President Donald Trump’s administration has announced a new immigration policy requiring foreigners in the United States who want a green card to leave and apply in their home country, a move that could affect hundreds of thousands of applicants a year and has already sent immigrants, lawyers and advocates scrambling to decode the rules. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said Friday that people in the U.S. temporarily who want a green card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances. The agency also said nonimmigrants, such as students or temporary workers, are in the U.S. temporarily and should leave when that time is up.
Who Gets Forced to Move
The new guidance shifts the burden onto people already living and working in the United States, telling them to leave and apply elsewhere unless they can fit into narrow exceptions. In response to questions, USCIS said only people who provide an economic benefit or national interest could likely apply from the United States. That leaves the agency with broad discretion over who gets to stay in the pipeline and who gets pushed out of it.
The announcement came with a more detailed policy memo intended as guidance for staffers who decide these cases, but immigration experts said the memo was more nuanced and created confusion over what the change actually meant. One immigration law firm, Boundless Immigration, said in a blog post that officers were being instructed to apply existing discretionary standards more rigorously, but that the policy did not necessarily stop the adjustment of status process for eligible applicants depending on visa category. The firm cited previous policy memos about citizenship acquisition that had not led to harsher steps in practice.
Fear at the Bottom, Discretion at the Top
Immigration attorney Flavia Santos Lloyd said her phone began ringing with clients worried about the implications. She said, “It has a chilling effect because we have some cases that we were going to proceed and I can tell already, we should wait and see what’s going on.” Lloyd said she has sent emails to corporate and noncorporate clients telling them she is monitoring the situation and will reach out when she has more guidance and practical applications. “I don’t want everybody to panic,” she said. “My advice to them is wait and see.”
Immigration attorney Charles Kuck said, “This is simply an attempt to try to limit and scare people away from the legal immigration process,” and added, “This is a scare tactic.” He said he expected legal action against the change. The language of the policy, and the uncertainty around how it will be enforced, has already done what bureaucratic power often does best: make people hesitate, delay, and self-censor while the apparatus sorts out who gets to move and who gets blocked.
Shev Dalal-Dheini, senior director of government relations at the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the guidance may be targeting people who overstayed their visas, including the parent of a U.S. citizen who remained after a visa expired, an employee of a company who transferred to the United States, or people in the country on visas specific to clergy and other religious workers. “It seems like maybe who they’re targeting is potentially those whose period of stay lapsed while they were here,” she said.
Exceptions, Exclusions, and the Fine Print
Kevin Miner, a partner with the immigration law firm Fragomen, said he expected people on employment-based visas, like H-1Bs, to be exempt. He said dual-intent visas were specifically mentioned in the memo as areas of possible exception. “Those probably are cases that will continue to precede business as usual and that we won’t see a significant impact,” Miner said.
Matthew Soerens, the U.S. director of church mobilization for World Relief, said language in the memo referring to cases in which immigrants have to adjust their status in the United States gave the organization “hope” and “expectation” that the guidance does not apply to refugees. He said refugees are required to do green card processing a year after arriving in the United States and cannot go home because of the risks they would face there. Trump’s administration has slashed the number of refugees admitted into the United States this year and limited them to white South Africans. Soerens said people who entered under humanitarian parole could also be impacted, including people who may already have family in the United States or who married a U.S. citizen.
The policy’s reach is still being fought over in practice, but the pressure is already showing up in interviews. The American Immigration Lawyers Association said several people in green card interviews under the new guidance faced questions Tuesday that had not previously been asked. One person applying for a green card based on marriage to a U.S. citizen was asked why they applied to adjust status in the United States instead of going back to their home country and applying at the embassy there, whether anything would prevent them from applying in their home country and whether they still had family there. Another person was asked to file a form showing why they should be allowed to apply from the United States and were told evidence should prove they would not be a financial burden or a public charge and could include a 2025 tax return, a letter from an employer stating salary and bank statements.
The policy has also prompted concern that companies may be deterred from pursuing green cards for clients. Lloyd said she thinks the policy will deter some companies from doing so. For people trying to build a life inside the system’s paperwork maze, the message is plain enough: the gate is still there, but the rules can be tightened whenever the people at the top decide to make the climb harder.