The Department of Homeland Security issued guidance last week that appeared to eliminate the option for many immigrants to apply for a green card inside the United States. Officials stated that someone in the U.S. temporarily who wants a green card must return to their home country to apply except in extraordinary circumstances. This change targeted the process known as adjustment of status used by immigrants sponsored by American employers or relatives.
The announcement triggered immediate concern among immigrants, business groups and immigration lawyers. They feared it would force hundreds of thousands to leave the country. Broad travel and entry restrictions imposed by the Trump administration on dozens of countries raised the possibility that some applicants would become stranded overseas.
The United States grants more than one million green cards each year. More than half of applicants were already in the U.S. before the new guidance according to the American Immigration Council.
Over the weekend the Department of Homeland Security released a statement portraying the guidance as far less sweeping. The department said the memo issued last week restated longstanding law and policy. DHS told CBS News the policy will not prevent any alien from obtaining a green card who legitimately and properly qualifies.
The department added that the guidance will result in some aliens who do not merit the discretionary benefit applying with the Department of State overseas rather than USCIS in the United States. DHS emphasized this policy will have no noticeable impact on highly qualified applicants and skilled professionals who have followed the law. These aliens benefit the national interest and provide economic benefits to the United States and will continue to merit the favorable exercise of discretion.
Lynden Melmed who served as the top lawyer at USCIS under the George W. Bush administration said the new DHS statement seeks to narrow the scope of the green card guidance. He noted that USCIS officers have long used discretion and analyzed different negative and positive factors to determine eligibility to apply inside the United States. Melmed described the guidance as still likely to prove burdensome for immigrant applicants and their lawyers.
Applicants will need to submit more evidence to show why they should not be required to leave the U.S. and apply abroad. Melmed said the seemingly inconsistent messaging from the administration was confusing for USCIS officers. The underlying policy will still slow legal immigration but at least they are toning down the rhetoric he said.
Green card holders gain access to certain federal benefits that influence housing stability, healthcare coverage and job opportunities. The initial policy language raised fears that hundreds of thousands of applicants could lose their ability to remain in the U.S. while cases advanced. Even the revised case-by-case framing leaves uncertainty about how officers will weigh discretionary factors.
Business groups that sponsor employees expressed alarm that skilled professionals could face prolonged separations from their workplaces. Families sponsoring relatives worried about disruptions to established households and community ties. The administration's statement that the policy affects only those who do not merit the benefit did not fully address how the added evidentiary burdens might delay approvals for those who ultimately qualify.
Immigrants currently awaiting adjustment of status must now prepare additional documentation demonstrating why departure would create hardship. Lawyers expect officers to scrutinize these submissions more closely under the restated policy. The Department of Homeland Security has not released updated forms or specific criteria beyond the case-by-case language.
The volume of more than one million annual green cards means even modest increases in overseas processing could extend wait times for many families and employers. Melmed's assessment that the policy will slow legal immigration suggests measurable effects on timelines despite the administration's assurance of no noticeable impact on highly qualified applicants. Applicants face the immediate task of gathering stronger evidence while the practical consequences of the guidance continue to unfold inside USCIS offices.
The Department of Homeland Security issued guidance last week that appeared to eliminate the option for many immigrants to apply for a green card inside the United States. Officials stated that someone in the U.S. temporarily who wants a green card must return to their home country to apply except in extraordinary circumstances. This change targeted the process known as adjustment of status used by immigrants sponsored by American employers or relatives.
The announcement triggered immediate concern among immigrants, business groups and immigration lawyers. They feared it would force hundreds of thousands to leave the country. Broad travel and entry restrictions imposed by the Trump administration on dozens of countries raised the possibility that some applicants would become stranded overseas.
The United States grants more than one million green cards each year. More than half of applicants were already in the U.S. before the new guidance according to the American Immigration Council.
Over the weekend the Department of Homeland Security released a statement portraying the guidance as far less sweeping. The department said the memo issued last week restated longstanding law and policy. DHS told reporters the policy will not prevent any alien from obtaining a green card who legitimately and properly qualifies.
The department added that the guidance will result in some aliens who do not merit the discretionary benefit applying with the Department of State overseas rather than USCIS in the United States. DHS emphasized this policy will have no noticeable impact on highly qualified applicants and skilled professionals who have followed the law. These aliens benefit the national interest and provide economic benefits to the United States and will continue to merit the favorable exercise of discretion.
A Trump administration spokesman Zach Kahler had said on May 22 that from now on an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a green card must return to their home country to apply except in extraordinary circumstances. By Friday DHS told The New York Times the policy announcement was not a requirement for all applicants but would be implemented on a case-by-case basis.
Lynden Melmed who served as the top lawyer at USCIS under the George W. Bush administration said the new DHS statement seeks to narrow the scope of the green card guidance. He noted that USCIS officers have long used discretion and analyzed different negative and positive factors to determine eligibility to apply inside the United States. Melmed described the guidance as still likely to prove burdensome for immigrant applicants and their lawyers.
Applicants will need to submit more evidence to show why they should not be required to leave the U.S. and apply abroad. Melmed said the seemingly inconsistent messaging from the administration was confusing for USCIS officers. The underlying policy will still slow legal immigration but at least they are toning down the rhetoric he said.
More than 10,000 federal lawyers have departed since the start of the Trump administration. This exodus has left some agencies without sufficient staff. The departures have boosted the ranks of state attorneys general offices and advocacy groups that often challenge federal immigration actions.
Immigration lawyers already anticipate increased workloads from the new guidance. The combination of reduced federal legal capacity and heightened documentation demands creates new pressure points in the green card system. Agencies responsible for processing these applications now operate with thinner resources at a time when policy shifts require clearer internal guidance.
Green card holders gain access to certain federal benefits that influence housing stability, healthcare coverage and job opportunities. The initial policy language raised fears that hundreds of thousands of applicants could lose their ability to remain in the U.S. while cases advanced. Even the revised case-by-case framing leaves uncertainty about how officers will weigh discretionary factors.
Business groups that sponsor employees expressed alarm that skilled professionals could face prolonged separations from their workplaces. Families sponsoring relatives worried about disruptions to established households and community ties. The administration's statement that the policy affects only those who do not merit the benefit did not fully address how the added evidentiary burdens might delay approvals for those who ultimately qualify.
Immigrants currently awaiting adjustment of status must now prepare additional documentation demonstrating why departure would create hardship. Lawyers expect officers to scrutinize these submissions more closely under the restated policy. The Department of Homeland Security has not released updated forms or specific criteria beyond the case-by-case language.
The volume of more than one million annual green cards means even modest increases in overseas processing could extend wait times for many families and employers. Melmed's assessment that the policy will slow legal immigration suggests measurable effects on timelines despite the administration's assurance of no noticeable impact on highly qualified applicants. Applicants face the immediate task of gathering stronger evidence while the practical consequences of the guidance continue to unfold inside USCIS offices.
Highlighted text was flagged by the council. Tap to see feedback.
