The Trump administration is preparing to strip more than 200,000 business and tourism visas from foreigners who entered the country as short-term visitors but then filed asylum claims to stay permanently, a move that would double the number of visas revoked since January 2025.

The State Department, working alongside the Department of Homeland Security, plans to target holders of B1 and B2 visas issued between 2016 and 2026 who have sought or are currently seeking asylum status, the Daily Caller reported, citing an Associated Press report based on government documents. If carried out, the action would represent the largest single mass visa revocation in American history.

State Department spokesman Tommy Pigott confirmed the scope of the effort:

"We are coordinating with DHS to identify and revoke the nonimmigrant visas of foreigners who have come to the United States claiming to be short-term visitors, but then file for asylum to stay here permanently."

The rationale is straightforward. B1 and B2 visas exist for temporary visits, business meetings, vacations, family events. They are not a side door into the asylum system. But for years, tens of thousands of foreign nationals have used them as exactly that: fly in on a tourist visa, file an asylum claim before the visa expires, and then remain in the country for years while the backlogged immigration courts sort through the paperwork.

175,000 visas already revoked since Trump took office

The planned action would build on an already aggressive enforcement posture. The Trump administration has revoked roughly 175,000 visas since the start of the president's second term, primarily over criminal activity or public opposition to U.S. policies. This new batch of 200,000 would nearly double that total, the Washington Examiner reported.

Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau laid out the administration's position in a lengthy post on X on Monday. He framed the asylum system as a mechanism that has been exploited far beyond its intended purpose:

"People in the US and all over the world are fed up with bogus asylum claims. Asylum isn't supposed to be a loophole to circumvent immigration laws; rather, it's supposed to provide a narrow safe harbor for persons persecuted because of their 'race, religion, nationality,...'"

Landau argued that the system has long been swamped by frivolous asylum claims and that the years-long processing delays allow applicants to put down roots in the country, making eventual removal far more difficult, both legally and politically.

One Colombian national's case shows how the loophole works

To illustrate the problem, Landau cited the case of Humberto Coral, a Colombian national who came to the United States on a tourist visa in 2015. Just before that visa expired, Coral applied for asylum. The Obama administration granted him a work permit, which he renewed for roughly a decade.

During that time, Landau said, Coral publicly supported Colombia's far-left government and accused the American government of "putting people in concentration camps." Whatever the merits of Coral's individual asylum case, the trajectory Landau described, tourist visa, last-minute asylum filing, work permit, decade of renewals, is precisely the pattern the administration says it wants to shut down.

The broader immigration enforcement push has faced resistance from the courts. A Biden-appointed federal judge previously struck down the administration's 75-country visa pause, and AP noted that this latest action would also likely face legal challenges.

Revocation does not mean immediate deportation, but it strips legal cover

Several outlets noted an important distinction: revoking a visa does not automatically trigger deportation. Affected individuals with pending asylum cases would likely see those cases recategorized rather than immediately dismissed, Breitbart reported. But the revocation would strip away the legal status these individuals originally entered under, removing the fiction that they are business travelers or tourists.

The practical effect is significant. Without a valid visa, these individuals lose their standing as lawful short-term visitors. They would face a much harder path to remain in the country and a much stronger incentive to leave voluntarily, the New York Post reported.

The administration has also moved on other immigration fronts. Trump signed executive orders targeting birth tourism and narrowing birthright citizenship, and the Washington Examiner noted that the administration is separately proposing a $103,265 fee for employers hiring foreign workers through the H-1B visa program.

And the legal landscape has shifted in the administration's favor on some fronts. The Supreme Court handed the White House two major immigration wins on Temporary Protected Status and asylum processing, giving the executive branch broader latitude to enforce its immigration priorities.

200,000 cases expose a system built on pretense

The sheer number, 200,000 visa holders who entered as visitors and then filed for asylum, tells a story on its own. These were not people fleeing persecution at the border with nothing but the clothes on their backs. They obtained visas. They boarded planes. They cleared customs as tourists or business travelers. And then they claimed they could not safely return home.

Some of those claims may be legitimate. Asylum law exists for a reason. But when the number reaches six figures over a single decade, the pattern stops looking like a safety valve and starts looking like a parallel immigration system, one that bypasses the legal channels millions of other applicants wait years to navigate.

The State Department did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller's request for comment beyond Pigott's statement. The AP's reporting, based on government documents, suggests the formal announcement is imminent.

Legal fights will come. They always do. But the underlying question is simple: should a tourist visa be a ticket to a decade-long stay? For 200,000 people, the administration's answer is no, and it is long overdue.