The rule, though effective immediately, includes a 60-day public comment window as part of a broader regulatory process that could yield a final revised version.

DHS General Counsel James Percival frames the reform as tightening the system against exploitation and delays attributed to open-borders attorneys.

Officials say the reform tackles exploitation and speeds enforcement, though immigration experts caution it could push more rapid deportations without adequately identifying legitimate asylum claims.

Reporting notes that immigration courts operate under the Department of Justice rather than an independent judiciary, raising concerns about due process and adjudicatory independence.

The plan fits a broader hardline approach to illegal immigration, aiming to boost removals of nondocumented people per government statements and advocacy responses.

DHS argues the current system is overburdened and open to exploitation, and the rule aims to ensure resources go toward timely protection for genuine asylum seekers.

Officials say the change directs resources to timely adjudication and helps identify individuals who pose risks to public safety or national security through removal hearings with adversarial proceedings.

Critics argue the policy undermines international refugee protections and could turn the asylum system into a deportation machine.

Officials describe the asylum system as in crisis and claim the reform redirects resources to timely adjudication, addressing delays and misuses that allowed work authorizations.

A sweeping interim final rule from USCIS and DHS scrubs the asylum officer interview for many applicants, sending cases directly to immigration court for removal proceedings, with immediate effect and the potential impact on up to 444,000 pending cases.

The administration argues the change will reduce backlogs, prevent delays or work-permit abuse, and redirect resources toward timely adjudication of legitimate asylum claims.

Advocates warn the shift jeopardizes due process, potentially leaving vulnerable migrants in unsafe positions while policy emphasizes mass denial and deportations.