DHS review targets expanded benefit use in green card decisions as officials argue changes would reinforce self-sufficiency and reduce incentives for illegal immigration.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
The Department of Homeland Security is advancing a proposal to significantly revise the federal “public charge” rule, a long-standing standard used to determine whether certain immigrants seeking permanent residency are likely to depend primarily on government assistance.
The public charge ground of inadmissibility applies to most green card applicants, with exemptions for specific categories such as refugees and asylum seekers. Under the proposed changes, immigration officers would gain broader discretion to consider an applicant’s use of public benefits when deciding whether to grant lawful permanent resident status.
DHS cited data showing that in 2022, 54 percent of households headed by immigrants—naturalized, legal, and illegal—used at least one major welfare program, compared with 39 percent of U.S.-born households, according to Census Bureau data.
In November 2025, DHS issued a formal proposal to repeal the existing public charge regulations adopted under the Biden administration and replace them with a broader, more discretionary framework. The proposal would allow officers to consider a wider range of public benefits—including food assistance, Medicaid, and housing aid—when assessing whether an applicant is likely to become a public charge.
In its notice of proposed rulemaking, DHS said the objective is to promote self-reliance and ensure public benefits do not serve as an incentive for immigration.
Critics argue the proposed rule could create confusion and discourage eligible individuals from accessing benefits they need. The public comment period closed Dec. 19, 2025, after drawing more than 8,800 submissions, including a multistate letter of objection signed by the attorneys general of 20 states. DHS has entered a mandatory review phase, during which it must respond to substantive public feedback before issuing a final rule.
According to an in-depth Epoch Times report, the proposal would undo what DHS described as “unduly restrictive” Biden-era rules finalized in 2022. Under those rules, officers were barred from considering use of benefits such as SNAP, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or housing assistance. Only cash assistance programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Supplemental Security Income, and government-funded long-term institutional care could be weighed.
The new proposal would also permit officers to consider individualized, case-specific factors relevant to an applicant’s financial self-sufficiency. DHS said the change would restore a framework that relies on officer discretion “as envisioned by Congress.”
The proposal further clarifies that receiving “any means-tested public benefit” would constitute a breach of a public charge bond—a financial guarantee posted by a U.S. citizen or company to ensure an immigrant does not rely on public assistance. Affidavits of support would also carry less weight under the new rule.
The policy would remove protections for immigrants who used public benefits while previously in exempt categories, including individuals with Temporary Protected Status. Under current rules, benefit use during protected periods could not be held against applicants if they later sought a green card through a non-exempt pathway. The proposal would allow DHS to consider benefit use at any time, regardless of immigration status at the time benefits were received.
DHS said the changes could reduce government spending by approximately $8.97 billion annually, including $5.29 billion in federal savings and $3.68 billion at the state level, largely due to reduced participation in benefit programs.
The rule would also shift the focus from individual applicants to household circumstances. Officers could consider benefit use by family members living in the same household, including mixed-status households. In 2022, there were an estimated 4.7 million mixed-status households in the United States, according to a Center for Migration Studies analysis. Those households receive more than $51 billion annually in public benefits, based on DHS data analyzed by The Epoch Times.
DHS acknowledged that the policy could affect U.S. citizens living in mixed-status households, as benefit use by family members could negatively impact a green card applicant. The agency estimates that about 950,000 individuals—roughly 10 percent of current participants—may stop using or avoid applying for benefits if the rule is finalized. DHS cited prior studies showing benefit enrollment declines of 21 to 54 percent following the 1996 welfare reforms.
The proposal also recognizes potential downstream effects on hospitals, nonprofits, pharmacies, grocery stores, farmers, and landlords that depend on Medicaid, SNAP, or federally subsidized housing funds.
The concept of “public charge” has existed in U.S. immigration law since the 19th century. The Immigration Act of 1882 allowed deportation of immigrants who became public charges within a year of arrival. In 1996, Congress reinforced self-sufficiency requirements through the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act and the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which explicitly established a national policy discouraging reliance on public benefits.
Following those laws, federal guidance in 1999 narrowed the definition of public charge, excluding non-cash benefits. That approach remained in place until 2019, when the Trump administration expanded the definition to include non-cash benefits if used for more than 12 months within a 36-month period. The Biden administration later halted enforcement and reinstated the narrower standard in 2022.
DHS said the Biden-era rule left “little opportunity for discretion or deviation” and conflicted with congressional intent. The current proposal aligns with President Donald Trump’s February 2025 executive order, “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders,” which directed agencies to prevent taxpayer funds from encouraging illegal immigration.
Opposition groups warn the policy could deter immigrants from seeking health care or assistance for their families. A December 2025 analysis by KFF said reduced participation in benefit programs could harm the health and financial stability of immigrant households. The analysis found that one in 10 adult immigrants avoided assistance over immigration concerns, rising to 42 percent in households with likely illegal immigrant members.
Supporters argue the proposal restores the original purpose of the public charge standard. Steven Camarota of the Center for Immigration Studies said extensive welfare use by both legal and illegal immigrants raises questions about admissions policy.
“We should be careful about who we let in,” Camarota said in a prior interview with The Epoch Times. “Once here, it’s going to be very hard to stop people from getting benefits, so the goal should always be keeping out those who are going to need benefits.”
DHS has not announced a timeline for issuing a final rule, which could take months following completion of its mandatory review process.
Original article
Comments