Green Card Policy Overhaul Changes Long-Standing Immigration Rules

Trump administration requires most green card applicants to apply from abroad, reversing a 50-year-old practice allowing adjustment of status within the U.S.

Objective Facts

The Trump administration announced Friday that it would require most foreigners seeking green cards to apply from outside the United States, a shift in long-standing practice that immigration lawyers said could affect hundreds of thousands of people who file applications each year while living in America on temporary visas. From now on, an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances. The agency's new policy memo PM-602-0199 tells officers to weigh discretion case by case and to view consular processing as the ordinary system for most applicants. Following the law allows the majority of these cases to be handled by the State Department at U.S. consular offices abroad and frees up limited USCIS resources to focus on processing other cases that fall under its purview, including visas for victims of violent crime and human trafficking, naturalization applications, and other priorities. Roughly 1.4 million green cards were issued in 2024, including more than 820,000 to applicants already living in the U.S. through adjustment of status.

Left-Leaning Perspective

Rep. Delia C. Ramirez called the policy "beyond cruel" and demanded DHS be dismantled "piece by piece," while New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said it "betrays the very promise that built this country." Rep. Ted Lieu characterized it as a "stupid" policy that will help China and Russia, while David J. Bier of the Cato Institute labeled it "illogical." World Relief President and CEO Myal Greene called the policy "cruel" and "anti-family," stating it will "force apart husbands from wives and children from their parents." Doug Rand, a former senior advisor at USCIS during the Biden administration, said "The goal of this policy is very explicit. Senior officials in this administration have said over and over that they want fewer people to get permanent residency because permanent residency is a path to citizenship and they want to block that path for as many people as possible." The American Immigration Lawyers Association emphasized that Congress intentionally created the adjustment-of-status system in the 1950s to prevent prolonged family separation and to help American businesses retain skilled workers during lengthy visa backlogs. The American Immigration Council warned that already strained consular offices will "absolutely" be overwhelmed by the volume of applicants now forced abroad. Critics argue that overturning such a long-standing framework through an administrative memo rather than legislation is legally questionable and likely to face immediate challenges in federal court. Left-aligned critics note that USCIS claims it is contrary to congressional intent to have temporary residents apply for permanent residence, but this is wrong—Congress created adjustment of status in 1952 because it was causing so much hardship to Americans and their families to have to leave the United States for the sole purpose of getting a visa to come right back.

Right-Leaning Perspective

USCIS stated: "We're returning to the original intent of the law to ensure aliens navigate our nation's immigration system properly. From now on, an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances. This policy allows our immigration system to function as the law intended instead of incentivizing loopholes." USCIS spokesman Zach Kahler said the change is about "returning to the original intent of the law" and explained that "When aliens apply from their home country, it reduces the need to find and remove those who decide to slip into the shadows and remain in the U.S. illegally after being denied residency." Conservative outlets described the practice as a loophole long unenforced, allowing non-citizens to remain in the United States while waiting for approval, with those on temporary visas effectively transitioning from a temporary visa to the permanent residency process without ever leaving the country. Conservative publications noted that adjustment of status will now be treated as an extraordinary form of relief granted only in exceptional circumstances, with people temporarily in the United States who want permanent residency expected to return home and pursue consular processing. The policy is part of a wider push by the administration to restrict both legal and illegal immigration, with officials saying these steps are designed to enforce compliance and reduce overstays. The administration argued that routing more cases through overseas consular processing would allow USCIS to redirect resources toward other priorities, including applications involving victims of violent crime and human trafficking, as well as citizenship and naturalization cases.

Deep Dive

For over half a century, foreign nationals with legal status have been able to apply for and complete the entire process for permanent residence in the United States—including individuals married to U.S. citizens, holders of work and student visas, and refugees and political asylum seekers. Congress created this "adjustment of status" pathway in 1952 specifically to prevent the hardship of American families having to separate while their foreign-born spouse or relative left to obtain an immigrant visa abroad before returning, which was illogical and expensive. Congress has repeatedly attempted to expand its use. In 2024 alone, more than 820,000 of the 1.4 million green cards issued went to applicants already living in the U.S. through this process. The core disagreement is whether this half-century practice represents a "loophole" that needs closing or a foundational protection Congress deliberately created. USCIS argues INA § 245(a) makes adjustment discretionary—status "may be adjusted" rather than "must be adjusted"—and cites court decisions describing it as administrative grace, not an entitlement. Critics counter that Congress created the provision precisely because forcing Americans and their families to undergo this separation was causing hardship, making the administration's interpretation contrary to legislative intent. Legal observers question whether overturning decades of practice through agency memo rather than rulemaking is procedurally valid, predicting immediate court challenges. The practical stakes are enormous: For many applicants, leaving the U.S. introduces new risks including visa delays, processing backlogs, and the possibility of being unable to return, potentially affecting hundreds of thousands of families and businesses. Multiple immigration law firms have already signaled they are reviewing the memo for potential legal challenges.

OBJ SPEAKING

Create StoryTimelinesVoter ToolsRegional AnalysisPolicy GuideAll StoriesCommunity PicksUSWorldPoliticsBusinessHealthEntertainmentTechnologyAbout

Green Card Policy Overhaul Changes Long-Standing Immigration Rules

Trump administration requires most green card applicants to apply from abroad, reversing a 50-year-old practice allowing adjustment of status within the U.S.

May 22, 2026· Updated May 23, 2026
What's Going On

The Trump administration announced Friday that it would require most foreigners seeking green cards to apply from outside the United States, a shift in long-standing practice that immigration lawyers said could affect hundreds of thousands of people who file applications each year while living in America on temporary visas. From now on, an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances. The agency's new policy memo PM-602-0199 tells officers to weigh discretion case by case and to view consular processing as the ordinary system for most applicants. Following the law allows the majority of these cases to be handled by the State Department at U.S. consular offices abroad and frees up limited USCIS resources to focus on processing other cases that fall under its purview, including visas for victims of violent crime and human trafficking, naturalization applications, and other priorities. Roughly 1.4 million green cards were issued in 2024, including more than 820,000 to applicants already living in the U.S. through adjustment of status.

Left says: Democratic lawmakers and immigrant advocates characterized the policy as "beyond cruel" and betraying American values, arguing it will force families apart and harm U.S. competitiveness. Critics from across the left framed it as part of DHS's radical expansion on legal immigration, detailing how USCIS has slashed green card approvals in half over the last year and now plans mass denials.
Right says: The administration framed the policy as closing a long-ignored loophole and returning the system to its original intent, stating "This policy allows our immigration system to function as the law intended instead of incentivizing loopholes. The era of abusing our nation's immigration system is over."
✓ Common Ground
Both sides acknowledge significant uncertainty about policy implementation—USCIS did not say when the change would come into effect, whether individuals would be required to remain in another country throughout the entire process, or whether the policy impacts foreigners whose green card applications are already underway.
Both progressive and conservative observers recognize that consular wait times present a practical problem—at some U.S. consulates abroad, wait times for a visa appointment could take up to more than a year.
Even supporters acknowledge in practice that adjustment of status has become the predominant mechanism by which employment-based immigrants obtain permanent residence, and that the process has become deeply embedded in employer-sponsored immigration strategies, particularly given multi-year visa backlogs.
Objective Deep Dive

For over half a century, foreign nationals with legal status have been able to apply for and complete the entire process for permanent residence in the United States—including individuals married to U.S. citizens, holders of work and student visas, and refugees and political asylum seekers. Congress created this "adjustment of status" pathway in 1952 specifically to prevent the hardship of American families having to separate while their foreign-born spouse or relative left to obtain an immigrant visa abroad before returning, which was illogical and expensive. Congress has repeatedly attempted to expand its use. In 2024 alone, more than 820,000 of the 1.4 million green cards issued went to applicants already living in the U.S. through this process.

The core disagreement is whether this half-century practice represents a "loophole" that needs closing or a foundational protection Congress deliberately created. USCIS argues INA § 245(a) makes adjustment discretionary—status "may be adjusted" rather than "must be adjusted"—and cites court decisions describing it as administrative grace, not an entitlement. Critics counter that Congress created the provision precisely because forcing Americans and their families to undergo this separation was causing hardship, making the administration's interpretation contrary to legislative intent. Legal observers question whether overturning decades of practice through agency memo rather than rulemaking is procedurally valid, predicting immediate court challenges. The practical stakes are enormous: For many applicants, leaving the U.S. introduces new risks including visa delays, processing backlogs, and the possibility of being unable to return, potentially affecting hundreds of thousands of families and businesses. Multiple immigration law firms have already signaled they are reviewing the memo for potential legal challenges.

◈ Tone Comparison

Democratic language used emotional descriptors like "beyond cruel," emphasizing human impact and betrayal of American values. The administration's language emphasized law enforcement and restoration—"This policy allows our immigration system to function as the law intended" and "The era of abusing our nation's immigration system is over"—framing the policy as correction rather than restriction.