04/22/2026 Immigration attorneys are noting an expansion in the range of questions asked during affirmative asylum interviews, including at the Los Angeles Asylum Office. While USCIS has not officially announced changes, the content of interviews indicates a shift in how applicants are being evaluated. Traditionally, asylum interviews focus on the circumstances of persecution, the reasons for seeking protection, and the credibility of the applicant’s story. Key factors include meeting asylum criteria and internal consistency of testimony. However, recent interviews show the addition of new question blocks that go beyond events in the applicant’s country of origin. Applicants are now being asked direct questions about political and ideological views. This includes questions about anti-Semitic beliefs, whether such views were expressed in the past, and whether the applicant holds views against the United States. Officers also ask whether such statements were made publicly, on social media, or in private settings. At the same time, the scope of questions regarding the applicant’s behavior after entering the United States has expanded. Interviews now include questions about employment, tax compliance, business activities, participation in community life, and volunteer work. The evaluation is no longer limited to past events but also considers the applicant’s current conduct. Additional questions address social and living conditions, including health status, medical treatment within the family, housing, education, and professional experience. There is also increased attention to religious affiliation and involvement in religious organizations. Another area of inquiry concerns relatives in the United States. Applicants may be asked who they live with, to identify family members, their immigration status, and their location. These questions may involve information about third parties not directly part of the case. Substantively, this reflects a broader scope of review. Interviews are no longer limited to analyzing past persecution but also evaluate the applicant’s views, behavior in the U.S., and social connections. With this expanded structure, risks arise not only from the core asylum claim but also from responses to related questions. Inconsistencies, excessive detail, or poorly phrased answers may affect credibility assessments and the outcome of the case.