DHS Clarifies Green Card Guidance Won’t Require All Applicants To Leave U.S.

The Department of Homeland Security clarified that a controversial green card guidance issued last week would not require all applicants to leave the United States while their cases are processed, saying most green card applicants will not be required to leave the country.

DHS said the earlier USCIS news release was not a sweeping policy shift and that immigration officers will assess cases case by case, with a DHS spokesperson telling The New York Times, "This was just a reminder to officers of their discretionary authority, which has always existed on a case-by-case basis."

Newsweek

The clarification followed confusion and backlash from applicants, attorneys, and business groups concerned about disruptions to long-standing immigration processes, as DHS now says applicants may still be asked to leave depending on individual circumstances.

The Economic Times reported that DHS said individuals who overstay visas or come from countries whose citizens heavily use public assistance could be among those affected, while also emphasizing that DHS said there had been no broad policy change.

The Economic Times also noted that the USCIS announcement had raised fears that a long-standing process allowing many applicants to remain in the United States could be significantly restricted, except in "extraordinary" cases.

Immigration lawyers described uneven rollout and said some applicants were already being asked during USCIS interviews why they were seeking permanent residency from within the United States and whether they could instead apply from their home countries.

Newsweek quoted Elissa Taub of Siskind Susser saying applicants were seeing "conflicting" accounts of how the policy is applied, while Angelo Paparelli of Vialto Law said some applicants were being asked why they did not apply from abroad.

The Economic Times

The Economic Times reported that Sarah Pierce, a former USCIS official who now heads social policy at Third Way, told The New York Times, "The public backlash has clearly sent the administration scrambling to clean up its own mess,".

Business groups warned that the original guidance could disrupt employers, and Newsweek cited Neil Bradley of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce saying the change could be "incredibly disruptive for employers," while calling for a "more robust" legal immigration system.

Benjamin Johnson, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the uncertainty could complicate any legal challenge, adding, "It does make it more difficult to figure out what you’re suing for when you don’t know what this thing really is,".

While DHS said most applicants would continue applying from within the country under officer discretion, the Economic Times and Newsweek both reported that DHS pointed to groups that could face greater scrutiny, including visa overstays and applicants from countries with high usage of public assistance programmes.

“The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has clarified a controversial immigration policy issued last week, saying most green card applicants will not be required to leave the United States while their cases are processed”

Newsweek

The Economic Times said about 1.4 million green cards were granted in 2024, including roughly 820,000 through the adjustment-of-status process, and it described family-sponsored applicants as potentially facing the greatest impact if officers more frequently required consular processing abroad.

The Guardian described the policy memo as creating confusion and fear for foreigners in the US, quoting a USCIS spokesperson to Semafor that the agency was "merely restating and reasserting" its interpretation of congressional intent regarding immigration status changes.

A 34-year-old Indian software engineer in Washington on an H-1B visa told The Guardian that the policy adds uncertainty, saying, "It sounds like now we would have to go back [to] applying [through consular processing], which was the very benefit of EB-5."

The Guardian also quoted a 30-year-old Portland, Oregon resident who said her husband’s conditional green card was valid for only two years and that she worried the "rug pulled out from everyone" pursuing immigration correctly and legally would change their position.