US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) published a notice in the Federal Register stating that effective September 14, 2020, flights carrying passengers who were recently present in China (excluding the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau), Iran, the twenty-six countries of the Schengen Area, the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Brazil will no longer be required to land at one of fifteen designated airports in order for passengers to undergo COVID-19 health screenings. This notice only relates to the cancellation of health screenings at designated US airports but does not lift or change the country-specific COVID-19 travel restrictions (which were issued January 31, 2020, February 29, 2020, March 11, 2020, March 14, 2020, and May 24, 2020) for the countries listed above, the immigrant visa travel ban (Presidential Proclamation 10014) or the nonimmigrant visa travel ban (Presidential Proclamation 10052). The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) CBP Liaison Committee confirmed with CBP that the travel restrictions remain in place and those affected by the restrictions will still be required to obtain a National Interest Exemption (NIE) to travel to the US.

The US Department of State (DOS) has issued guidance explaining additional ways for H-1B, H-2B, L-1, and J-1 visa applicants to overcome the travel restrictions detailed in President Trump’s June 22, 2020, presidential proclamation (PP 10052). This June 22 proclamation suspended the entry of foreign nationals into the US on H-1B, H-2B, L, and J visas until at least December 31, 2020, and also extended the suspension of entry to the US of most immigrant visa applicants through the end of the year. The DOS guidance, issued August 12, 2020, broadened the exceptions to the June 22 proclamation, but not everyone is pleased. Jesse Bless, American Immigration Lawyers Association’s (AILA) director of litigation, criticized the guidance in an interview in Forbes: “The guidance is an attempt to place new statutory requirements for these visas in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act and, to the extent the law is ambiguous, without notice and comment to enact regulatory change.” He added: “Some may benefit, but it’s an unlawful attempt nonetheless.”