Why Trump’s new rule for green card applicants is sparking controversy

Kevin Carter/Getty Images/File

A new Trump administration rule that is expected to make it harder for many legal immigrants to obtain green cards if they receive or are deemed likely to need public assistance is set to take effect Friday – even as lawsuits seeking to halt it wind their way through federal court.

The effort is one of President Donald Trump’s latest moves to curb the number of immigrants in the US, including residents already living here legally.

What’s more, the rule could prompt many green card applicants and their families to forgo receiving needed federal aid to avoid becoming considered “public charges” and hurting their chances of being approved.

Here’s what you need to know about Trump’s changes to the “public charge” rule:

Federal immigration officers have long reviewed green card applicants to ascertain whether they have the financial means to support themselves, among other considerations, to obtain permanent residency.

The Immigration Act of 1882 allowed the US government to deny entry to applicants deemed likely to be unable to take care of themselves and wind up dependent on government assistance – in other words, become “public charges.”

In 1999, the Clinton administration defined a public charge as someone “primarily dependent” on government benefits. It considered only cash aid, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or Supplemental Security Income, and Medicaid for long-term institutional care.

The first Trump administration sought to widen that definition to encompass non-cash benefits, such as food stamps, Medicaid and housing subsidies. It announced the broader rule in 2019 and put it into effect in 2020.

However, the following March, a federal court nullified the rule, and the Biden administration rescinded it. Biden officials then issued a new rule in 2022 limiting consideration to cash benefits only and clarifying that family members’ use of federal benefit programs does not have an impact on applicants’ reviews.

The new rule is similar to what was implemented by the first Trump administration but more expansive.

The latest rule, published in July, allows immigration officers to consider a wider array of public assistance programs when determining whether green card applicants will likely become “public charges.” It also rescinds the 2022 rule.

“Under @POTUS Trump, DHS is restoring the basic principle that immigrants must be able to support themselves,” the Department of Homeland Security posted to X at the time. “We are reaffirming the requirement of self-reliance, protecting public resources, and ending policies that encouraged dependency on hard-working American taxpayers.”

The new rule does not specify which safety net programs should be considered, saying only that DHS “will consider the receipt of any means tested public benefits.”

That could potentially include a wider array of income-based assistance, such as food stamps, Medicaid, childcare subsidies, housing vouchers and Head Start, as well as certain tax breaks, such as the child tax credit, Maddie Geschu, director of policy and advocacy at the Protecting Immigrant Families Coalition, told CNN in July.

Also, the new rule allows immigration officers to consider government benefits applied for on behalf of family members, including children who are citizens.

About 588,000 applicants are subject to public charge reviews annually, on average, according to DHS.

But the so-called “chilling effect” could have an even wider impact as applicants and their families opt to stay away from safety net programs for fear of being denied green cards.

DHS estimates that about 950,000 people may opt to leave or not enroll in six public benefits programs it examined, including Medicaid, food stamps, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and federal rental assistance.

Undocumented immigrants would not be affected since they do not qualify for public aid.

Immigration advocates fear that the rule will deter eligible family members from applying for or remaining enrolled in public safety net programs, including school meals and WIC, which provides nutrition assistance and counseling to pregnant women, new mothers and young children.

“No parent should ever have to choose between feeding their children and keeping their family together,” Clarissa Hayes, deputy director of child nutrition programs and policy at the Food Research & Action Center, told reporters earlier this week. “We cannot allow fear and confusion to determine whether or not a child will have enough to eat.”

Also, the revised rule “really opens the green card process to abuse based on partisan politics or personal bias,” Geschu told reporters.

Earlier research on the prior Trump administration rule found that participation in programs among immigrant families and citizen children declined in 2019 and 2020, even among those not subject to it at the time, the advocates said.

Similarly, the latest effort would have widespread consequences. Some 3.7 million members of immigrant households could lose Medicaid, food stamps, housing benefits and other assistance, according to a George Washington University study published in December that analyzed the proposed rule. State economies could lose $27.4 billion as healthcare providers, grocery stores and other businesses lose revenue. Up to 212,000 jobs could be lost.

A coalition of 22 states and the District of Columbia, led by New York, are suing to block the rule. A group of cities, led by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, has filed a similar lawsuit. They were both filed Monday in the Southern District of New York.

The states argue they would lose billions of dollars in federal funding if immigrants, particularly mixed-status families, disenroll from safety net programs due to fears about immigration consequences. And they say that the new rule gives “unfettered discretion for immigration officials to determine who can be excluded on public charge grounds.”

The determinations could “fundamentally depart from the core meaning of the term” public charge, according to the filing.

The cities, meanwhile, say in their filing that the rule will harm their public health and economic interests, including shifting costs for healthcare, food and housing to the cities and hurting their labor forces.

The rule is scheduled to go into effect on Friday, unless it is blocked in court.

Federal District Court Judge Ronnie Abrams of the Southern District of New York, an Obama appointee, set an initial conference for October 9 for the lawsuit brought by the states.

CNN’s Gloria Pazmino contributed to this report.

Kevin Carter/Getty Images/文件

特朗普政府一项新规将于周五生效，预计这将使许多合法移民更难获得绿卡，如果他们正在接受或被认为可能需要公共援助——尽管试图阻止该规定生效的诉讼仍在联邦法院进行。

这项举措是唐纳德·特朗普总统为遏制美国移民数量（包括已合法居住在美国的居民）而采取的最新措施之一。

此外，该规定可能会促使许多绿卡申请人及其家人放弃获得必要的联邦援助，以避免被视为“公共负担”，从而损害他们获得批准的机会。

以下是您需要了解的关于特朗普对“公共负担”规则的修改：

联邦移民官员长期以来一直在审查绿卡申请人，以确定他们是否有足够的经济能力来维持自己的生活，以及其他因素，从而获得永久居留权。

1882 年的《移民法》允许美国政府拒绝那些被认为可能无法照顾自己并最终依赖政府援助的申请人入境——换句话说，成为“公共负担”。

1999年，克林顿政府将“公共负担”定义为“主要依赖”政府福利的人。它仅考虑现金援助，例如贫困家庭临时援助或补充保障收入，以及用于长期机构护理的医疗补助。

特朗普第一届政府曾试图扩大该定义，将食品券、医疗补助和住房补贴等非现金福利纳入其中。该政府于2019年宣布了这项更广泛的规定，并于2020年使其生效。

然而，次年3月，联邦法院裁定该规定无效，拜登政府随后撤销了该规定。2022年，拜登政府官员发布了一项新规定，将考虑范围限定于现金福利，并明确指出家庭成员使用联邦福利项目不会影响申请人的审核。

新规与特朗普第一届政府实施的规则类似，但范围更广。

最新规定于7月发布，允许移民官员在判断绿卡申请人是否可能成为“公共负担”时，考虑更广泛的公共援助项目。该规定还废除了2022年的规定。

“在特朗普总统的领导下，国土安全部正在恢复移民必须能够自食其力的基本原则，”国土安全部当时在X网站上发布消息称。“我们重申了自力更生的要求，保护了公共资源，并终止了那些鼓励移民依赖辛勤工作的美国纳税人的政策。”

新规并未具体说明应考虑哪些社会保障计划，仅表示国土安全部“将考虑任何需要进行经济状况调查的公共福利”。

保护移民家庭联盟的政策和倡导主任麦迪·格舒 (Maddie Geschu) 在 7 月份告诉 CNN，这可能包括更广泛的基于收入的援助，例如食品券、医疗补助、儿童保育补贴、住房券和启蒙计划，以及某些税收减免，例如儿童税收抵免。

此外，新规允许移民官员考虑以家庭成员（包括公民子女）的名义申请的政府福利。

据美国国土安全部统计，平均每年约有 588,000 名申请人需要接受公共负担审查。

但所谓的“寒蝉效应”可能会产生更广泛的影响，因为申请人及其家人可能会因为害怕被拒绝绿卡而选择远离社会保障计划。

美国国土安全部估计，约有 95 万人可能会选择退出或不参加其调查的六项公共福利计划，包括医疗补助、食品券、儿童健康保险计划 (CHIP) 和联邦租房援助。

无证移民不会受到影响，因为他们不符合获得公共援助的条件。

移民权益倡导者担心，该规定将阻止符合条件的家庭成员申请或继续参加公共安全网计划，包括学校供餐和WIC（妇女、婴儿和儿童营养补充计划），该计划为孕妇、新妈妈和幼儿提供营养援助和咨询。

“任何父母都不应该被迫在养活孩子和维持家庭完整之间做出选择，”食品研究与行动中心儿童营养项目和政策副主任克拉丽莎·海耶斯本周早些时候告诉记者。“我们不能让恐惧和困惑决定孩子是否能吃饱饭。”

格舒告诉记者，修订后的规则“实际上让绿卡程序更容易被基于党派政治或个人偏见的滥用所利用”。

倡导者表示，此前对特朗普政府先前规定的研究发现，2019 年和 2020 年，移民家庭和公民子女参与相关项目的人数有所下降，即使是那些当时不受该规定约束的人也是如此。

同样，这项最新举措也将产生广泛的影响。乔治·华盛顿大学去年12月发布的一项研究分析了这项拟议规则，结果显示，约有370万移民家庭成员可能失去医疗补助、食品券、住房福利和其他援助。由于医疗机构、杂货店和其他企业收入减少，各州经济可能损失274亿美元，多达21.2万个工作岗位可能因此消失。

由纽约州牵头，包括22个州和哥伦比亚特区在内的联盟提起诉讼，试图阻止该规则生效。纽约市市长佐兰·马姆达尼领导的多个城市也提起了类似的诉讼。这两起诉讼均于周一在纽约南区联邦地区法院立案。

各州辩称，如果移民，特别是混合身份家庭，因为担心移民后果而退出社会保障项目，它们将损失数十亿美元的联邦拨款。它们还表示，新规赋予移民官员“不受限制的自由裁量权，可以以公共负担为由决定哪些人可以被排除在外”。

根据提交的文件，这些决定可能会“从根本上偏离”公共负担一词的核心含义。

与此同时，各城市在提交的文件中表示，该规定将损害其公共卫生和经济利益，包括将医疗保健、食品和住房成本转移到城市，并损害其劳动力。

除非被法院阻止，否则该规定将于周五生效。

纽约南区联邦地区法院法官罗尼·艾布拉姆斯（奥巴马任命）将各州提起的诉讼的首次会议定于 10 月 9 日举行。

CNN的格洛丽亚·帕兹米诺对本报道亦有贡献。