New ‘30-day’ immigrant registration rule: Here’s what to know

The Department of Homeland Security seal is seen on the podium at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement headquarters, Wednesday, April 9, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

WASHINGTON — On April 11, 2025, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem issued a stern public reminder: “All foreign nationals who have been in the United States for more than 30 days must register under longstanding federal law or face legal penalties.”

This directive, framed as an enforcement of the Alien Registration Act, signals a renewed push under the Trump administration to strictly monitor and potentially penalize immigrants, visa holders and undocumented individuals who fall afoul of technical registration requirements.

While the announcement is being touted by the administration as simply enforcing existing law, immigrant communities and legal advocates view it as part of a broader trend of heightened scrutiny and enforcement measures that could lead to increased detentions, removals and legal uncertainty for many immigrants.

Understanding the Alien Registration Act

The Alien Registration Act of 1940 (also known as the Smith Act), codified in 8 U.S.C. § 1302, mandates that “every alien over the age of 14 who remains in the United States for 30 days or more must register with the federal government.” This includes providing fingerprints and basic biographic information. The law also requires foreign nationals to notify DHS of any address change within 10 days (8 U.S.C. § 1305).

Noncompliance can carry penalties ranging from civil fines to criminal prosecution, and in immigration contexts, can even become grounds for removal or inadmissibility.

Although the law has existed for decades, it has rarely been the focus of active enforcement in modern immigration policy. Secretary Noem’s directive now seeks to change that.

Implications under current immigration framework

This directive must be viewed alongside the Trump administration’s broader immigration posture – marked by revived enforcement of the unlawful presence bars under INA § 212(a)(9)(B), where overstaying a visa or accruing unlawful presence of over 180 days (or one year) can trigger 3-year or 10-year bans from re-entry into the United States.

Immigrants who fail to register under the Alien Registration Act may also face discretionary denials of benefits or bars to adjustment of status, particularly if USCIS determines such failure is a negative factor in discretionary relief applications such as:

• Adjustment of status (Form I-485)
• Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) renewals
• Cancellation of removal under INA § 240A
• Temporary Protected Status (TPS) applications
• Work authorization renewals

Who is affected?

The memo, while general in tone, may disproportionately affect:

1. Overstayed visa holders: B-1/B-2 tourist visa holders and F-1 students who remain past their authorized period.
2. Asylum seekers in limbo: Applicants waiting for hearings or decisions who may not yet be formally registered.
3. TPS and DACA beneficiaries: Individuals relying on temporary protections without permanent legal status.
4. Undocumented immigrants: Especially those avoiding contact with federal authorities due to fear of deportation.

Reliefs, defenses and legal remedies

While the directive appears intimidating, affected individuals may explore a range of legal remedies and defenses depending on their circumstances:

• I-601 or I-601A waivers: For those facing inadmissibility due to unlawful presence or technical violations.
• U visa and T visa protections: For victims of crimes or human trafficking who cooperate with law enforcement.
• Asylum or withholding of removal: Based on fear of persecution in the home country.
• Prosecutorial discretion: Where DHS may agree not to pursue removal based on equities, including family ties, medical needs and community contributions.
• Adjustment of status under section 245(i): For those with old petitions filed before April 30, 2001.
• Motions to reopen or terminate proceedings: For those already in removal but with changed circumstances or procedural errors.

Know your rights and act proactively

This revived directive places a burden on immigrants to proactively comply or consult legal counsel to evaluate their exposure. Non-citizens should:

• Verify their legal status and consult attorneys on whether registration is required in their case.
• Maintain accurate address information with USCIS through Form AR-11.
• File late registration if possible, accompanied by a statement explaining the delay.

Legal service providers, community organizations and churches must now urgently help immigrants understand their responsibilities and safeguard themselves from accidental violations that may result in removal or bars to legalization.

Enforcement or entrapment?

While Secretary Noem’s April 11 memo is legally grounded in an old statute, its sudden and forceful application in today’s immigration climate raises serious concerns. Laws long dormant are now weaponized under a policy of attrition, disproportionately harming the most vulnerable.

It is imperative that Congress, the courts and civil society stay vigilant. We must ensure that immigration enforcement does not morph into entrapment – where compliance becomes a moving target and due process is sacrificed at the altar of political performance.

In the meantime, we urge all immigrants to stay informed, seek qualified legal advice and assert their rights under the US Constitution and immigration laws. Justice and compassion must remain pillars of any lawful immigration policy.

Atty. Arnedo S. Valera is the executive director of the Global Migrant Heritage Foundation and managing attorney at Valera & Associates, a US immigration and anti-discrimination law firm for over 32 years. He holds a master’s degree in International Affairs and International Law and Human Rights from Columbia University and was trained at the International Institute of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France. He obtained his Bachelor of Laws from Ateneo de Manila University. He is a professor at San Beda Graduate School of Law (LLM Program), teaching International Security and Alliances.