The Trump administration's sweeping expansion of the "public charge" rule officially took effect on September 18, 2026, fundamentally altering how immigration officers evaluate green card applications — and sparking an immediate legal firestorm from states and cities across the country.
What Changed
The new federal rule governing "public charge" — a test used in certain immigration decisions, such as applying for a green card — took effect September 18, 2026.
The new rule gives immigration officers broad new power to deny green cards to applicants who've used certain public benefits like SNAP, Medicaid, housing assistance, or received post-secondary education financial aid after this date.
It replaces the standard used by immigration officers since 2022, which only counted cash assistance and government-funded long-term institutional care against a green card applicant.
Under the new USCIS guidance, the agency will consider many more public benefits when assessing public charge, including any means-tested benefit — a benefit given based on a family's income level — including Medicaid, food stamps, and housing assistance, among others.
Under the new rule, immigration officers must consider at least five factors when deciding whether an applicant is likely to become a public charge: the applicant's age; health; family status; assets, resources, and financial condition; and education and skills.
Officers may also consider employment history and prospects, a required Affidavit of Support, and other information relevant to the applicant's ability to support themselves.
Perhaps most significantly,
for the first time, a family member's use of these programs — including a U.S. citizen child's use of public benefits — can count in a parent's public charge assessment, potentially negatively impacting their green card application.
Receipt of public benefits alone does not automatically result in a public charge finding; officers must evaluate the applicant's circumstances as a whole.
However,
the new rule is considerably more open-ended than the standard it replaces, with no fixed dollar or time threshold for benefit participation counting against an applicant, and no clarity on how benefit usage is weighed against other factors.
Who Is Affected — and Who Is Exempt
The changes are not retroactive; the new policy only applies to adjustment of status (I-485) applications postmarked or e-filed on or after September 18, 2026.
Anyone with a pending green card application filed with USCIS before September 18, 2026, will be decided based on the prior, more favorable policy from 2022.
The rule can also apply to green card holders who leave the country for more than 180 days and then try to re-enter.
It does not apply to someone renewing a green card or submitting other immigration applications, such as applications for citizenship.
Importantly, several humanitarian categories remain exempt from public charge review.
Refugees, asylees, VAWA self-petitioners, U-visa holders, T-visa holders, and Special Immigrant Juveniles remain exempt from the public charge ground.
Congress has carved out specific humanitarian categories that are not subject to public charge at all, regardless of how the underlying test changes, because these categories were designed to protect people who came forward as victims.
States and Cities Fight Back
New York Attorney General Letitia James led a coalition of 21 other states and the District of Columbia in suing to halt the new policy.
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and seeks to block the rule from taking effect.
In a separate action, New York City Mayor Zohran Kwame Mamdani announced that New York City, alongside the City of Chicago, the City and County of San Francisco, the County of Santa Clara, the City of Seattle, King County, Washington, and the Public Rights Project, filed a lawsuit challenging the rule.
The plaintiffs argue that the Department of Homeland Security exceeded its authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act.
They say the new framework gives immigration officers too much discretion and does not clearly define which income-based federal, state, or local benefits may influence a decision.
The Legal Aid Society, Democracy Forward, and the Center for Constitutional Rights also filed a new lawsuit on September 18 asking a federal judge to throw out the rule.
As of September 15, 2026, no publicly reported court order had blocked the rule, and filing the lawsuits does not by itself suspend the effective date.
This means the rule is currently in force while the legal challenges proceed — a dynamic that mirrors, but also diverges from, the first Trump-era public charge rule in 2019, which was eventually vacated by the courts.
The "Chilling Effect" Concern
One of the most potent criticisms of the new rule centers on what researchers call the "chilling effect" — the phenomenon of immigrants and their families voluntarily disenrolling from benefits they are legally entitled to receive, out of fear.
The administration itself estimates roughly 1.3 million people will disenroll from or forgo enrolling in seven major benefits programs and that there will be a $13 billion annual reduction in program expenditures as a result of the new rule.
The rule's expected effect on program enrollment comes not from eligibility changes, but from dissuading eligible people from participating.
Between 1.4 million and 4.1 million eligible people could disenroll from Medicaid or CHIP, including about 560,000 to about 1.7 million U.S. citizen children, according to estimates from the Kaiser Family Foundation.
The cities argue the policy could increase costs for local governments and discourage eligible individuals from accessing public benefits.
New York City Mayor Mamdani stated that the rule "seeks to push immigrant families away from the programs that have kept people fed and healthy for decades," warning that "families who remain fully eligible for benefits will feel a chilling effect."
The Administration's Position
The Department of Homeland Security said the new rule ensures immigrants can support themselves, posting on X: "Under @POTUS Trump, DHS is restoring the basic principle that immigrants must be able to support themselves," and adding, "We are reaffirming the requirement of self-reliance, protecting public resources, and ending policies that encouraged dependency on hard-working American taxpayers."
The administration argued that the prior 2022 rule was "inconsistent with congressional intent, unduly restrictive, and hampered DHS's ability to make accurate, precise, and reliable determinations," and that the rescission "restores broader discretion for DHS officers to evaluate all pertinent facts."
What Green Card Applicants Should Do Now
For immigrants navigating the green card process, the practical implications are significant. Immigration attorneys and legal aid organizations are urging caution:
- Do not panic-disenroll from benefits.
- Determine if you are exempt.
- Filing date matters.
- Prepare documentation carefully.
- Audit the Affidavit of Support.
What Comes Next
The legal battles ahead will likely be prolonged. During Trump's first term, a similar public charge rule was introduced in 2019 and faced extensive litigation.
The Supreme Court stayed nationwide injunctions issued by district courts in New York and Illinois in January and February 2020, but the Ninth Circuit ultimately held the rule unlawful.
The Biden administration later rescinded it entirely.
Whether history will repeat itself remains to be seen, but the current lawsuits are following a familiar playbook — filed in the same Southern District of New York and raising similar arguments about administrative overreach.
In the meantime, the rule is live. Green card applicants and their families should consult with a qualified immigration attorney before making any changes to their benefits enrollment or filing strategy. The stakes — for both immigration status and family well-being — could not be higher.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have questions about how the public charge rule may affect your immigration case, contact an experienced immigration attorney.