Clarification of Discretionary Employment Authorization for Certain Aliens

A Ukrainian immigrant living in the U.S. under the Uniting for Ukraine program supports the proposed action to protect access to employment authorization. The commenter argues that work authorization provides stability, dignity, and economic contribution for eligible families and individuals.

A Ukrainian immigrant under the U4U program expresses personal hardship due to a delay in receiving work authorization. The commenter argues against the restrictions on work permits, stating that the inability to work prevents them from meeting basic needs and pursuing education.

Inessa T. supports the preservation of employment authorization for Uniting for Ukraine (U4U) program participants. She argues that these individuals provide essential, culturally and linguistically appropriate care for elderly and disabled Americans, and that restricting their work would create significant hardships for families.

A US citizen and sponsor of Ukrainian families opposes the proposal, arguing that making it difficult to obtain work authorizations will harm local businesses and place a financial burden on the communities that support these families. The commenter encourages the agency to withdraw the proposal in its current form.

A group of Ukrainian refugees under the Uniting for Ukraine (U4U) program opposes the proposed changes, arguing that they would reduce work authorization opportunities. They state that these changes could force self-sufficient individuals to rely on public benefits and increase their personal uncertainty regarding their legal status in the U.S.

A Ukrainian humanitarian parolee under the Uniting for Ukraine program opposes the proposed restrictions on employment authorization. The commenter argues that maintaining work permits is essential for financial stability and contributing to the U.S. economy while awaiting immigration decisions.

A Ukrainian individual who entered the U.S. through the Uniting for Ukraine (U4U) humanitarian parole program opposes the proposed changes to discretionary employment authorization. The commenter argues that the "economic necessity" requirement is impractical and that making it harder for legal parolees to work will hinder their ability to be self-sufficient and contribute to the economy.

Russell Wilson, a local business owner and homeowner, opposes the proposed rule restricting work authorization for humanitarian parolees, specifically those under the Uniting for Ukraine (U4U) program. He argues that the rule creates instability, prevents self-reliance, and ignores the positive economic and community contributions made by these individuals.

A Ukrainian family living in the U.S. under the U4U program opposes the proposed action, arguing that it would strip them of their right to work and force them to return to a war zone in Ukraine. The commenter emphasizes the humanitarian crisis and the danger of returning to a country under constant shelling.

The commenter, a private individual who has sponsored a Ukrainian family, supports the continued employment authorization for U4U recipients. They argue that these individuals are vital members of their small community who fill essential jobs and request a reduction in the administrative "red tape" and costs associated with their legal status.