On May 21, 2026, USCIS issued policy memorandum PM-602-0199, addressing the adjudication of adjustment of status (AOS) applications filed in the United States. Although framed as a reminder of existing law, the memo signals a shift in how USCIS officers are instructed to evaluate AOS applications. Subsequent statements from the Department of Homeland Security suggest that USCIS may be walking back some of the sweeping interpretations of the policy. Nonetheless, the memo reflects an intent to apply heightened discretionary scrutiny in AOS cases, which is likely to have real-world implications.
What changed
The memo characterizes adjustment of status as an “extraordinary” discretionary benefit and an “act of administrative grace” that should not “supersede” the ordinary consular visa process. USCIS instructs adjudicators to approach AOS as exceptional relief, even where statutory eligibility is met.
Officers are directed to consider all relevant factors and information in the totality of the circumstances to determine whether an applicant should be granted their request to adjust status or whether an applicant must apply for an immigrant visa at a consular post abroad. Approval of AOS is discretionary, and applicants bear the burden of demonstrating they merit a favorable exercise of discretion. The absence of negative factors is, on its own, insufficient; some applicants may need to demonstrate “unusual or even outstanding equities.”
USCIS’s initial press release suggested that most temporary visa holders would need to leave the United States and apply abroad “except in extraordinary circumstances,” triggering immediate backlash. Within days, DHS sought to clarify that the memo was not a blanket policy change and that officers would continue making case-by-case determinations.
Why it matters
The memo signals a shift in how USCIS officers are instructed to evaluate AOS applications—prompting concern among employers, foreign nationals, and immigration practitioners.
Impact on adjudication standards. The memo signals increased scrutiny of immigration history, intent at entry, and compliance with prior status. More detailed RFEs or interview questions focused on discretionary factors and the availability of consular processing will likely follow. Longer adjudication timelines as officers apply enhanced review.
Differing risk by visa category. Applicants in dual-intent nonimmigrant categories, such as H-1B or L-1, are more likely to satisfy the requirements and avoid intent-related challenges. Nonetheless, the Policy Memo cautions that maintaining lawful status, even in a dual-intent nonimmigrant category, is insufficient to qualify for favorable discretion.
Retroactive application. Because the favorable exercise of discretion is assessed at the time of final adjudication, the heightened standard applies to every I-485 application that has not yet been approved, regardless of when it was filed.
Statutory authority unchanged. Importantly, the memo does not change the underlying law. Adjustment of status remains available under the Immigration and Nationality Act, and USCIS has not created new statutory bars or eliminated existing eligibility categories. The shift is in adjudicative posture, not statutory authority.
Way forward
-
Strengthen discretionary records in new filings. Build affirmative evidence of favorable equities into the initial I-485 packet: family ties, community involvement, employment history, moral character, and any humanitarian considerations. Do not rely on statutory eligibility alone.
-
Prepare pending cases for enhanced scrutiny. If a case is pending adjudication, anticipate Requests for Evidence or interview questions about why adjustment was chosen over consular processing. Document your client’s reasoning and any adverse factors head-on.
-
Monitor your client’s visa category. The scrutiny may be much less for dual-intent visa holders. For individuals not on a dual-intent type of visa, the new policy may raise the stakes for some people. An applicant who travels on advance parole must be prepared to demonstrate “unusual or even outstanding equities” at the time of final adjudication of their I-485 application, which is a higher bar than existed under prior practice, where adjustment was treated as relatively routine for eligible applicants.
-
Assess consular processing as an alternative. For now, employers and foreign nationals should anticipate a more rigorous discretionary review in adjustment cases and take a proactive, strategic approach to planning and filing. Employers should also consider whether immigrant visa processing may be a better option for certain foreign national employees and plan ahead for any employee absences to reduce operational disruption.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Folaform is a software company, not a law firm. Adjustment of status law is fact-intensive and continues to develop; USCIS may refine or withdraw this guidance, and federal courts may challenge it. Verify all guidance against the primary policy memo at the source URL linked above and consult a licensed immigration attorney for advice on your specific case or client situation.