DHS Proposes Ending 60-Day Grace Period for H-1B Workers After Job Loss

DHS filed a proposal, not an immediately effective rule

WASHINGTON — The Department of Homeland Security has proposed eliminating the discretionary grace period that can allow certain temporary foreign workers to remain in the United States for up to 60 days after their employment ends, according to a federal filing and Reuters reporting published Thursday.

The Office of the Federal Register placed the document titled “Eliminating the Discretionary 60-day Grace Period” on public inspection and scheduled it for publication Friday, September 11. The filing is a proposed rule, not a final rule or an order that took effect Thursday.

That distinction is essential: the existing grace-period regulation remains in place while DHS receives public comments and decides whether to issue, revise or abandon a final rule. What’s the Scoop With Broach found no announcement that the current protection has already been eliminated.

What the current 60-day provision does

Current regulations give DHS discretion to treat covered workers and their dependents as maintaining lawful nonimmigrant status for up to 60 consecutive calendar days after employment ends, or until the end of the worker's authorized validity period, whichever is shorter.

The period can give a laid-off worker time to obtain new employer sponsorship, seek a different lawful status or prepare to leave the country. It does not automatically provide 60 days in every case, extend an already expired admission period or authorize employment for a new employer by itself.

The proposal would remove that post-employment buffer. Reuters reported that affected workers would generally need to depart when the sponsoring employment ends unless another lawful basis to remain is secured.

The change reaches beyond H-1B visa holders

The proposed change covers workers in E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, O-1 and TN classifications, according to Reuters. Those categories include treaty traders and investors, specialty-occupation workers, intracompany transferees, people with extraordinary ability and qualifying Canadian and Mexican professionals.

Because the current regulation also addresses dependents of covered workers, the practical effects can extend to spouses and children whose status is connected to the principal worker. Family consequences would depend on each person's status, admission period and any timely filing made before employment ends.

The proposal should not be described as an end to H-1B visas, a cancellation of every existing visa or an order removing all affected workers. It targets one period of discretionary protection after employment ceases.

A job loss would carry faster immigration consequences

If DHS finalizes the proposal as described, a termination could create immediate pressure for the worker, a prospective new employer and immigration counsel to act. Reuters reported that business-immigration lawyers warned the change would sharply compress the time available to manage layoffs and offboarding for foreign-national employees.

Employers seeking to retain a worker through a different sponsor may still have petition options, including Form I-129 procedures where applicable, but eligibility and timing depend on the specific classification and facts. A proposed rule does not provide individualized legal advice or guarantee that a petition will be accepted.

Ending the grace period would not mean that a person is physically deported the moment a job ends. Removal requires separate legal authority and process. It would, however, eliminate a widely used regulatory period during which covered workers may be treated as maintaining status after the employment relationship stops.

DHS frames the proposal around U.S. workers and new petitions

Reuters reported that DHS acknowledged possible disruption for employers but argued they could offer openings to qualified United States workers or pursue the petition process when they still require a foreign worker.

That is the administration's policy rationale, not proof that every affected job has an immediately available domestic applicant or that every departing worker could later return. Employers, workers, unions, universities and industry groups can challenge DHS's assumptions during the comment period.

California's technology, research, health-care, higher-education and professional-services employers are among the institutions likely to scrutinize the proposal. The filing does not create a California-specific rule; it would operate nationally if finalized.

What happens next

DHS plans a two-month public comment period after the proposal is published, Reuters reported. The agency must review relevant comments before issuing any final rule, and a final version could differ from the proposal.

The Federal Register warns that its public-inspection document is unpublished and scheduled for September 11. The final published notice will provide the controlling comment instructions and deadlines; readers should use that official docket rather than links circulated by immigration marketers or social-media accounts.

Workers facing an actual termination should not rely on a headline or assume either that the proposal is already law or that 60 days is guaranteed in their case. Individual status, expiration dates and pending filings can change the analysis, and qualified immigration counsel can review those facts.

About the image

The accompanying image is an authentic December 2012 photograph of a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services office in the Northlake area of DeKalb County, Georgia. It provides agency context but does not depict an H-1B worker, a layoff, the September 2026 proposal or an immigration proceeding.

Wikimedia Commons contributor Gulbenk released the photograph under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0. Its use does not imply endorsement by the photographer, USCIS, DHS or Wikimedia Commons.