DHS Ends the Automatic Extension of Work Permits (EADs)

Status: In effect now — Removal of the Automatic Extension of Employment Authorization Documents (DHS interim final rule, RIN 1615-AD05) (RIN 1615-AD05; FR Doc. 2025-19702 (90 FR 48799); litigation No. 8:26-cv-00060 (C.D. Cal.))

In effect. The DHS interim final rule took effect on October 30, 2025 and applies to EAD renewal applications (Form I-765) filed on or after that date; those renewals no longer receive an automatic extension. The rule is being challenged in federal court (Jane Doe 1 et al. v. DHS, Central District of California, No. 8:26-cv-00060), where a motion for a preliminary injunction was set for argument on June 24, 2026; as of June 30, 2026 the court had not ruled and the rule remained in force and unblocked. A separate challenge in the District of Columbia was voluntarily dismissed on June 2, 2026.

Next step: A ruling from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on the plaintiffs' preliminary-injunction motion in Jane Doe 1 et al. v. DHS. If granted, it could pause or block the rule nationwide; if denied, the rule would stay in effect. No ruling had been issued as of June 30, 2026.

Verified against the primary source as of 2026-07-25 — status can change with a single court ruling. Official source.

What’s happening

In effect. The DHS interim final rule took effect on October 30, 2025 and applies to EAD renewal applications (Form I-765) filed on or after that date; those renewals no longer receive an automatic extension. The rule is being challenged in federal court (Jane Doe 1 et al. v. DHS, Central District of California, No. 8:26-cv-00060), where a motion for a preliminary injunction was set for argument on June 24, 2026; as of June 30, 2026 the court had not ruled and the rule remained in force and unblocked. A separate challenge in the District of Columbia was voluntarily dismissed on June 2, 2026.

Who it affects

People who file Form I-765 to renew an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) on or after October 30, 2025 in categories that previously qualified for the automatic extension — for example, adjustment-of-status applicants (c)(9), asylum applicants (c)(8), and H-4 and L-2 dependent spouses. For these renewals, the work permit is no longer extended automatically while USCIS processes the case; if the replacement card has not been issued before the current EAD expires, employment authorization lapses and the worker generally must stop working until the new card arrives. The change applies only to renewals filed on or after October 30, 2025: EADs that were already automatically extended before that date keep their extension, and separate TPS-related automatic extensions granted through Federal Register notices are not affected. As a measure of scale, USCIS reported receiving an average of about 52,800 automatic-extension-eligible renewal EAD applications per month in fiscal year 2023. (Note: the rule does not state that 800,000 renewal applicants per year are affected; that 800,000 figure was a USCIS projection of applicants who could have faced an EAD lapse over the roughly 22-month period from May 2024 to March 2026 had the temporary 540-day extension not been in place.)

How it got here

  1. Oct 30, 2025 DHS publishes the interim final rule 'Removal of the Automatic Extension of Employment Authorization Documents' (90 FR 48799), effective the same day; EAD renewal applications filed on or after this date no longer receive the up-to-540-day automatic extension.
  2. Dec 1, 2025 The public comment period on the interim final rule closes.
  3. Jan 8, 2026 Seven H-4 dependent spouses file Jane Doe 1 et al. v. DHS in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (No. 8:26-cv-00060), challenging the rule under the Administrative Procedure Act.
  4. May 8, 2026 Judge David O. Carter converts the plaintiffs' emergency application into a motion for a preliminary injunction; briefing follows (DHS opposition May 28, plaintiffs' reply June 4).
  5. Jun 24, 2026 A hearing on the preliminary-injunction motion is set before Judge Carter; as of June 30, 2026 the court has not ruled and the rule remains in effect.

What to watch next

A ruling from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on the plaintiffs’ preliminary-injunction motion in Jane Doe 1 et al. v. DHS. If granted, it could pause or block the rule nationwide; if denied, the rule would stay in effect. No ruling had been issued as of June 30, 2026.

Official sources

This page is general information about ongoing litigation, not legal advice. A case’s status can change with a single ruling, and outcomes can turn on facts specific to each person. For advice on a specific situation, consult a licensed immigration attorney or a DOJ-accredited representative.