More than 125 congressional Democrats are pushing the Trump administration to withdraw a proposed rule that would open the door to denying a person a green card if they use public assistance, including Medicaid or food stamps.
“This proposal punishes families for caring for their children. It would scare parents away from health care, food assistance, and early education that U.S. citizen children are legally entitled to, putting kids at risk and destabilizing entire communities,” Rep. Adriano Espaillat, D-N.Y., chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said in a statement to The Hill.
“Congress never intended public charge to be used this way, and we are demanding DHS withdraw this harmful proposal before it inflicts real and lasting damage on American families,” Espaillat added.
The Department of Homeland Security‘s proposal would rescind a rule adopted in 2022 under the Biden administration that reinstated a long-standing but relatively narrow definition of “public charge.”
OVERWEIGHT FOREIGNERS SEEKING VISAS MAY BE REJECTED TO SAVE HEALTHCARE COSTS, TAXPAYER EXPENSE
The 2022 rule defined a “public charge” as someone “primarily dependent” on government assistance, particularly people receiving cash assistance for income maintenance or nursing home care at government expense. Most non-cash benefits such as Medicaid and food stamps did not count toward a public charge determination under that rule.
DHS’ new proposal argues that the Biden-era policy is a “straitjacket” on immigration officers that prevents them from considering “all factors and information relevant to an alien’s likelihood at any time of becoming a public charge.”
Opponents of the Trump administration’s proposed rule change fear it would open the door to widespread rejection of green cards for people who would otherwise qualify and that it would lead immigrants to not seek assistance they could qualify for over concerns that it could impact their green card applications.
If the proposal is finalized, the Trump administration would not have a formal definition of what it means to be a public charge. This would give immigration officials broader discretion to consider a wider array of factors and potentially additional types of benefits in determining what constitutes a public charge, moving away from the narrow “primarily dependent” factor that was included in the 2022 rule.
In urging the federal government to abandon the proposal, 127 Democrats said the rule would create “immediate and widespread uncertainty,” according to The Hill.
The Democrat lawmakers argue in formal comments that immigration officers would be forced to make a public charge determination with little guidance.
DHS TO IMPOSE $1K FEE FOR MIGRANTS GRANTED HUMANITARIAN PAROLE
“Removing these definitions invites arbitrary decision-making and creates significant risk that adjudicators will rely on factors that Congress has not authorized,” the lawmakers wrote to DHS.
“The proposed rule contains no assurance that adjudicators will refrain from considering benefits received during periods when the federal government expressly stated that such benefits had no immigration consequences,” they continued.
The lawmakers also said the proposed rule opens the door to penalizing people who previously used assistance programs when there was no risk for accessing the benefits.
“Families seeking adjustment of status — including refugees, survivors of domestic violence or trafficking, children who have been abused, neglected, or abandoned, and others whom Congress has long exempted from punitive public charge treatment — cannot navigate a system where the rules shift without warning and where past, lawful conduct that the federal government had stated was permissible could be reinterpreted as a negative factor,” they wrote.
“To be very clear, the proposed rule will trigger a massive chilling effect, driving eligible families away from essential assistance in health care, nutrition, childcare, and education, with the heaviest harm falling on U.S. citizen children,” the lawmakers said.
Another group of Democrats also submitted comments taking issue with the plan to change the longstanding definition of a public charge.
“Since the term was first codified as an immigration restriction in 1882, it has been consistently interpreted to mean an individual who is, or is likely to become, primarily dependent on the government for his or her care (i.e., someone who is effectively a ‘charge’ or ward of the state),” Rep. Jaime Raskin, D-Md., and Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the top Democrat on their respective chambers’ Judiciary committees, said in comments signed by additional lawmakers, according to The Hill.
“Over the years, the method for determining such ‘primary dependence’ has changed, but the principle itself has remained steadfast,” they added.
Under the 2019 public charge rule issued during Trump’s first term, immigration officers were instructed to reject applicants who used public programs.
