The Home Office’s refusal to issue alternative proof of immigration status outside of its electronic visa (eVisa) system could be deemed unlawful in 2026 if a judicial review against the policy is successful.
On 31 December 2024, the immigration documents of millions of people living in the UK expired after being replaced by the Home Office with a real-time, online-only immigration status.
While the department has been issuing eVisas for several years – including to European Union (EU) citizens who applied to the European Union Settlement Scheme (EUSS) after Brexit, those applying for Skilled Worker visas, and people from Hong Kong applying for the British National (Overseas) visa – paper documents have now been completely phased out.
Instead, people are now expected to use a UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) digital account to generate “share codes”, which they must use to prove their immigration status when dealing with a range of third parties, including employers and letting agencies.
As a result, a number of individuals experiencing issues with their eVisas have instructed law firm Deighton Pierce Glynn (DPG) to challenge the Home Office over the system.
“Two of our clients, BSC and JS … have now been appointed as Lead Claimants in the policy challenge which continues,” wrote the law firm in a blog post about the action.
This [court case] is a significant development … which will mean that individuals … are no longer left at the mercy of the eVisa system to prove their lawful immigration status in the UK Deighton Pierce Glynn
“In the case of BSC, a recognised refugee and survivor of trafficking, the eVisa displayed her trafficking name and date of birth. The consequences of this were wide-ranging, but most significantly, they were retraumatising, and put her at risk of losing public funds she relied on to survive.
“Whilst for JS, a vulnerable adult, the eVisa incorrectly stated that she had no recourse to public funds. As a consequence, she was denied access to public funds and had to rely on limited asylum support payments for months longer than she should have. In both cases, the eVisas were fixed months later after we issued the claims.”
DPG added that its clients were granted permission to proceed with the challenge in October 2025 by the Cardiff Administrative Court, on the basis that the grounds are arguable and that it is in the public interest for the legality of the Home Office’s policy to be determined.
The case will be heard in the Cardiff High Court on 3 and 4 March 2026.
“This is a significant development which has taken our clients a step closer to establishing a much-needed safeguard in the eVisa system, which will mean that individuals such as our clients are no longer left at the mercy of the eVisa system to prove their lawful immigration status in the UK,” it wrote.
No alternatives
Highlighting the Home Office’s refusal to issue alternative proof of immigration status despite the well-documented issues individuals are having with the system, DPG said the challenge will focus on the fact that the statutory framework does, in fact, give the home secretary the discretion to allow alternatives where appropriate.
“Her refusal to do so is therefore arguably unlawful as it is a fetter of her discretion and irrational,” it wrote, adding that while the Home Office has implemented several “workarounds” for those experiencing issues – including ways for landlords, employers and others to verify immigration status using the system, as well as means to report eVisa issues via an online form and helpline – such avenues are often “inadequate”.
DPG said this was largely due to delays on the Home Office’s end, “which leaves individuals without proof of their lawful status and exposed to the full force of the hostile/compliant environment”.
Speaking with Computer Weekly, DPG solicitor Unkha Banda said although the firm had been receiving a high volume of referrals related to the eVisa system before the phasing out of paper documents on 1 January 2025, there was a notable uptick in referrals after that date as people started facing real consequences of not having a working eVisa.
Banda added that a successful case could “open the doors for everyone to be able to benefit from it”, particularly if the Home Office is legally forced to start issuing and accepting alternative proof of status.
“That means if there are problems with an eVisa that the Home Office are taking a long time to fix, for whatever reason, then people will have something else to rely on, so there isn’t that gap in terms of access to rights and entitlements,” she said, highlighting that the case could also reduce similar gaps that may spring up with the government’s roll-out of mandatory digital ID.
“Digital IDs are going to be implemented for everyone, and I imagine the system will probably be similar to this, so if we can find ways of fixing this system before it’s rolled out to 70 million people, it would be fantastic.”
Over 10 million eVisas have now been issued, and the vast majority of people with an eVisa continue to use them without any problems Home Office spokesperson
“The Home Office can take immediate steps to reduce the anxiety that migrants are experiencing by giving them the safety of a physical or digital backup that will allow them to prove their status in any circumstances,” said Sara Alsherif, migrants digital justice programme manager at Open Rights Group (ORG), at the time, which collaborated with the authors on creating the report.
“However, root and branch reform of this system is also needed, and lessons must be learnt, especially as the government intends to roll digital ID out to everyone in the UK.”
Responding to the issues raised by the judicial review, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Over 10 million eVisas have now been issued, and the vast majority of people with an eVisa continue to use them without any problems.
“They cannot be lost, stolen, or tampered with, and provide a secure digital way to prove someone’s right to work or enter this country lawfully. We stand ready to support any users who encounter difficulties creating or using their eVisa accounts.”
While groups like ORG and the3million have directly proposed alternatives to the Home Office, such as the use of QR code or “stable token” systems, the department’s eVisa policy team insisted as far back as December 2023 that it would not “compromise on the real-time aspect” of the eVisa checks, as “any check of an individual’s immigration status must be done in real time to reflect the current immigration status held” on its systems.
“As we warned, people are having problems using eVisas to travel back to the UK,” said the ORG at the time. “We asked the Home Office to make the simple change of allowing people to have a QR code. This could be saved or printed without having to rely on a flawed online-only system.
“Many refugees are still waiting for their eVisas,” it said. “Without them, they cannot work, set up a bank account, rent somewhere to live or claim benefits. The Home Office needs to sort out this mess urgently.”
The Home Office also states in the eVisa terms and conditions that it will take no liability for any problems or disruptions, and direct or indirect losses, when using a UKVI account – including for “any information that is lost or corrupted while data is being transmitted, processed or downloaded from the UKVI account” – which ORG said implies the department “is already aware of the many technical issues with the eVisa scheme and is pre-emptively protecting itself against legitimate legal claims”.
ORG and others have said the use of eVisas should be seen in the context of the UK’s “hostile environment” approach, which is intended to make life in the UK as difficult as possible for people choosing to live there.
For Banda, the fact that the Home Office has known about all of these issues with digital-only visas for so long, without taking meaningful action to resolve them, is “quite concerning”.
She also said that despite DPG and many other organisations trying to get a sense of how widespread the problem is, the department is refusing to provide figures on the number of people reporting issues or how long it takes on average to get problems solved.
Given that millions of people are now required to prove their immigration status via the system, even a 1% error rate would mean tens of thousands of people are affected at the very least.
Computer Weekly contacted the Home Office about error rates with the eVisa system, but received no on-the-record response.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, those affected variously told Computer Weekly that the entire experience had been “anxiety-inducing,” and described how their lives had been thrust into “uncertainty” by the transition.
Each also described how the “inordinate amount of stress” associated with not being able to reliably prove their immigration status had been made worse by a lack of responsiveness and help from the Home Office, which they accused of essentially leaving them in the lurch.
According to Banda, while clients are instructed to report their issues to the Home Office first before DPG takes them on, unless the case is particularly urgent, the vast majority are given vague responses without time frames.
“Most of the time, by the time the case gets to us, nothing has changed, but we found that once we get involved and start sending pre-action letters, then they start fixing the eVisas,” she said, adding that sometimes clients’ eVisa issues are being resolved after a case has already been issued.
On the legal recourse available to people once their problems have been fixed, Banda noted that while a judicial review can only be taken forward if the issues are still active, those affected can still make civil claims for compensation if they were negatively impacted in the interim by, for example, losing out on employment or being denied benefits.
“In cases where we send pre-letters and then the Home Office fixes it, you can’t then go to court,” she said. “Or, for example, if you go to court and they fix it before the judge looks at it, then the government would start arguing that the whole case is academic because the eVisa has been fixed.”
It should be noted that even if people’s eVisa issues are resolved once, Computer Weekly has heard concerns that, because of how the system is set up to trawl dozens of disparate government databases in real time, every time a status is needed, the same people could once again find themselves without access to a working eVisa.
In a follow-up Freedom of Information request to the ICO about the volume of eVisa-related data protection complaints made in the past year, the regulator said that searching through the approximately 425 cases linked to the Home Office in that time would exceed the cost limit.
The ICO added that it does not record the requested information in a way that is easily reportable, meaning it would be required to manually search hundreds of records to identify the information requested.
Since 2018, a group of researchers from around the world have crunched the numbers on how much heat the world’s oceans are absorbing each year. In 2025, their measurements broke records once again, making this the eighth year in a row that the world’s oceans have absorbed more heat than the years before.
The study, which was published Friday in the journal Advances in Atmospheric Science, found that the world’s oceans absorbed an additional 23 zettajoules’ worth of heat in 2025, the most in any year since modern measurements began in the 1960s. That’s significantly higher than the 16 additional zettajoules they absorbed in 2024. The research comes from a team of more than 50 scientists across the United States, Europe, and China.
A joule is a common way to measure energy. A single joule is a relatively small unit of measurement—it’s about enough to power a tiny lightbulb for a second, or slightly heat a gram of water. But a zettajoule is one sextillion joules; numerically, the 23 zettajoules the oceans absorbed this year can be written out as 23,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.
John Abraham, a professor of thermal science at the University of St. Thomas and one of the authors on the paper, says that he sometimes has trouble putting this number into contexts laypeople understand. Abraham offers up a couple options. His favorite is comparing the energy stored in the ocean to the energy of atomic bombs: The 2025 warming, he says, is the energetic equivalent to 12 Hiroshima bombs exploding in the ocean. (Some other calculations he’s done include equating this number to the energy it would take to boil 2 billion Olympic swimming pools, or more than 200 times the electrical use of everyone on the planet.)
“Last year was a bonkers, crazy warming year—that’s the technical term,” Abraham joked to me. “The peer-reviewed scientific term is ‘bonkers’.”
The world’s oceans are its largest heat sink, absorbing more than 90 percent of the excess warming that is trapped in the atmosphere. While some of the excess heat warms the ocean’s surface, it also slowly travels further down into deeper parts of the ocean, aided by circulation and currents.
Global temperature calculations—like the ones used to determine the hottest years on record—usually only capture measurements taken at the ocean’s surface. (The study finds that overall sea surface temperatures in 2025 were slightly lower than they were in 2024, which is on record as the hottest year since modern records began. Some meteorological phenomena, like El Niño events, can also raise sea surface temperatures in certain regions, which can cause the overall ocean to absorb slightly less heat in a given year. This helps to explain why there was such a big jump in added ocean heat content between 2025, which developed a weak La Niña at the end of the year, and 2024, which came at the end of a strong El Niño year.) While sea surface temperatures have risen since the industrial revolution, thanks to our use of fossil fuels, these measurements don’t provide a full picture of how climate change is affecting the oceans.
“If the whole world was covered by a shallow ocean that was only a couple feet deep, it would warm up more or less at the same speed as the land,” says Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist at Berkeley Earth and a coauthor of the study. “But because so much of that heat is going down in the deep ocean, we see generally slower warming of sea surface temperatures [than those on land].”
Skullcandy headphones aren’t always the sharpest tools in the proverbial shed, but they do have cool looks and have affordable price tags, and that gets even better with these Skullcandy promo codes on a few of the brand’s top products. If you’re after a pair of in-ear, open-ear, or over-ear headphones, Skullcandy has cut prices on several of its headphones, making now a decent time to buy. Plus, make sure you check out our Skullcandy coupons above for even more savings.
Experience Immersive Sound With 47% Off Skullcandy Crusher Evo Headphones
Right now, you can get nearly half off (47% off) Skullcandy Crusher Evo Headphones. We haven’t tested these sleek over-ear headphones, but they look nice and likely have solid performance. They come in many different colors, which is the main appeal of many Skullcandy headphones; they match your own personal style.
Enjoy Open-Ear Comfort With 33% Off Skullcandy Push 720 Earbuds
Open earbuds are a great way to hear the world around you while also tuning into your favorite music, audiobook, or podcast. We really like using them when working out in nature or working in the yard, where hearing someone honk or yell at you can be helpful. Skullcandy Push 720 Open Earbuds are 35% off right now; so if you’ve been curious about open earbuds, now’s a great time to buy.
Block Out Noise With 36% Off Skullcandy Crusher ANC 2 Headphones
The Skullcandy Crusher ANC 2 are over-ear headphones that come with a leopard print finish, which should appeal to anyone who is tired of boring black over-ear headphones. They also have active noise canceling, which should help tune out any errant roars. They are on sale for a limited time, at 36% off.
Take Your Gaming to the Next Level With Crusher PLYR 720 Headphones
Folks who want a gaming headset will be happy with the swivel-based mic on the Crusher Plyr 720 (now on discount at 33% off) allowing them to easily chat with friends and foes during tense online gaming sessions.
Shop the Skullcandy Sales to Save on Headphones, Earbuds, and Speakers
Don’t see what you’re looking for here? Be sure to check out the full list of Skullcandy options on sale right now on the company’s website. I’d also recommend looking at our Skullcandy discount codes and coupons, which rotate often to make sure you’re getting the best deals possible.
Jonathan Ross, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer identified by multiple news outlets as the federal agent who shot 37-year-old Renee Good in Minneapolis on Wednesday, is a veteran deportation officer in ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations division, according to sworn testimony from the federal district court in Minnesota obtained by WIRED. A member of a Special Response Team, ICE’s version of a SWAT team, he’s had duties as a firearms trainer and led teams drawn from multiple federal agencies including the FBI, Ross testified.
The testimony stems from a December 2025 trial related to a June incident with parallels to the interaction that led to Good’s killing.
In June according to Ross’s testimony, he led a team seeking to apprehend a man named Roberto Carlos Muñoz-Guatemala, who was on an administrative warrant for being in the United States without authorization. Because the man’s home was across from a school and immigration agents had no authority to enter his home, Ross testified, they instead trailed him in unmarked vehicles.
Muñoz-Guatemala’s attorney did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
According to the December testimony and a New York Times account of an FBI agent’s affidavit associated with the case, Ross approached Muñoz-Guatemala and asked him to roll down his window and open his door. Ross, who testified that he had been driving an unmarked vehicle, was dressed in ranger green and grey, and wore his badge on his belt, broke the driver’s side back window and reached into the vehicle, at which point Muñoz-Guatemala pulled away.
While being dragged at a speed he claimed seemed like “40 miles an hour at least, if not more,” Ross pulled out his Taser and fired it at the driver. Muñoz-Guatemala continued to drive, and succeeded in shaking Ross from the car. At trial, Ross testified that he suffered injuries that required 33 stitches.
According to the affidavit, Muñoz-Guatemala called 911 to report that he’d been assaulted by ICE, which led to his arrest. Last month, he was convicted of assault on a federal officer with a dangerous weapon.
Reports from the Minnesota Star-Tribune and The Guardian identified Ross as the shooter who killed Good, a mother and recent transplant to Minneapolis, during an immigration enforcement action in the city. Video of the incident appears to show a federal agent firing shots into Good’s vehicle as she attempted to leave the scene. The officer did not appear to have been struck by the vehicle, and Good appeared to be turning the wheel to avoid contact, video analysis by The New York Times and the Washington Post shows.
At Thursday’s White House press briefing, vice president JD Vance answered questions about the incident, and his responses included numerous identifying details about Ross, mainly relating to his interaction with Muñoz-Guatemala. “That very ICE officer nearly had his life ended, dragged by a car, six months ago, 33 stitches in his leg,” said Vance, “so you think maybe he is a little bit sensitive about somebody ramming him with an automobile?”
Department of Homeland Security secretary Kirsti Noem has repeatedly described Good’s actions as an intentional act of “domestic terrorism.” An FBI investigation into Good’s killing is ongoing.
DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin told WIRED in a statement that the department is “not going to expose the name of this officer. He acted according to his training.” McLaughlin added that federal immigration agents “are under constant threat from violent agitators” because of “doxxing” and that the Minnesota Star Tribune, which first published Ross’ name, “should delete their story immediately.”According to Ross’ December testimony, he served in the Indiana National Guard and was deployed to Iraq from 2004 to 2005 as a machine gunner on a patrol truck, then joined Border Patrol in 2007 after finishing college, working near El Paso, Texas.
Sports4 days ago
Politics4 days ago
Sports4 days ago
Entertainment4 days ago
Sports4 days ago