EL PASO, TEXAS — The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released guidance Tuesday concerning the application of “public charge” regulations finalized in July. The immigration law’s public charge provision applies to some lawfully present immigrants applying for “green cards.” The guidance fails to define key concepts required to comply with the policy and opens the door to green card denials based on bias concerning an applicant’s disability or health.
“Whether it’s on the streets of Maine or Minnesota or in the process used to evaluate green card applications, the Trump administration is making lawful immigration policy about bias and chaos, regardless of the resulting harm,” said Protecting Immigrant Families coalition policy and advocacy director Maddie Geschu.
Regulations adopted in 2022 established guardrails to mitigate the impact of political influence and personal bias in the evaluation of green card applications. The July regulations rescinded those guardrails, indicating that the agency would later issue guidance articulating the administration’s green card application evaluation priorities.
That guidance, issued today, allows DHS officials reviewing green card applications to consider whether a U.S. citizen child or other relative has used health or social service programs, even if the green card applicant had not. This is a radical departure from decades of precedent, as past policies have considered only the green card applicant’s use of safety net programs.
“Immigration policies shouldn’t deter U.S. citizens from getting the care and help they need,” said Geschu.
A 2021 survey exploring the impact of a less extreme public charge expansion found that about half (46%) of people in immigrant families who needed care or help during the pandemic did not apply because of immigration concerns.
The guidance also reaffirms the regulation’s focus on “means tested” programs, but it does not define the term or list specific programs that the agency will consider. DHS’ failure to clarify this central question leaves both families and service providers unable to assess whether using any given program might undermine a current or future green card application.
“When it comes to the critical question of which health or social service programs will count against green card applicants, this ‘guidance’ offers no actual guidance,” said Geschu.
The guidance also directs administration officials to discriminate based on personal factors, including disability, age and employment prospects, obesity, heart or respiratory disease, cancer, diabetes, and mental health conditions.
“Green card decisions shape the lives of whole families, and they decide who can eventually become U.S. citizens. They shouldn’t be based on how someone looks,” said Geschu.
Health factors are not race neutral. From infant mortality to life expectancy, people of color are more likely than white people to face barriers to good health.
“Making decisions based on someone’s health is just another way of making decisions based on their race,” said Geschu. “And given the administration’s track record of racial profiling in immigration enforcement, that should concern all of us.”
Federal law requires that changes to regulations must be adopted through a specific process involving public notice and comment, but there is no such requirement for “subregulatory” guidance like that issued by DHS today. As a result, the agency can change or revoke the guidance at any time, with no prior notice, no opportunity for public comment or other engagement, and no appeal.
“On Tuesday, DHS says they’re going to implement the public policy one way, but there’s no reason to expect they won’t apply it differently on Wednesday,” said Geschu. “That’s what chaos looks like.”
A March 2026 PIF poll found that 83% of Americans want lawfully present immigrants to be able to get care and help when they need it.
“This is yet another example of an administration that has set the will of the American people aside to pursue its own relentless anti-immigrant agenda,” said Geschu.
