Trump New Green Card Rule Shocks Immigrants | Strict Rules On Green Card | Rahul Reddy | EHA TV

Hinzugefügt: 2026-05-25

[00:00:00]Good morning. We have an uh immigration update with regards to the recent memo that was uh passed yesterday on May 21st and we just saw it early in the morning and we want update. This is about the adjustment of status. Um it is saying that the it is up to the discreation of the USCIS and they may not approve the adjustment of status unless there is extraordinary circumstances showing that the person needs the adjustment of status in United States. So this affects the people who have already applied the adjustment of status also called as 485 application. It also affects the people who intends to file the 485 application.

[00:00:40]In a sense what they're telling is that let's say for example somebody comes and F1 visa changes to H1 and now they changes to adjustment of status. They're going to look into why you did not depart after the F1 visa. Even if people have come on H1B visa, it's a dual intent visa. people can have an intention to settle in United States.

[00:00:58]They say that's not enough for them to have a favorable discretation to give them the green card. Emily, can you tell me what what is happening on the on this thing?

[00:01:11]>> Yeah. So with this memo, USCIS is saying that the general rule should be that every single person applying for a green card should consular process, meaning you are outside the US, you apply for an immigrant visa at the consulate and you enter the US after that process is complete.

[00:01:33]The alternative is adjustment of status.

[00:01:36]and they're saying that in order for someone to qualify for adjustment of status, that is um a matter of discretion, administrative grace. It's an extraordinary form of relief.

[00:01:50]Therefore, we're not going to allow it in most cases. They are considering that filing for adjustment of status is a negative discretionary factor when you should have departed the US and you have to then provide all of the positive discretionary factors that will outweigh this one negative discretionary factor in order for them to agree to let you adjust status and approve your I485 application. So, we've been talking a number of times about USCIS using discretion, how the Trump administration and Steven Miller is changing that uh when it comes to filing for extension of status, change of status, and they're using these law enforcement interaction as a reason to deny an extension of stay to deny an EAD, to deny um a change of status. We've seen it expanded to 485s recently. Um, I think I've come across three or four denials just in the last week where USCIS sole reason for denial, they say, "You clearly qualify for adjustment of status. You've met all the requirements, but in our discretion, we're denying it because of A, B, and C, negative factors that they think apply to this particular person." This takes it to a whole another level. This is on steroids to where they're saying adjustment of status itself is completely discretionary, extraordinary form of relief and we're not going to let anybody do it unless you can prove that you have all of these positive factors to outweigh uh the fact that you did not depart when uh you should have.

[00:03:31]um even though you're in a dual intent visa, even though you're on H or L, um your failure to depart is highly relevant to the analysis and therefore is considered a negative factor.

[00:03:47]>> So is it is it applicable to everybody, Emily, or is it only applicable to the new cases that are getting filed?

[00:03:56]>> It does not provide an effective start date. Um it is the memo is written in such a way that it's just a reminder to officers of how adjustment of status has longstanding been um you know decided and so therefore it applies to everything cases already filed everything pending right now. they could choose to deny every single 485 pending right now as a matter of discretion um or at least send a notice of intent to deny and give you a chance to provide your positive discretionary factors. So this is not just a forward looking. It applies to everything already filed and anything to be filed in the future. For all 485 applications regardless of the type um regardless of your status uh regardless of the category regardless of your country all 485s will be subject to this. Today >> we're getting live questions. So I just want to reiterate that this recent memo is applicable to the existing adjustment of status and future filing cases when the filing dates are current or final action dates are current this memo is applicable. So Stephen, do you think so they will start denying the 485 files unless they see a totality of the circumstances that will favor in their discreation or is it that they're going to it's just an excuse for some of the denials that they are doing or will they do they intend to do more denials? I want to Stephen Brown I want to keep you in intention what Stephen Miller wants to do. Yeah, I think he spells his name differently. He's one of the evil Stevens with the PH. Um, you know, I I think with with even with this memo, Rahul, I think they can't just turn around and say we're denying everything today. I think there would have to be an opportunity to uh respond uh procedurally.

[00:06:01]um you know that they say, "Hey, we don't think we're going to exercise discretion, so um prove it." Um I think I think they could um I I do want to emphasize I mean, we've all had this memo for maybe three hours now. Uh we don't really know how they're going to uh actually apply it. just have the text which some of it is kind of I don't know they they like I mean I don't know maybe discretion was Edllo's word of the day calendar uh because it shows up quite a bit but I think there's a lot of issues with this memo but I think we're going to have to be proactive with it >> what do you mean by proactive what are we going to do about it for the applications number one I I think maybe I would try to, you know, start putting together my evidence. You know, why why should I? I think there's a lot of support. So, let's just kind of go back to where this comes from. The IMA does say that the the secretary uh or the attorney general, it's now DHS may in his discretion uh go through, you know, with adjustment of status, right?

[00:07:16]So it all is adjustment status is discretionary but it is still a procedure that the government created and their regul I think their regulations don't support this memo. Um I think it creates a higher uh uh evidentary standard than what the regulation says and I don't think this is actually discretion that is afforded to Congress to say you can't actually go through this procedure that we created.

[00:07:44]Um, I can tell you there's a lot of people already I've been talking all morning with people on potentially developing litigation. I will say we don't have anything created today. We we all had this for three hours. There's a lot of research that needs to be done, but it's already being discussed because I think there's a lot of open doors for litigation on this that it's not discretion that's intended. It's abuse of discretion. I would say it's not even discretionary.

[00:08:13]um because it's not something afforded to them. It's a a lot of issues with it.

[00:08:16]But you know, uh I also think Rahul and Emily, we were talking about this. Let the go back in history, the the 1954 INA allows for adjustment of status because they want to alleviate some of the burdens on the consulates abroad. Now, let's fast forward to 2000 with the um AC21, right? This idea is we want to stop disruptions with high-skilled immigrants. We want to make things a little bit more flexible, a little bit smoother. So, how are you going to say, uh, we have this process of adjustment of status. We want to make things Congress wants to make things easier, uh, smoother, but now we're going to view it as a negative, you know, that you're trying to adjust. I I don't think it's going to fly. So, we'll see how they actually apply it. uh but I can tell you a lot this is being talked about already >> MB what what do you think of immediate relatives that is the spouse of US citizen parents of US citizen children under 21 of US citizen let's say the spouse of US citizen came on a B2 visa and now um they are married after they entered into United States uh or if the person is an F1 visa and or if the person is an H1B visa and now they got married. How do they view this uh discretionary method and we should do the console processing instead of actually filing the additional status?

[00:09:45]>> Yeah, I think that's what they're wanting people to do as a way to get you out of the country and then you know you're stuck with dealing with the consulate for who knows how long and what their process is going to be like.

[00:09:57]But yeah, I do think it applies for to any 485. So, even those that are married to a US citizen, immediate relatives, um I think that it might depend on the method of entry into the US. Um you know, someone who entered on a B visa or an F visa and then gets married and files adjustment may have a harder time compared to someone who entered on an H and then married a US citizen and files for adjustment. Um because again that initial visa is intended for you to come in for a short specified purpose and then leave and they're saying your failure to depart in that time is the negative discretionary factor and so you're going to have to have a lot of positives in order to outweigh that.

[00:10:44]Now, of course, we don't know how USCIS is going to weigh all the different factors and how heavily they're going to claim that the one negative factor that you didn't leave is going to outweigh.

[00:10:56]You could have a hundred positive factors and maybe they're going to say this one negative factor is so negative that there's no way to overcome it. I think that's what they're planning to do for F1, B visas, you know, TPS, um, people that were parrolled in, that sort of thing.

[00:11:14]um for someone on HRL, they do specifically say that um you know applying for adjustment of status for these dual intent categories is not inconsistent with maintaining your non-immigrant status. But in a little footnote, they also say that being an HRL by itself doesn't overcome this negative factor. So for H&L who marry a US citizen, I think you're going to have to be prepared to provide all those positive factors which are your immigration history, family ties in the US, medical conditions, criminal history, connections to the community, anything about public safety, national security concerns. Um, I'm hopeful that those will more outweigh the one negative factor for H&L, but for everybody else, I feel that their plan is to deny adjustment of status to everyone regardless of how many positive factors you have and force everyone to consular process. I'm curious, Emily, if that's actually their plan or if it's, you know, Friday and we want to dominate the news cycle because we've seen that quite a bit. I mean, I think there's a lot of illegalities with this memo. I think there's a lot of issues uh with uh the vagueness, the legisl all that. So, we know that this administration loves to make announcements so they can dominate the news cycle so they can say we're doing this and then we'll start, you know, Tuesday because Monday's a holiday. We'll we'll we'll get tweets from, you know, press secretaries like but whoa, all of y'all don't know how to read. Uh that's not um so I mean it's why I want folks I mean when I first saw this Yeah. You know, my my heart dropped a little bit because I was like this is pretty messed up. Um, I also, you know, started going into thinking, but I also think we kind of have to see a little bit with what plays out on this, too.

[00:13:16]I'm not sitting there saying we need to be complacent, but um, this is new and it's, I think, flies in the face of decades of what they've done. Um, and so I don't I don't even know how they actually intend to apply this to to be honest.

[00:13:34]>> Yeah. to your point, if you think back to the prior Trump administration, remember their big thing was public charge. Um, and so they wanted to be able to use public charge as a way to deny everything basically. So they created this 944 form, this declaration of self-sufficiency.

[00:13:53]Anybody filing a 485 had to include the 944 form. They had to include their credit score, their credit report, proof of their health insurance, and then all of these, you know, positive financial factors. Did we ever see 1485 denied due to public charge for employment base specifically? Never.

[00:14:14]>> Fe. So, this may be along those lines where they're making a big hoopla as you suggest and that for the typical run-of-the-mill employmentbased, you know, maybe yeah, we'll have to add in some positive discretionary factors um types of things in the filing, but that they'll still approve them, but it just adds more risk and more uncertainty when Congress wanted things to be more flexible and smoother specifically for employment And to your point on that risk, I mean, and I hate I hate saying this because it goes against what we said the previous administration. I mean, you know, up till now, I would tell people, yes, 485s are discretionary, but if you don't have an arrest and you don't have visa issues and you have a legitimate sponsor, your case is probably what, 95% chance that it's going to get approved because that's that's how it goes, right? Uh, and so who cares about your non-immigrant status once you have the EAD and the advanced parole? Like, you're not going to ever need it again because this is going to be smooth.

[00:15:20]Should should that I mean, I I would almost consider changing that advice.

[00:15:24]And I know we've talked about that all year uh last year and this year because of a number of other things with automatic extensions of the EAD as well, but um you know right now if you abandon your non-immigrant status and you get a 485 denied, you have to leave there. There isn't an option. And then you know are you subject to the to a proclamation or whatever. Um, you know, unfortunately for a government that's fixated on efficiency, this adds more uh layers to to them because somebody who probably could get off their H1 or their L or whatever might need to maintain their non-immigrant status.

[00:16:07]Uh Emily, you rightly pointed out with regards to the financial thing that where we have been put like 15 or five to six pages filling out all that information out. Uh we never got a single denial on that issue especially for the employment based immigration and um we never and Stephen pointed out not even a single RF on it either not a single RFP on it either. Uh yet we had to go through all the burden. It could be that or you know we have like for example 60 days of grace period after the H-1B is let go. Um and that is also a discretionary relief but we haven't seen any denials of people moving from company A to company B within 60 days.

[00:16:52]Of course we have seen some reversals with regards to the B2 switching back to H1B but not from company A to company B.

[00:16:58]We haven't seen anything. It could be that way or it could be drastic as you know getting all the 485 dates unless we show the extraordinary circumstances why they need it and they could point out in the DS160 form and when you filled out you said you you came on F1 visa then you changed to H1 you never left after F1 you never left after H1B or they could deny we don't know at this point of time so uh and Stephen pointed out that it's only 3 four hours we're banging our heads what what are they going to do about it? Now, what do we advise for people right now? The questions that are coming here right now is uh I'm filing the my adjustment of status. I'm married to a US citizen.

[00:17:40]What are the steps that I need to take?

[00:17:42]I I'm about to travel. It's a summer vacation for me. I have an advanced parole. I have to travel. I am in a traditional status and um I don't I have an EAD but I don't have an non-immigrant visa again. Should I get back to H1B?

[00:17:55]What are your answers guys?

[00:17:59]Those are a lot of uh tough questions to answer right now. I think um you know if I'm someone who's married a US citizen and was planning to file the adjustment of status as of this moment I would probably still file it I would maintain my nom non-immigrant status after filing. If you're in a situation where you know for marriage to a US citizen you don't have to be in a non-immigrant status. you don't have to have any status to qualify to file.

[00:18:30]Might want to wait and see what happens there. I don't know how safe it's going to be to file a 485 um in that situation. Um for someone, you know, who's employmentbased and um traveling on advanced parole, is it safe to travel right now? Maybe not because it's possible that your 485 could get denied where you're when you're outside the US and you don't have an advanced parole to come back on anymore. Um, so you would want to have that non-immigrant status. So I think right now the most conservative thing would be to maintain your non-immigrant status, don't travel, and then maybe cautiously proceed with the 485. maybe include some of the discretionary positive discretionary factors at the time of filing um and you know hope for the best at this point but yeah I think it's risky to travel on AP now >> I don't to your point I definitely wouldn't not file for adjustment right now I mean I I think definitely I would proceed full full steam ahead with that because you know with the understanding that maybe there's a greater chance of denial. Um, but no, and someone just asked and I let's be very clear on the terms of art we're using here. This is not a change of status. So, this is this doesn't impact, you know, going from your F1 to your H1, although Emily, let's not talk about it. Um, this memo is fully about adjustment of status to a lawful permanent residency for the green card. So, we just had two people ask that on YouTube about, you know, their H-1B cap cases. That's not what we're talking about. That's a change of status, adjustment of status for a green card. And very term of art.

[00:20:26]>> So, what you're telling me, this is not applicable from people moving from H4 or F1 to H1B. It does not affect at all.

[00:20:33]That's what Stephen said. Um, one question a lot of people saying, okay, so what we're going to do council processing. Uh this question is coming from um uh ASICA7103 from YouTube and other people um that okay we're going to do the console processing. It's not that easy guys console processing because console processing involves lotus a lot of delay a lot of discreation you're outside the country and you may not um if if they put it some query on your thing you may have to wait it for a long period of time there's a lot of discreational that they can use in denying it the console processing. So normal immigration lawyers are reluctant in sending the clients out there.

[00:21:15]Uh regardless >> and I would also add you know the consulates don't have the capacity to handle um everyone who would normally file for adjustment of status now doing consular processing for their immigrant visa. They don't even have the capacity to handle the current number of non-immigrant visa applicants because everyone requires an interview now. um how are they possibly going to handle the number of people that would normally file a 485 at the consulate? It's just going to create a huge backlog um where people are going to be, you know, waiting in the US for their interview to be scheduled for years because the consulates do not have the capacity to handle that many more immigrant visa applicants. You know, it's it's funny because I'm I'm looking here at X, an attorney friend of of mine who tweeted out a uh textbook. It's an older textbook, but it's it talks about it. Um 1952, the idea, you know, Congress enacted the INA to include this adjustment of status, you know, uh because, uh, you know, why was it better for someone to leave when it could be done here in the United States? And Emily, you and I talked about this this morning. Um, I think DHS with, you know, HSI, with, you know, all the petition, everything, they have more information, uh, with DHS, with USCIS of the immigrants journey uh, than, um, the consulate has.

[00:22:58]>> Yeah. I mean for people who are in the US um you know H1B holders, L1 holders but other visa applicants as well many of them most of them have had to file petitions with USCIS file applications for USCIS provide their information to USCIS over and over again so that they could be vetted and so USCIS could determine whether these people qualify for the visa that they're getting. And now, and so all of that data is within USCIS. And so we know when someone files a 485 that USCIS goes through that data.

[00:23:34]They use that information to determine whether you qualify or not. Department of State might not have access to all of that same data. So they're the ones that would be adjudicating a immigrant visa at the consulate. Um, I feel like USCIS is in a much better position to actually vet green card applicants compared to the consulate who would be doing all of this from abroad. Um, so I'm not sure how this makes us safer or more secure or eliminates fraud um when the people that have the information aren't going to be the ones adjudicating the application. and and USCIS also has a better understanding of what's going on with all that. You know, Department of State might see data points, might see numbers, might see parts of the petition, but I mean, USCIS has the institutional knowledge more so than than Department of State. um you know let's take and you know if there's past issues in an H-1B that is not an inadmissibility uh but you know that department of state would be looking at that would be USCIS.

[00:24:45]So um we'll see it it you know how this uh how this goes in the next couple of little bit here. So a couple of notes I made Emily that what we were been advising clients before and what we are telling right now is quite different of course. Um so one thing is that that what you said is maintain the non-immigrant status uh which was not encouraged before by us particularly me Rahul ready um I would say that right now until we know what's going on very clearly if you are having a non-immigrant intent like H1B or whatever status that you have continue on that status instead of moving on to the EAD that's one change for USC the other change is that we told people that oh it's completely safe for you to travel on advanced parole. Now we are taking that back. We are telling people that don't travel on advanced parole until we we will see how the things will and we'll update the things. Um and also those people who are already outside the country and advanced parole I am advising them to come back into United States uh as soon as possible so that if there is any untoward action happens it's better that we handle the things here in United States now would I people who lost who have been on EAD would I move them back to the uh would I move them back to the non-immigrant status most probably no because that may involve $100,000 fees because we have to do the console processing and also uh the console processing the the things are not good you we are not getting the appointment we are getting the 221G so I would not take that step of converting the bank non-immigrant visas but those people who are already here on non-immigrant visas I would tell them to continue on the non-immigrant visas am I correct Steven and um Emily >> yeah I would 100% % agree with all of that. Until we see how this is actually being implemented, we need to operate under the assumption that um adjustment of status is not safe as a status because it could be denied at any time.

[00:27:06]And so don't rely on your adjustment of status. Continue your non-immigrant status even after you file. Don't use the EAD. Don't travel right now. Don't use the AP. Um, as you said, for people who've already switched, um, and are relying on the adjustment of status and using the EAD, um, you know, I think now is not the time to travel in order to get the non-immigrant status back, uh, because that's more of a problem that's being created, but um, something to consider as we see how this is actually going to play play out. We don't know how uh drastic USCIS adjudicators are going to be with this. Is it going to be like the 944 form adjudication or are they going above and beyond that to deny all 485s unless there's just something incredibly extraordinary about the case?

[00:28:01]We don't know yet.

[00:28:03]>> Yeah. And I think I think you you nailed it, Emily. I mean, you know, people like to think immigration lawyers fear bunker and uh I would say in in this case, it's being cautious and advising you to be cautious until we know. We have a memo that kind of uh changes decades of immigration, okay? uh practice principles understandings uh upends it in a memo okay uh that's released on Friday morning so we don't really know how it's going to be implemented and until we see trends until we see guidance until we see whatever I re I agree it's better to be cautious uh with travel with abandoning your non-immigrant status which again I think is stupid you should be able too. Um, but it's better to be cautious uh until we know for sure.

[00:29:06]>> I'm responding to Reguland. Uh, can I extend the H1B based on the I140 approval? Yes, you can. This memo is not applicable to the extension of the H1B based on the I140 approval.

[00:29:21]You can still continue doing so.

[00:29:25]Um for the people who we uh who are about to file the adjustment of status right now we I will still advise them to file the adjustment of status whether it's a family based immigration whether it's a employment based immigration as Emily has pointed out I probably will try to collect the documentation that why you change the status why is it you need the adjustment of status here instead of going the console processing but I will still file the adjustment of status right Now, uh, Emily, what do you think?

[00:29:57]>> Yeah, I agree with that. I think, um, I would include the positive discretionary factors in the filing, but otherwise, go ahead and file it. Just continue to maintain your non-immigrant status while you wait. While we wait and see how this is actually going to play out.

[00:30:16]>> Uh, any litigation part, Stephen, on this? What >> I think it's being formulated? I've been talking with multiple lawyers this morning while I've been talking with folks while we've been on live. I mean, I think there's definitely things being formulated. You know, I and I think the tough part and I think there's ways around it is, you know, finding uh plaintiffs withstanding because nobody's harmed yet, right? We have a memo, but nobody's harmed yet. Now, I think there's good arguments that there's imminent harm uh because of what we talked about at the beginning, and I think there's ways around it. Um, but I think finding the right way to challenge it is going to be important, but I know been texting with folks, talking to folks, tweeting with adult attorneys, emailing while we've been on here that the wheels are turning. Um, I think something will come. Might not be tomorrow. Uh but uh I think it's in the works.

[00:31:19]>> Any opinions?

[00:31:22]>> Nope. Let's uh see how this plays out.

[00:31:25]Unfortunately, we're in a wait andsee mode. Uh very similar to what we experienced with the $100,000 fee proclamation that happened on a Friday and we saw how things uh adjusted over the weekend into the following week. So, we'll have to do the same this time around.

[00:31:41]>> Thank you very much for tuning.