHS funding. These included getting a court warrant before entering private property such as a home, banning agents from wearing masks, requiring agents to show identification, and requiring body cameras. The list of places ends with "etc.," but the offices of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), where marriage green card interviews are held, were not named. The letter came nearly three months after arrests at green card interviews began in San Diego on Nov. 12, 2025, according to immigration lawyers there. It did demand immediate access to a lawyer in detention centers, but not an end to on-the-spot arrests of people who come for interviews.

And most of these demands never became law. When DHS funding passed on April 30, it included money for body cameras, but the mask ban and the warrant requirement were left out. In June, Republicans, without Democratic votes, set aside a separate $70 billion or so for immigration and border enforcement and related purposes, again leaving out those two items.

Just Before the Election, a Marriage Green Card Applicant Was Arrested at His Interview

"ICE said in a statement that when someone has applied for relief such as a green card, '[a] new or pending relief does not cancel, pause, or prevent enforcement of that removal order.'"

According to a U.S. District Court order in Minnesota, two agents of ICE, the enforcement agency, arrested William Lizardo, a dentist from Canada, at the end of his USCIS interview in St. Paul on Oct. 23. He came to the United States on an F-1 student visa in 2019 and finished dental school. In 2023 he married a dental-school classmate who is a U.S. citizen and applied for a green card. His wife's petition for him (Form I-130) was approved earlier, in January 2025.

But in January 2026, USCIS denied his green card application (Form I-485). He was denied because he did not have a certified court record from Ontario, Canada, showing that a 2012 charge had been withdrawn after he met the conditions of a diversion program. The denial notice said that if he did not leave the United States within 33 days, USCIS "may issue you a Notice to Appear" in immigration court (a court, separate from USCIS, that decides whether a person will be deported).

On Feb. 5, through his lawyer, he filed Form I-290B, asking for the denial to be reviewed again. But on Feb. 24, DHS issued a Notice to Appear and sent it to an old address where he no longer lived. On March 26, a removal order was issued at a hearing he did not attend. USCIS had communicated with him at each new address, but he first learned of both the Notice to Appear and the removal order at his interview.

ICE said that "a records check showed he has a final order of removal." In other words, he was arrested not for the interview but for a removal order issued before it.

On Oct. 28, the immigration court found there was enough evidence that he had not received notice. It canceled the removal order issued in his absence and reopened his case. On Nov. 1, in a separate lawsuit, federal Judge Michael J. Davis ordered his release. The judge wrote that Mr. Lizardo had filed a change of address with the post office and USCIS every time he moved, and that USCIS's own records were enough to show he no longer lived at the old address. The judge added that Mr. Lizardo was held only because of USCIS's mistake.

People without removal orders have been arrested, too. According to KPBS, a San Diego broadcaster, when arrests happened there in November 2025, lawyers said ICE's stated reason for most of them was that the green card applicants had overstayed their visas. The lawyers pointed out that spouses of U.S. citizens who entered on a visa can apply for a green card inside the United States even if they overstayed, as long as they meet the other requirements. Yet people were arrested for it. ICE said Mr. Lizardo had also overstayed, but his lawyer disputed this.

It Is Too Soon for Optimism

"On Nov. 4, the day after the election, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin posted a single sentence on the social media site X: 'Deportations will continue.'"

The executive branch still has the power to direct enforcement. The roughly $70 billion set aside in June can be used until Sept. 30, 2029, so the new Congress cannot easily limit ICE by cutting its budget. If Congress tries to change the law, the president can veto it.

A lame-duck administration may instead hurry to issue regulations and executive actions that do not need Congress's approval. CNN reported that administration lawyers are reviewing executive actions on immigration, such as tightening visa rules.

Amnesty (legalizing undocumented immigrants as a group) also looks unlikely. Vice President Vance, who said enforcement could change, wrote in the same post that "anyone pushing amnesty is lying to you." And in a Nov. 4 letter to fellow lawmakers, House Democratic Leader Jeffries listed goals for the first 100 days, and immigration was not among them.

The standards for reviewing marriage green card applications have not changed. Whether to hold an interview, which documents to review, and how to judge financial ability are decided by USCIS regulations and guidance, and these do not change right away because of an election result. Applications postmarked or filed online on or after Sept. 18 are already subject to a new public charge rule (the standard for deciding whether a person is likely to depend on government benefits in the future), which restores broader discretion for officers.

Conclusion

The election clearly shifted the political momentum. But marriage green card applications are reviewed under the current rules, and arrests at interviews have continued. There are three things to do now. First, do not hold off on filing just to wait for policies to change.

Second, if you have ever received a USCIS denial notice or any immigration court papers, check before you file or before your interview whether you have a removal case in immigration court. As Mr. Lizardo's case shows, even if USCIS can reach you without trouble, you may not know about an immigration court case. You can check by entering your A-number (the alien registration number printed on USCIS notices) and country of nationality on the immigration court case lookup site (acis.eoir.justice.gov), or by calling 1-800-898-7180. Not every case appears there, so also look again at any USCIS or court papers you received in the past. Even without a court case, a person who has overstayed can be arrested, so before the interview, decide who will take care of your children and whom to notify if you are detained.

Third, every time you move, report your change of address to USCIS and keep a record of it. The judge in Mr. Lizardo's case cited these records as a reason for his release. If you have an immigration court case, you must also notify the immigration court separately.

If you have overstayed, had an application denied, or were ever arrested or charged with a crime, even long ago, check, as you prepare to file, how that record will be treated in the review and what documents you will need. Mr. Lizardo was denied for lacking the court record of a withdrawn, closed case.

FAQ

Now that Democrats control Congress, will arrests at marriage green card interviews stop? They are unlikely to stop right away. The 10 enforcement reforms that Democratic leaders demanded in February did not specifically name the USCIS offices where marriage green card interviews are held, and most of those demands did not become law. On Oct. 23, before the election, an applicant in Minnesota was arrested by ICE right after finishing a USCIS interview. The executive branch still has the power to direct enforcement.

Can applying for a green card stop a removal order that was already issued? ICE has said that a new or pending request for relief, such as a green card application, does not cancel, pause, or prevent enforcement of a removal order. In the Minnesota case, too, the reason for the arrest was not the interview itself but a removal order that had been issued without the applicant knowing. He went free only after the immigration court found he had not received notice and reopened his case, and a federal judge in a separate lawsuit ordered his release.

How can you check whether you have a case in immigration court? You can check on the immigration court case lookup site (acis.eoir.justice.gov) by entering your A-number and country of nationality, or by calling 1-800-898-7180. Not every case appears there, so it is a good idea to also look again at USCIS and court papers you received in the past. If you have an immigration court case, you must notify the immigration court of an address change separately, even if you already notified USCIS.

General information, not legal advice for your specific case. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. English translation of the attorney's Korean-language newspaper column.

Free eligibility checkServices & pricing

Cho & Associates · 35-24 154th St., Flushing, NY 11354 · jd@choattorneys.com