Trump’s EB-1A Policy Shifts in 2026 and What They Did to Evidentiary Standards
Most of what gets called a “Trump policy shift” in 2026 is not a rule change. It is an adjudication shift. The EB-1A regulations have not been rewritten. The Code of Federal Regulations still lists the same ten criteria, and applicants still need to satisfy three to reach final merits review. What changed is how officers read the evidence in front of them. At Jinee, we have watched this shift case by case through the last three quarters, and the pattern is consistent enough to plan around.
Team Jinee
Extraordinary Ability. Precisely Positioned.
Updated May 2026
6 min read
FY2025
Several law firms reported softer approval trends
66.6%
EB-2 NIW approval rate, Q3 FY2025
3 of 10
Current EB-1A criteria threshold (unchanged)
Jan 2026
Draft DHS modernization rule expected
On This Page
Overview
The Four Changes
Takeaways
Strategy
FAQs
References
EB-1A approval rates dropped to roughly 66.6 percent in Q3 of FY2025 after sitting higher earlier in the year. EB-2 NIW fell harder, to around 54 percent. No criterion was deleted and no new form was issued.
They are not the same thing, and treating them as one news story has caused most of the confusion. The modernization rule is still proposed, while the vetting and FBI changes are already affecting cases this quarter. DHS’s regulatory agenda lists the Petition for Immigrant Worker Reforms rule for employment-based immigrant petitions in EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. (RegInfo)
— Team Jinee
01-
What actually changed in 2026
The Trump administration cannot rewrite the EB-1A statute without Congress, and it has not tried. The 8 CFR 204.5(h) regulatory criteria are intact. The Kazarian two-step framework still governs adjudication and the shift is happening in three places that the executive branch does control: the USCIS Policy Manual, internal officer guidance, and the templates used for Requests for Evidence and Notices of Intent to Deny.
Layer in the broader regulatory environment, the DHS Petition for Immigrant Worker Reforms rule, listed as RIN 1615-AC85 in the Spring 2025 Unified Regulatory Agenda, is expected to publish in draft form in early 2026. That rule would codify many current Policy Manual standards into federal regulation, which is a separate development from the adjudication trends but feeds the same direction. We covered the modernization angle in more depth recently.
Here is what the shift looks like in practice:
- Heavier RFE focus on independent recognition versus self-claimed accomplishments
- Tougher scrutiny of awards from non-juried or pay-to-play sources
- Reduced weight on publications in journals lacking rigorous peer review
- Higher demand for circulation data, citation independence, and source authority
02-
Four ways evidentiary standards tightened
The shifts below are the ones we have seen consistently across recent filings and RFEs. None of them are written into a single new policy memo. They are emerging through the pattern of how cases get evaluated.
01 · “High-fidelity” evidence is now the default expectation
Recent RFEs suggest officers are placing increased emphasis on independently verifiable evidence. An award is no longer enough on its own. The petition now needs to show who selected the recipient, what the selection criteria were, and whether the awarding body has independent stature in the field. Several legal commentators have suggested USCIS could roll out standardized RFE templates explicitly demanding circulation statistics, juror lists, and acceptance rates. We are already seeing those requests in the wild.
What it means practically: every claim in your petition should anticipate a follow-up question about how the claim was verified. Build the evidence file around the verification, not just the achievement.
02 · Modern recognition metrics are getting downgraded
The 2022 to 2024 policy clarifications under the Biden administration explicitly recognized open-source contributions, startup funding milestones, and digital media coverage as valid evidence for STEM EB-1A and O-1A profiles. Those clarifications have not been formally retracted, but several practitioners have flagged a quiet rollback through how RFEs treat that evidence. GitHub fork counts, accelerator selection, and online publication metrics are showing up in RFEs as items USCIS wants reframed against “traditional” measures of distinction.
If your profile leans heavily on modern metrics, do not abandon them instead reframe them. A fork count means more when paired with a letter from a senior engineer at an unrelated company describing how they relied on the work. A startup funding round means more when paired with independent press coverage and a description of the selection process.
03 · AI-assisted RFEs are real, and they read like AI
Multiple immigration firms have reported a noticeable change in RFE quality through late 2025 and early 2026. The RFEs are longer than before, often citing more criteria, but the reasoning inside them is less coherent. Some practitioners believe newer automated screening systems may be contributing to broader, more templated RFEs. The official position is that final decisions still rest with human officers, which is correct. But the initial RFE you respond to may have been substantially generated by a system that does not fully understand your case.
The response strategy adjusts accordingly. RFE responses now need to be more structured, more explicit, and more aggressive about correcting the AI-generated misreadings of evidence. Generic responses get generic denials.
04 · Some commentators are floating a 5-of-10 threshold
This one is speculation, not policy. Some immigration analysts have suggested the proposed DHS rule might raise the EB-1A regulatory criteria threshold from 3 of 10 to as many as 5 of 10. We want to be clear that this is not in any official draft we have seen. It is published commentary from former USCIS policy officials. Whether it materializes in the January 2026 draft rule or not, the practical floor has already moved. Strong petitions today are being built around four to six well-evidenced criteria, not three thin ones. Treat that as the working bar regardless of what the final rule says.
03-
What this means for your filing strategy
01 · Adjust to tighter evidentiary review
Q3 FY2025 approval at 66.6 percent reflects stricter evidence review without formal rule changes, so build petitions assuming maximum scrutiny.
02 · Avoid case-law misreadings
Relevant case law should be cited carefully in cover letters and RFE responses.
03 · Counter AI-assisted RFE patterns
Boilerplate RFEs are more common, so respond with structured legal arguments that close each specific concern.
04 · Use Mukherji ruling defensively
The January 28, 2026 Nebraska ruling challenges arbitrary final-merits denials and can support both responses and federal litigation.
04-
Why strategic preparation outpaces credentials in 2026
A petition that won in 2023 with three lightly evidenced criteria may face an RFE in 2026 with the same evidence. The candidate did not change. The evaluation did. Cases moving through cleanly today share a pattern: every claim is supported by independent third-party verification, every criterion is built four layers deep, and the petition tells a coherent story instead of stacking unrelated achievements.
This is where strategic EB-1A profile building outpaces raw credentials. We have seen self-taught engineers approved on tighter evidence than PhDs because the engineers’ petitions were built for the current evaluation reality. The bar is not a Nobel Prize. It is verifiable, independent, sustained recognition documented in the language USCIS now uses to read evidence.
That is the difference between filing and winning in 2026.
Free assessment under the 2026 framework
If you are unsure how the tightening evidentiary standards apply to your profile, the first step is mapping your evidence against the current adjudication reality, not the regulatory text alone. We do this for free, with no commitment.
Contact us to start your evaluation, or use the details below.
Email: support@jineegreencard.com Book a consultation: foryourjourney.typeform.com/Website
05-
Frequently Asked Questions
Did Trump change the EB-1A regulations in 2026?
No. The EB-1A regulations in 8 CFR 204.5(h) are unchanged. The ten criteria and the 3-of-10 threshold remain in effect. What changed is how officers apply existing standards, with stricter RFE practices and a higher expectation of independent verification.
What is the current EB-1A approval rate in 2026?
USCIS data through Q3 FY2025 showed EB-1A approval rates of approximately 66.6 percent, with EB-2 NIW at around 54 percent. Approval rates fluctuate quarter to quarter, but both categories are running below earlier 2025 levels.
Will the EB-1A criteria threshold rise from 3 of 10 to 5 of 10?
Some commentators have speculated the proposed DHS modernization rule might raise the threshold, but no official draft has confirmed this. The current threshold of 3 of 10 criteria remains in effect. Strong petitions today are still built around four to six well-evidenced criteria.
Are USCIS officers using AI to draft RFEs?
USCIS uses AI tools for fraud screening and pattern matching. Several immigration firms have reported longer, less coherent RFEs that practitioners attribute to AI-assisted drafting. Final adjudication decisions still rest with human officers.
Should I file my EB-1A petition now or wait for the new rules?
File now if your evidence is ready. The current 3-of-10 framework is in effect, and the proposed DHS rule may tighten standards further once finalized. Filing under today’s framework while building evidence to tomorrow’s bar is the safer strategy.
06-
References
How the Trump Administration Could Reshape the EB-1A Green Card Process in 2026 — Reddy Neumann Brown PC: https://www.rnlawgroup.com/how-the-trump-administration-could-reshape-the-eb-1a-green-card-process-in-2026/
What to Expect in High-Skilled Immigration (EB-1, EB-2, O-1) for 2026 — Fakhoury Law Group: https://fakhouryglobal.com/immigration-alerts/what-to-expect-in-high-skilled-immigration-eb-1-eb-2-o-1-for-2026/
