Green card applicants are navigating two major legal developments this August, as a landmark federal court ruling calls the State Department's 75-country immigrant visa freeze unlawful while a new Department of Homeland Security public charge rule prepares to reshape how adjustment of status applications are evaluated starting September 18, 2026.
Federal Court Strikes Down 75-Country Visa Freeze
On July 31, 2026, U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta of the District of Columbia ruled in De Moura Gomes v. Rubio that the State Department's blanket "public charge" policy violates the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
The policy required consular officers to refuse immigrant visa applications from nationals of 75 listed countries — even when the officer found no individualized legal basis to deny the visa.
Judge Mehta held that the public charge policy issued by Secretary of State Marco Rubio is "an exercise of authority specifically denied by Congress" in the INA.
At the heart of the ruling is a question of who holds the power to make visa decisions.
The law assigns consular officers — not the Secretary of State — the responsibility to evaluate visa applications individually and determine whether an applicant is likely to become a "public charge."
According to the court, the policy unlawfully eliminated that discretion by requiring officers to refuse applications from the listed countries even when an applicant demonstrated financial self-sufficiency and otherwise qualified for approval.
The plaintiff, Newton De Moura Gomes, a Brazilian national, sued the State Department after the policy halted his application for an immigrant visa through the EB-5 investor visa program.
His attorneys at Kurzban Kurzban Tetzeli and Pratt P.A. celebrated the decision.
"We are pleased the Court recognized that the State Department cannot require individualized review and then dictate refusal regardless of the result," counsel Edward Ramos said. "Congress entrusted visa decisions to consular officers applying the law to each case."
Narrow Relief, Broad Implications
Despite the significance of the court's legal findings, the practical impact for most affected applicants remains limited — at least for now.
The injunction applies specifically to the plaintiff's application and does not, by itself, immediately lift the freeze for every affected applicant of the 75 countries.
The plaintiffs specifically requested narrow relief, and the court ordered individualized adjudication for their case.
Unless the State Department voluntarily withdraws the policy, another court issues broader relief, or an appellate decision changes the landscape, most applicants from the 75 countries may continue to encounter the pause.
Nevertheless, the court's conclusion that the underlying policy is unlawful may strengthen similar challenges brought by other immigrant visa applicants in New York and D.C. district courts.
The freeze, which took effect on January 21, 2026,
has blocked mostly family-based immigrant visa applicants and some employment-based green card seekers from countries including Nigeria, Colombia, Russia, and Egypt.
The directive covered nationals of 75 countries, including Russia, Belarus, Brazil, Colombia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Egypt, Morocco, and many others.
A parallel lawsuit, CLINIC v. Rubio,
is currently pending on cross-motions for partial summary judgment in the Southern District of New York, where the plaintiffs seek to have the blanket ban declared unlawful and permanently vacated.
The July 31 judgment is final and appealable, and the government may seek review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and may ask to stay the order while the appeal proceeds.
New Public Charge Rule Takes Effect September 18
While the court battle over the visa freeze continues, a separate but closely related policy change is bearing down on green card applicants inside the United States.
On July 16, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security announced a final rule rescinding the 2022 public charge regulation, stating that the change aligns public charge determinations more closely with the INA.
The final rule is effective on September 18, 2026.
Under the 2022 rule, only cash assistance and long-term institutional care mattered.
Under the new rule, officers can consider any "means-tested" benefit — meaning any government program with an income limit — including Medicaid, SNAP (food stamps), CHIP, and housing assistance.
If applicants receive these benefits on or after September 18, 2026, they will be considered negative factors in the "totality of the circumstances" analysis: most forms of Medicaid, SNAP nutrition assistance, and Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers and Project-Based Rental Assistance.
The expanded public charge policy will give USCIS officers broad discretion to determine whether an applicant is likely to become financially dependent on the government.
This rule does not reinstate the 2019 regulation with its specific benefit lists and thresholds. It removes the 2022 rule's limits and leaves the statutory factors, agency guidance, and officer discretion to fill the space.
What This Means for Applicants
The filing date is critical.
If you submit your green card application (Form I-485) before September 18, 2026, your case will be evaluated under the 2022 public charge rule — the narrower standard that is more favorable to applicants. If you submit your application on or after September 18, 2026, the new, broader discretionary framework applies.
USCIS will publish a revised Form I-485. Older versions of Form I-485 postmarked or submitted electronically on or after the effective date will not be accepted.
There are important protections for past benefit use.
Receipt of means-tested public benefits before September 18, 2026, will be considered consistently with the 2022 Final Rule.
Additionally,
benefits your family members receive do not count against you. The rule only looks at benefits the applicant personally receives. If your U.S. citizen children receive Medicaid or SNAP, that is not counted against your application.
Statutory exemptions also remain in place. Refugees, asylees, Special Immigrant Juveniles, and T/U nonimmigrant and VAWA beneficiaries, among others, are still statutorily exempt from public charge review.
Practical Steps for Green Card Applicants
Immigration attorneys widely agree that the weeks ahead represent a pivotal window for applicants.
Some applicants who are already eligible and have nearly complete cases may benefit from filing before the new rule takes effect. A properly filed pre-effective-date application may remain under the more defined 2022 framework.
However, experts caution against filing hastily.
Filing quickly should never take priority over determining whether an applicant is legally eligible or submitting a complete and accurate application. A rushed green card filing can create serious consequences, including rejection, delay, a Request for Evidence, a Notice of Intent to Deny, or denial.
Employment-based adjustment applicants should be prepared to provide more extensive documentation and undergo a more thorough public charge review. Employers sponsoring foreign national employees should factor these changes into filing timelines and case strategy for adjustment applications submitted on or after the effective date.
The Bigger Picture
These two developments — the court ruling against the 75-country freeze and the incoming public charge rule — are two sides of the same coin. Both center on the concept of "public charge," a provision that has existed in immigration law for more than a century but whose scope and application have become one of the most contested issues in modern immigration policy.
The De Moura Gomes ruling confirms a basic principle: the government may screen applicants carefully, request evidence, and deny a visa when the law supports denial, but the Secretary of State cannot dictate a predetermined refusal based only on nationality when Congress assigned the decision to individual consular officers.
Meanwhile, the September 18 rule change will reshape how domestic green card adjudications are conducted for the foreseeable future. Applicants, petitioners, and employers should consult with experienced immigration counsel to assess individual circumstances, evaluate filing timelines, and prepare documentation that addresses the broader discretionary factors officers will soon be empowered to consider.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration policies and court orders are subject to rapid change. Individuals should consult a qualified immigration attorney regarding their specific circumstances.