By Hasan Legal Admin · September 15, 2026
DHS has proposed eliminating the 60-day grace period that currently lets certain employment-based visa holders remain in the U.S. after their job ends. The proposal covers O-1 and H-1B status directly, along with E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B1, L-1, and TN. Nothing has changed yet — but it's worth understanding exactly what's on the table. Here's what the current grace period actually does, what DHS is proposing to change, and why this is worth planning around now rather than after it happens.
DHS has proposed eliminating the 60-day grace period that currently lets certain employment-based visa holders remain in the U.S. after their job ends. The proposal covers O-1 and H-1B status directly, along with E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B1, L-1, and TN. Nothing has changed yet — but it's worth understanding exactly what's on the table.
Here's what the current grace period actually does, what DHS is proposing to change, and why this is worth planning around now rather than after it happens.
A layoff is stressful enough without your immigration status turning into an immediate countdown. Right now, it isn't — for most employment-based nonimmigrant categories, there's a buffer. DHS wants to remove it.
Under current rules, workers in several employment-based nonimmigrant categories — including O-1 and H-1B — generally get up to 60 days after their employment ends to either find new employment and transfer status, change to a different status, or arrange departure from the U.S. That window exists precisely because job loss is rarely instantaneous in terms of what needs to happen next: securing a new employer, filing a change of status or transfer petition, or making travel arrangements all take time that a same-day status cutoff simply doesn't allow for.
DHS has proposed eliminating that 60-day grace period entirely. The proposal covers workers in E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, O-1, and TN status, along with their dependents. Under the proposal, affected workers would generally be expected to leave the United States immediately when their employment ends, unless they have another independent legal basis to remain.
| Current Rule | Proposed Rule | |
|---|---|---|
| Time after employment ends | Up to 60 days | None — expected to leave immediately |
| Categories affected | E-1, E-2, E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, O-1, TN (and dependents) | Same categories |
| Status | Currently in effect | Proposed — not yet in effect |
This is a proposal, not a final rule. Nothing changes for the grace period today. Watch for a Federal Register notice and public comment period before this becomes binding — and note that details, scope, or timing could still shift before any final rule is issued.
O-1 status is already more fragile than some other categories in one respect: it's tied tightly to a specific agent or employer relationship and a specific set of activities. A layoff for an O-1 holder isn't just a job search problem — it's a status problem the moment the employment relationship ends. The current 60-day grace period is often the only breathing room an O-1 holder has to line up a new petitioner, a portable status option, or an alternative pathway before their authorized stay effectively runs out.
Removing that buffer would compress an already tight timeline into something close to zero. For O-1 holders whose extraordinary-ability work often involves specific engagements, productions, or projects rather than open-ended employment, that compression could be especially disruptive.
The same logic applies to H-1B workers, who already navigate one of the more employer-dependent categories in the system. A sudden loss of the grace period would mean less time to find a new H-1B sponsor willing to file a timely transfer, less time to explore a change of status, and less time to make orderly travel arrangements — all compressed into whatever gap exists between an employment termination and an immediate departure expectation.
Regardless of whether this specific proposal is finalized, it's a useful prompt to think through your own contingency plan before you need one: what would you actually do if your employment ended tomorrow? Having an answer — a general sense of alternative status options, or a self-petition pathway that doesn't depend on a single employer at all — is worth having in place before a layoff forces the question.
This proposal is a useful reminder of a structural feature of employer-dependent categories generally: your status is tied to someone else's decision to keep employing you. EB-2 NIW and EB-1A don't have that dependency built in. A self-petition isn't tied to a single employer relationship the way O-1 and H-1B are, which means a layoff doesn't carry the same immediate status implications. That's not a reason to panic about your current status — but it is a reason to know what your options look like before you need them.
If you're on O-1 or H-1B status and want to understand your options — including whether a self-petition under EB-2 NIW or EB-1A could reduce your dependency on a single employer — let's talk before you need to.
This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. This proposal is not yet in effect and its final form, scope, or effective date could change following the rulemaking process, or the proposal could be withdrawn entirely. Verify the current status directly on the Federal Register before relying on it for any planning decision. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Consult a licensed immigration attorney about your specific circumstances.