Indians seeking Green Card may have to wait for up to 179 years, analysis shows
An analysis by the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) reveals that Indian professionals applying for U.S. green cards may face wait times of up to 179 years in certain categories due to a nationality-based cap limiting the number of green cards issued to citizens of any single country. Over 996,599 Indian professionals and their dependents are currently in a visa backlog across three green card categories. The report highlights that Indian applicants face significantly longer wait times compared to professionals from countries like China and the Philippines, who experience shorter waits despite similar qualifications. The backlog has persisted for over a decade, with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approving fewer than 50,000 EB-2 applications for Indian professionals in fiscal year 2016 alone.
Indian professionals applying for U.S. green cards, permits granting permanent residency, could face wait times stretching up to 179 years in certain categories, according to a recent analysis by the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP). The study highlights a growing crisis in U.S. immigration policy, particularly affecting applicants from India, who constitute nearly 80% of those waiting in the employment-based green card backlog. The issue stems from statutory limits on the number of green cards allocated to citizens of any single nation each year, a rule that has created long delays for Indian professionals seeking to settle permanently in the United States. The current system allows for 140,000 employment-based green cards to be issued annually, with no more than 7% of that total, approximately 9,800 slots, allocated to any individual country. For Indian applicants, this cap has resulted in severe bottlenecks. According to the NFAP’s August policy brief, someone submitting an application in January 2026 or later would face a potential wait time of 179 years for the employment-based second preference (EB-2) category, 38 years for the third preference (EB-3), and five years for the first preference (EB-1). These figures reflect a backlog that has been building for over a decade. In fiscal year 2016, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approved 47,601 applications in the EB-2 category for Indians, which includes an estimated 98,594 people when dependents are considered. However, only 4,407 individuals from India received permanent residency in that category during the same year. This discrepancy led to the addition of over 90,000 people to the backlog in FY 2016 alone, a trend that continued through 2017 and 2018. The situation worsened during the pandemic, when global travel restrictions forced the closure of U.S. consulates abroad. These closures disrupted the processing of family-based visas, leading to an accumulation of unused quotas. Under U.S. law, these unused numbers were carried forward into the employment-based categories. Between FY 2020 and FY 2024, this resulted in an additional 280,000 green cards being allocated to the employment-based categories. Despite this increase, the overall backlog for employment-based green cards grew by 20.6% over five years, underscoring the inefficiency of the current system. Chinese applicants, though also affected, experience shorter wait times compared to their Indian counterparts. For example, in the EB-2 category, Chinese professionals face a maximum wait of 25 years, versus 179 years for Indians. Similarly, in the EB-3 category, Chinese applicants must wait seven years, whereas Indians could face a wait of 38 years. These disparities highlight how the nationality-based caps disproportionately affect Indian professionals, despite the presence of other nationalities in the same system. The NFAP analysis suggests that the prolonged wait times are deterring American companies from hiring top Indian talent, thereby impacting the U.S. economy. Many highly skilled professionals are opting to seek opportunities elsewhere due to the uncertainty surrounding their ability to obtain a green card. This exodus of talent raises concerns about the competitiveness of the U.S. labor market in attracting and retaining international expertise. Efforts to address the backlog have so far yielded limited results. Proposals to reform the green card allocation process remain stalled in Congress, and there is little consensus on how to resolve the issue. Some advocacy groups argue for increasing the per-country cap or eliminating it altogether, while others suggest expanding the number of annual green cards available. Until a resolution emerges, Indian professionals will continue to face an uncertain future, with many left waiting for decades before they can even begin the process of obtaining permanent residency in the United States.
5 reports
Times of IndiaIndependentCenterFactual 92Objective 889/2/2026
The article reports that Indian professionals seeking U.S. employment-based green cards (Green Card) face extremely long waiting times, with some estimates suggesting a 179-year wait. According to a study by the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP), the backlog of employment-based immigration applications has surpassed 1.2 million, with nearly 1 million from India alone. This makes India the country with the longest delays in the U.S. immigration system. The report attributes this to annual caps and country-specific quotas, which disproportionately affect large populations like India. It compares waiting times across different visa categories and countries, noting that while Chinese applicants face similar or shorter waits, Indian applicants experience significantly longer delays.
Bias read (Center): The article presents factual data and analysis regarding U.S. immigration policies affecting Indian professionals without overtly endorsing or criticizing specific political ideologies. While the issue of immigration policy is politically charged, the framing remains neutral, focusing on statistical
Why factuality (92): The article accurately conveys the 179-year wait time and the 1.2 million backlog figure, citing the NFAP analysis. It provides comparative data between Indian and Chinese applicants, which adds depth and aligns with the cross-source consensus. The inclusion of direct quotes from the NFAP report enh
Why objectivity (88): The article maintains a balanced and objective tone throughout, avoiding emotional language or biased framing. It presents the data clearly and without overt advocacy, making it one of the most neutral accounts among the sources.
An analysis by the National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) reveals that Indian professionals applying for U.S. green cards may face wait times of up to 179 years in certain categories due to a nationality-based cap limiting the number of green cards issued to citizens of any single country. Over 996,599 Indian professionals and their dependents are currently in a visa backlog across three green card categories. The report highlights that Indian applicants face significantly longer wait times compared to professionals from countries like China and the Philippines, who experience shorter waits despite similar qualifications. The backlog has persisted for over a decade, with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approving fewer than 50,000 EB-2 applications for Indian professionals in fiscal year 2016 alone.
Bias read (Center): The article presents factual data about the U.S. green card backlog and its impact on Indian professionals without overt ideological slant. It cites a nonpartisan research organization (NFAP) and provides comparative data between different nationalities without favoring any particular political or移民
Why factuality (90): This article accurately reflects the 179-year wait time for certain categories of Indian applicants and cites the NFAP analysis. It includes relevant data points such as the 79% share of the backlog and the employment-based categories. The mention of the nationality cap and its disproportionate effe
Why objectivity (85): The article maintains a neutral tone overall, though it does include a caption with a representative photo, which might slightly influence perception. The content itself remains balanced and avoids strong editorializing.
The article states that as of December 2025, approximately one million individuals from India are awaiting U.S. employment-based green cards due to a significant backlog in the immigration system. The headline suggests this wait could last up to 179 years, highlighting the extreme length of time some applicants might face before obtaining permanent residency. The piece focuses on the scale of the backlog and its implications for Indian nationals seeking employment-based immigration to the United States.
Bias read (Center): The article presents factual information about the U.S. immigration backlog without overtly favoring any particular political perspective. It does not take a clear stance on the cause or solution to the backlog, nor does it frame the issue in a way that clearly aligns with either left or right-wing
Why factuality (88): The article correctly states the 179-year wait time and references the NFAP analysis. It also notes the backlog of nearly one million people from India. While it doesn't provide detailed breakdowns of the categories or the methodology, it aligns closely with the cross-source consensus on the main fa
Why objectivity (82): The article is largely neutral in tone, presenting the issue without apparent bias. However, the headline 'Indians May Have To Wait 179 Years For US Green Card' could be seen as emphasizing the dramatic nature of the claim, which slightly affects neutrality.
The article discusses the prolonged wait times for Indian applicants seeking U.S. green cards, highlighting the challenges they face within the U.S. immigration system. It notes that some applicants could wait over 179 years to receive their green cards due to backlogs and high demand. The piece explores systemic issues such as visa quotas, processing delays, and the impact of these delays on individuals and families. While the article presents data and anecdotal evidence from affected applicants, it does not provide detailed information on specific policies or proposed solutions.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the U.S. immigration system as overly restrictive and inefficient, particularly toward Indian applicants, which aligns with a left-leaning perspective that often criticizes U.S. immigration policies for being too harsh or discriminatory. The emphasis on systemic failure and the '1
Why factuality (85): The article accurately reports the 179-year wait time for Indian applicants based on the NFAP analysis. It mentions the backlog of nearly one million Indians and the 79% share of the employment-based backlog. However, it lacks specific details like the exact date of the analysis or the methodology u
Why objectivity (80): The article presents the information neutrally but uses phrases like 'immigration crisis' in the title, which introduces a slight bias. Otherwise, it provides a balanced summary of the situation without overtly favoring any perspective.
The article discusses the prolonged wait times for Indian applicants seeking U.S. green cards, highlighting the challenges they face within the U.S. immigration system. It notes that some applicants could wait over 179 years to receive their green cards due to backlogs and high demand. The piece explores systemic issues such as visa quotas, processing delays, and the impact of these delays on individuals and families. While the article presents data and anecdotal evidence from affected applicants, it does not provide detailed information on specific policies or proposed solutions.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the U.S. immigration system as overly restrictive and inefficient, particularly toward Indian applicants, which aligns with a left-leaning perspective that often criticizes U.S. immigration policies for being too harsh or discriminatory. The emphasis on systemic failure and the '1
Why factuality (65): The article reports on the extended wait times for green cards faced by Indian applicants, citing general trends and policy changes. While it provides some context about immigration policies and processing delays, it lacks specific data or official statistics to support its claims. The information a
Why objectivity (55): The tone of the article leans toward highlighting the challenges faced by Indian applicants, which may reflect a particular perspective or concern. It uses emotionally charged language such as 'immigration crisis' and emphasizes the length of the wait time, potentially influencing readers' perceptio
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
India
