USCIS announced that foreigners in the U.S. who want a green card will need to leave and apply in their home country, barring some unspecified exceptions. USCIS also issued a more detailed policy memo designed as guidance for its staffers who decide these cases. The announcement potentially affects hundreds of thousands of green card applicants a year, upending decades of established practice that allowed applicants to adjust status within the U.S.
What changed
For more than 50 years, foreign nationals with legal status in the U.S.—including people married to U.S. citizens, visa holders, refugees, and asylum-seekers—have been able to apply for and complete green card processing in the United States. That appeared to change suddenly on Friday, when USCIS announced the shift on its website.
“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 said. The policy memo provides more detail than the initial announcement, though immigration experts report the guidance is “more nuanced,” creating ambiguity over the precise scope of the change.
Why it matters
The policy shift creates immediate cascading effects across green card practice. The American Immigration Lawyers Association said several people in green card interviews under the new guidance faced questions Tuesday that haven’t previously been asked of applicants. USCIS adjudicators are now requiring applicants to explain why they cannot apply overseas and requesting new forms of evidence.
Foreign nationals with legal status have been able to apply for and complete the process for permanent residence in the United States — including people married to U.S. citizens, holders of work and student visas, and refugees and political asylum-seekers. This shift threatens to block or complicate green card pathways for all these categories.
People who entered the country under humanitarian parole could be impacted. Many of those people might have already had family in the U.S. or they married a U.S. citizen — both of which potentially give them pathways to apply for a green card that could now be complicated.
Practitioners report a “chilling effect” on pending applications. The scope of the “extraordinary circumstances” exception remains undefined, leaving practitioners unable to give clear advice to clients. One immigration attorney knew the confusing new policy would slow down applications, saying “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”.
Way forward
-
Monitor the policy memo closely. The USCIS memo contains more detail than the public announcement. Obtain the full text (typically available via the USCIS website or official guidance channels) and review the scope of the “extraordinary circumstances” language.
-
Reassess pending I-485 cases. If you have green card applications pending adjustment of status in the U.S., consult with clients about whether the new policy applies to their category. Employment-based and dual-intent visa cases may be treated differently than immediate-relative cases.
-
Prepare alternative filing strategies. Advise clients and employers that overseas consular processing via I-485 withdrawal and I-131/I-539 advance parole may become the default pathway for many green card seekers.
-
Expect legal challenges. Immigration attorney Charles Kuck said he expected legal action against the change. Monitor federal court filings and circuit court decisions for updates on the policy’s constitutionality.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. We are a technology company, not a law firm. Immigration policy changes frequently and without notice. The USCIS memo—not news coverage of it—is the binding source. Verify all claims against the primary policy memo and consult a licensed immigration attorney before making filing decisions or advising clients. The scope of exceptions, the timeline for implementation, and the policy’s interaction with pending cases may change or be clarified by future agency guidance or court order.