Democrats Control Congress: What Does This Mean for Trump's Immigration Policies?

Livestream originally aired November 10, 2026.

Transcript:

Well the midterms are over and everybody is wondering how is this going to make a difference for immigration in this country?

Today we are going to break all of that down.

We now have a Democratic majority in Congress in the United States and people are wondering is this going to effect change overnight, or how is this actually going to play out?

And here is the real takeaway I want everybody to remember as we we will go into detail, but President Trump is still exactly that President. And the President we’re gonna do a little civics lesson today, is still the head of the executive agencies which means that President Trump can still direct ICE, CBP, USCIS, Department of Labor to make changes that are more in line with his agenda.

But at the same time Congress does play a role in how some of this can be affected.

So why don’t we break it down?

So the first thing I want everybody to know is, let’s go over what changes can Congress make? What what can Congress do to help change the immigration agenda or change the way it’s implemented in the United States?

And I think the most important thing to keep in mind is they have oversight of these agencies. They can hold hearings, subpoena records and require USCIS, DHS, ICE, CBP and the State Department to explain what policies, processing delays, and enforcement practices are appropriate.

They can also challenge these controversial immigration policies. They can introduce legislation to reverse or limit policies such as the $100,000 H-1B fee or restrictions on employment authorization and heightened immigration screening requirements.

But again when we think about legislation is that the most powerful tool that Congress can have? Yes, theoretically, but comprehensive immigration reform has not happened since the mid-’90s. It has historically under any administration been proven very difficult for Congress to effect change on the legislation level. Is it possible? Yes, it is. But am I holding my breath for it? No, I am not.

What I am more looking forward to is seeing how they can use appropriations, for instance, to use federal funding as leverage. Congress can influence how much immigration agency or how immigration agencies spend their money. That includes funding for immigration enforcement, staffing, and processing improvements.

They can again introduce legislation to recapture unused immigrant visas. They can increase visa availability, modify per-country limitations, or provide additional pathways for highly skilled workers, but those things require legislation which requires a concerted effort on behalf of Congress.

They can also use legislation to reform the H-1B program.

They can also push for this is not without legislation push for greater transparency, accountability, and efficiency at USCIS and US consulates including reporting requirements and measures addressing excessive processing delays.

They have the right to check in through their committees to say, “Government, explain yourself. What is going on here? What are you doing? Why are these problems persisting? Give me a breakdown of exactly the steps you’ve taken to try to ameliorate or make less of an issue than what we are actually seeing right now,” and can demand answers.

They can also propose legislation to improve or restrict certain enforcement practices. This can limit certain enforcement activities, like establishing additional procedural protections or restricting funding for particular initiatives.

They can also use legislation to challenge agency regulations themselves, saying, “Hey, these regulations aren’t really right. We’ve got to make some changes here.”

The Senate in particular can scrutinize and vote on presidential nominees requiring confirmation, including certain officials responsible for immigration policy.

And finally they can do a better job at negotiating a bipartisan immigration reform so they can pursue legislation addressing employment-based immigration, border security, family immigration and other priorities.

But remember passing legislation generally requires approval from both chambers of Congress and the president’s signature. Overriding a presidential veto requires a two-thirds majority in both chambers, and most legislation also needs 60 votes to overcome a Senate filibuster.

So again why I say why legislative changes really haven’t happened much historically is because there are protections in place to make it very difficult for a bill to actually pass.

But the numbers are somewhat in our favor here so it is possible that it could technically overcome these limitations if the government actually put together meaningful legislation reform.

So again there are tools. You can use congressional oversight. You can, you can use the power of federal funding. You can propose legislation. You can challenge these agencies and say “What are we doing here?”

But ultimately remember Trump is still in power.

He can continue issuing executive orders.

He can continue to implement new immigration regulations through DHS, including Customs and Border Protection, ICE, USCIS, or the State Department.

He can change the way that change policies of how agencies enact certain areas of the law.

He can continue to maintain heightened immigration enforcement, and remember, you know, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act gave immigration and border enforcement about $170 billion in 2025, which runs through 2029, and Republicans also funded ICE and Border Patrol 3 years in advance this year so a new Congress can’t really easily take that back.

He can also continue or his government can continue to impose or maintain certain travel restrictions because, remember, the president has statutory authority to restrict entry of certain foreign nationals, and he can also influence visa processing, continue to influence visa processing at the State Department. So the where embassies and consulates need to issue visas, he can continue to promulgate his policies in saying, “We are going to loosen or tighten certain ways of doing things to determine that who is coming into the United States meets with my agenda.”

And he will continue to defend his policies in federal court, but of course, I expect this administration to do it exactly what they’ve continuing they’ve been continuing to do throughout his entire administration, which is to continuously drop again and again and again and again more new immigration executive orders, more new policies, more new proclamations, more proposed rules that are geared towards limiting both legal and illegal immigration in the United States.

And again as said previously, this president can continue to or will be able to veto legislation that this new Congress creates.

So if the government does not like what Congress has put forward, he can veto it, and unless two-thirds of the Congress then comes back and says, “we really wanna push this through,” we’re gonna have a stalemate, and and finally again the executive branch can continue to control day-to-day immigration operations including staffing priorities, resource allocation, operational procedures within of course statutory and budget limits.

So do I see more pressure happening under this administration in this next half of it? Yes, absolutely. Do I think President Trump will change anything about how he’s been operating thus far? No, I do not, but certainly we are in a better place than we were for the first half of this term because we now have a Congress who can push back, demand oversight, uh cre- allocate funding for more resources to clear backlogs, um, and help push things forward a little bit better.

And hopefully you know we will break from history and actually see meaningful legislative change in this country.

Now as promised on this webinar there’s a few other things that have been happening in the last few weeks that should be discussed, which is in line with what we’ve already been talking about which is that what if President Trump’s final rule effective October 14th took away automatic EAD extensions. So unless you’re in specific cases like some individuals with temporary protected status, or you have, um, a STEM OPT application automatic extensions of work authorizations, my friends are unfortunately now a thing of the past, meaning if you file to renew your status, which expires your work authorization, which expires March, if you file in December but it’s not approved by March, when your work authorization expires unfortunately you will have a gap in your employment until that employment authorization document is approved. You will no longer benefit from an auto extension for timely filed applications.

Another big thing that’s on the horizon is there is a proposed rule right now to end prior deference. That’s just a fancy way of saying, “Hey, if we previously approved your employment-based petition under the same set of facts that currently stand for you and you are renewing your status,” so let’s say the same employer, the same job description, the same job title, the same work site, nothing’s really changed. Maybe you have a little bit of a higher salary, maybe you have a few additional duties, but all in all it’s the same thing. Previously the government has codified prior deference and said, “Hey, if we approved you before on the same set of facts we’re probably gonna approve you again.” But under this proposed rule the government would say, “Eh, actually we’re going to look at your renewal petition as if it’s the first time you’ve applied and we don’t care if we approved you the first time around. We have the right to determine once again if you really do meet the eligibility requirements for this particular work permit, and we do not have to honor our previous approval. We can deny you again in the future.”

Another thing that’s on the agenda is there are some big proposed changes to PERM which is a process by which we test the US labor market to determine whether there are available workers to um fill a permanent role in the United States. It’s the first step by which we can sponsor a foreign national to have permanent employment here with a particular employer.

There’s and this is no surprise we’ve seen a lot in the news in the last several months and years about different major companies having these their PERM processes under fire or now in recent times, suspended based on their practices being somewhat questionable.

Meaning for instance when they’re recruiting workers they are making everybody who is applying for the same position as this foreign national mail in their application, where every other person at their company applying for any other job could apply online.

So even though something might be completely lawful under immigration law it may be problematic from an employment law perspective, and that’s what many large companies are facing right now. Microsoft, Adobe, Tata Consulting, Infosys, the list goes on and on.

These companies are having their PERM cases suspended because the government is really scrutinizing them which is likely a reason for this new PERM overhaul, and lastly I guess this is somewhat good news.

As we know there’s been a yo-yoing a back-and-forthing of this $100,000 H-1B rule.

Attorneys are reporting that they are successfully securing H-1Bs for individuals without paying this $100,000 fee rule, even if they are currently out of the country.

Time will tell on this.

There is another proposed rule this time for a $103,265 fee that would be imposed for every new immigration cap filing. That is for all first time applicants that employers must pay.

And remains to be seen how that will come to fruition but you can bet that Berardi Immigration Law is staying on top of all of these developments, and we continue to be your one-stop shop for all things employment-based immigration.

And if you have questions or concerns, or simply want to know more about the immigration process please subscribe to our channel, share this video with someone you might that might benefit from it, and stay tuned.

Thanks so much.