USCIS Authorized to Expand Law Enforcement Authorities with New Special Agent Roles

USCIS Authorized to Expand Law-Enforcement Functions? What It Would Mean—and What Stays the Same

USCIS’s core mission is benefits adjudication (visas, green cards, naturalization). Within that mission, the agency already combats fraud through its Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS) directorate. This directorate conducts administrative inquiries, database vetting, and unannounced site visits (for example, to verify H-1B or L-1 job duties and worksites). FDNS can refer suspected crimes to DHS partners—primarily Homeland Security Investigations (ICE/HSI)—and to the Department of Justice.

If USCIS were formally authorized to expand law-enforcement authorities with new “special agent” roles, here’s what that would likely mean in practice:

1) Clearer criminal–administrative handoffs.
Specialized USCIS agents could package fraud referrals with stronger evidentiary records. This includes sworn statements and preservation of digital evidence, speeding decisions on whether HSI or prosecutors should open a case.

2) More structured field activity.
Expect better-documented worksite verifications, standardized interview protocols, and improved chain-of-custody for records. These would be gathered during FDNS visits. Routine compliance reviews would still focus on administrative verification.

3) Narrow focus on benefit fraud and national security.
Any expanded role would likely target document fraud, sham employment, sham marriages, identity theft, and security-related ineligibilities. This would not encompass general immigration enforcement at large, which remains with ICE and CBP.

4) Due process remains.
Even with enhanced investigative capacity, USCIS must follow the INA, regulations, and the Policy Manual. They must issue RFEs/NOIDs, honor representation, and base outcomes on the record.

How applicants and employers should prepare—now

  • Accuracy first: Ensure petitions match reality (duties, wages, worksites, corporate structure).
  • Audit files: Keep public access files, itineraries, and payroll evidence current; preserve onboarding and I-9 records.
  • Interview readiness: Train designated points of contact; be courteous, truthful, and limit responses to what is asked.
  • Incident response plan: If potential fraud surfaces, involve counsel early to assess withdrawal, amendment, or self-disclosure strategies and to protect legal privilege.

Bottom line: Whether or not “special agent” roles expand, USCIS will continue to scrutinize fraud while adjudicating benefits. Strong, consistent evidence—and proactive compliance—remains the best defense..

America’s Immigration Laws

Court Agrees with Remand Request After BIA Misconstrues California Penal Code §1473.7(a)(1)

A request for remand was not frivolous because the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) made a clear error. The BIA misconstrued a California law and a state court order. The state order had vacated a petitioner’s plea. It found the plea was constitutionally deficient. This error by the BIA justified sending the case back for a new review.


This case highlights the link between state and federal law in immigration cases. California Penal Code §1473.7(a)(1) lets people who are no longer in custody challenge a conviction. The challenge must be based on a “legally invalid” plea. A plea is legally invalid if an attorney made a prejudicial error. For example, they may have failed to advise a defendant of immigration consequences. This is a crucial issue for noncitizens, as convictions can lead to deportation.

The BIA is the highest administrative body for immigration law. It must consider state court records and state law when reviewing a case. In this instance, a state court had set aside the petitioner’s conviction under the California law. This action nullified the conviction.


The BIA’s Mistake

The BIA failed to properly recognize the effect of the state court’s order. BIA policy is to give effect to state orders that vacate convictions due to a defect in the original proceedings. The state court’s finding of a “constitutionally deficient” plea meant the conviction was legally invalid from the start.

The BIA, however, did not give the state order its proper weight. It likely saw the vacatur as an attempt to avoid deportation. It did not see it as a correction of a legal error. This misinterpretation was a legal mistake. Therefore, a remand was a necessary and proper step for the petitioner to correct the BIA’s error. The petitioner was not relitigating facts. Instead, they were asking the BIA to re-examine the legal effect of the state court’s decision. This confirms that a remand is a valid action when a legal body makes a clear error.

Removal Defense Counsel

California Immigration

— California Immigration: how we defend clients facing removal proceedings When a person is placed in removal (deportation) proceedings, the legal stakes are high and timing is critical. Removal defense requires rapid evidence-gathering, procedural strategy, and careful evaluation of relief options — asylum, cancellation of removal, adjustment, waivers, voluntary departure, or motions to terminate. Therefore, …

Read more

Attorney PINS for Immigration Law Firm

Immigration Law Firm PINS Immigration Law Firm PINS is the international movement of people to a destination country of which they are not natives or where they do not possess citizenship in order to settle as permanent residents or naturalized citizens. Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner, APC is the premier for fraud investigations and legal representation. We are a modern and remote law …

Read more

Los Angeles Immigration Attorney

Regarding Immigration Law, in 2000, I passed a rigorous examination and extensive experience requirements by the State Bar of California, Board of Legal Specialization. As a Los Angeles Immigration Attorney who is a certified specialist in Immigration and Nationality Law, my firm handles every type of immigration case from deportation cases from all over the …

Read more

We have hope yet, A Biden immigration policy: New hope for immigrants

California Immigration

We Have Hope Yet: A Biden-Era Immigration Path—New Hope for Immigrants There is a path forward. While U.S. immigration remains complex, recent policy trends have opened practical doors for many families and workers—and created space for fairer, faster decisions.  Bottom lineHope is not a slogan—it’s a strategy. With the right category, waiver planning, and persuasive …

Read more

Contact Form