“I had filed Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence, for my parents, but I recently received a Request for Evidence (RFE) from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), citing concerns that my parents could become a public charge. Now, I’m worried that this could lead to the denial of their green card applications,” expressed a Nepali American who has been a U.S. citizen for many years. He shared his deep concern and anxiety over the potential rejection of his parents’ green card applications, choosing to remain anonymous out of fear that speaking publicly could jeopardize their case.
This concern is not isolated. New York-based immigration attorney Keshab Seadie confirmed that the issuance of RFEs based on public charge grounds has surged, even though the Trump administration has not changed Biden-era public charge rules.
“Compared to the previous administration, we’re seeing a noticeable increase in RFEs related to public charge concerns for family-based green card applications, placing increased scrutiny on a sponsor’s and joint sponsor’s financial ability to support the intending immigrant,” Seadie explained. “These RFEs specifically request current income verification, pay stubs, W-2 forms, and employment letters to ensure compliance with the affidavit of support requirements.”
Seadie further noted, “The Trump administration has taken a strict stance on enforcing public charge inadmissibility grounds, potentially leading to denials in weaker cases where financial eligibility is questionable. Furthermore, there is a growing emphasis on enforcing the Affidavit of Support obligations, meaning sponsors could be held financially accountable if the sponsored immigrant seeks public assistance within the first three years of obtaining a green card.”
The public charge rule, which assesses whether an immigrant is likely to rely on government assistance, has long been a point of contention in immigration policy. Adding to the unease, many parents of Nepali American applicants are unemployed or retired, and their age, health, assets, education, and skills are now under scrutiny.
As another applicant explained, “Most Nepali American parents are elderly, often with limited education and declining health due to old age. Evaluating them under the public charge criteria only heightens our worries about whether getting green cards for them will be as difficult as it was during the Trump administration.”
Seadie warned that applicants need to be extra cautious moving forward. “With these heightened enforcement measures, petitioners and applicants must be prepared with strong financial documentation and a well-supported affidavit of support to avoid complications in the adjustment of status process,” he said. “Tougher times lie ahead for those with borderline financial eligibility, making it crucial to ensure all sponsorship requirements are met in full compliance with USCIS expectations.”
While the Biden administration had rolled back some of the harsher interpretations of the rule implemented during the previous Trump era, the uptick in RFEs suggests heightened scrutiny by USCIS adjudicators under the current Trump administration.
On September 9, 2022, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a final rule on “public charge,” providing clarity for noncitizens on how DHS will administer the public charge ground of inadmissibility.
The final rule took effect on December 23, 2022, and it remains in effect. The rule restored the historical understanding of the public charge ground of inadmissibility—the reasons a person could be denied a green card, visa, or admission into the United States if they are found likely to become a public charge.
On February 10, USCIS labeled its “Public Charge Resources” page on its website as Archived Content, stating, “The information on this page is out of date. However, some of the content may still be useful, so we have archived the page.” However, USCIS has not published any updated pages or resources.
The NYC Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs updated its webpage on March 12 regarding the public charge rule. The office states on its website, “You do not have to stop using the public benefits programs or City services you or your family members need. You have the right to get care and support without fear. At this time, the public charge rules have not changed.”
“Even if the rule does change, it cannot be applied to all immigrants. The public charge rule cannot be changed by the president of the United States to apply to people who are applying for asylum, are refugees, are seeking or have received Special Immigrant Juvenile classification, are seeking or have received a U visa or T visa, have a green card and are seeking to naturalize to become a United States citizen, or belong to another exempted category,” the Mayor’s Office further clarifies.
According to the current policy and rule, the only public benefits that immigration officials consider in the public charge test are Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), state, tribal, territorial, or local cash assistance for income maintenance, and institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.
Many public benefits and services related to healthcare, nutrition, housing, and other essential needs are not considered in the public charge test. Some excluded benefits from the public charge test include SNAP (food stamps), WIC, free and reduced-price school meals, Medicaid (except for long-term institutionalization), CHIP, Medicare, home-based or community-based health services, vaccines, testing, and treatment for COVID-19 and other communicable diseases, public housing and shelter assistance, and supplemental or special-purpose benefits such as child care or utility assistance.
The Biden-era DHS final rule on public charge also clarified that benefits received by family members other than the applicant, such as a U.S. citizen child, will not be considered in the applicant’s public charge test. Being in an institution for short-term rehabilitation or due to a criminal conviction will not be considered as part of the public charge test. Having a disability, on its own, is not sufficient to make someone a public charge. Using benefits that are considered in the public charge test does not automatically make someone a public charge.
Kishor Panthi
View More PostsKishor Panthi is the founder and editor-in-chief of Khasokhas and NepYork. He is the author of three books, “Kampan,” "UNTRANSLATABLE" and “Zero Mile.” He writes about social issues, immigration, and politics.
