U.S. requires H-1B applicants to make social media public, raising ethical concerns
The U.S. government has expanded its screening and vetting procedures for H-1B visa applicants and their H-4 dependents, directing them to keep all social-media profiles publicly visible as part of intensified background checks. The State Department, in a directive issued on Wednesday, announced that from December 15 onward, the online presence of all H-1B applicants and their accompanying dependents will be reviewed. Previously, this level of scrutiny had been limited to students and exchange visitors under the F, M, and J visa categories.
According to the directive, applicants are now instructed to maintain all their social-media privacy settings in the public mode so that government authorities can scrutinize their digital activity. These reviews may include examination of posts, comments, photographs, interactions, connections, and other publicly visible elements of an applicant’s online footprint. A U.S. visa is treated as a privilege rather than a right, officials noted, adding that all available information is used in screening applicants who may be deemed inadmissible or considered potential security risks. The assertion that “every visa adjudication is a national security decision” was restated in passive voice, underlining that visa determinations are regarded as matters of national security that warrant extensive evaluation.
The tightening of social-media screening coincides with the Trump administration’s broader crackdown on immigration processes, particularly surrounding the H-1B programme, which is widely used by U.S. technology companies to hire skilled foreign workers. Indian professionals, including tech workers and physicians, remain among the largest groups of H-1B visa holders and are expected to be significantly affected by the expanded vetting requirements.
The social-media review conducted by U.S. authorities includes scrutiny of publicly visible posts, photos, videos, captions, comments, follower interactions, group associations, and even historical usernames. Analysts say that while the government maintains the reviews are meant to reinforce national security and detect fraud, the wide scope of what can be interpreted as “relevant” information raises concerns about subjective judgement and potential misinterpretation of social-media content.
The directive has also reignited an ongoing ethical debate: Is it appropriate for governments to monitor one’s personal life through social media, even if the content is public? argue that forcing individuals to expose all their online activity undermines their control over personal boundaries and may discourage free expression out of fear that posts could be misconstrued. Critics further warn that the context of online interactions can be easily misread, potentially affecting visa decisions unfairly. Supporters of the policy, however, contend that governments have a legitimate right to use publicly accessible information when assessing security risks.
The expanded vetting comes alongside additional immigration restrictions imposed after the recent shooting of two U.S. National Guard members by an Afghan national who entered under the “Operation Allies Welcome” programme. In response, a USCIS memorandum has placed an immediate pause on Green Card, citizenship, asylum, and other immigration applications from nationals of 19 “countries of concern,” pending a comprehensive review. These restrictions apply regardless of the applicant’s date of entry.
As the United States intensifies its immigration controls, concerns continue to grow over how the expansion of mandatory public social-media scrutiny may reshape the visa experience for thousands of skilled foreign professionals, particularly those from India, who form a substantial share of the annual H-1B workforce.