A proposed US immigration rule backed by the Trump administration could effectively halt work authorisation for asylum seekers indefinitely, according to a coalition of state attorneys general who have urged federal officials to withdraw the plan.California Attorney General Rob Bonta has led a group of states in opposing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposal, which would change how Employment Authorisation Documents (EADs) are processed for people with pending asylum cases.The rule would increase the waiting time for asylum seekers to apply for work permits from six months to one year. After that, processing could take between 30 and 180 days.The proposal would also pause all new work permit applications if asylum processing takes more than 180 days. Officials say such delays could last for years, effectively blocking asylum seekers from getting work permits for an indefinite time.In a public statement, Bonta said the move would harm both individuals and the wider economy.“Asylum seekers need a fair and efficient system that allows them to work legally while they await decisions on their applications for asylum, which will allow them to contribute to our communities and build lives,” said Attorney General Bonta.He added: “I am committed to defending and empowering immigrants to support their families and help our communities thrive, while protecting California’s economic and humanitarian interests from unjustified obstacles created by the Trump Administration. Once again, the federal government has taken drastic measures — indefinitely pausing critical legal work authorizations for asylum seekers that will have serious consequences. I strongly oppose this proposed rule.”According to the coalition letter, the policy could leave asylum seekers unable to legally work, increasing the risk of exploitation, financial hardship, and instability. The states warned it would also affect local economies, reduce tax revenue, increase healthcare costs, and place additional pressure on public services and law enforcement.They estimate the economic impact could reach up to $126.6 billion in lost annual compensation for asylum seekers.The attorneys general argue the rule would harm physical and mental health, food security, housing stability, and access to healthcare and legal services, while forcing some individuals into unsafe working conditions.The coalition also claims the proposal violates US administrative law, saying it is “arbitrary and capricious” because it ignores evidence and fails to properly assess its impact.Alongside California, the letter is supported by attorneys general from Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawai‘i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and the District of Columbia.The proposed rule has not yet been finalised, and DHS has not withdrawn it, but it is now facing legal and political opposition from multiple states.
