New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has joined a coalition of Democratic-led municipalities and states in filing a lawsuit against the Trump administration’s new immigration regulation, which takes effect Friday. The legal challenge targets a rule that expands the criteria for denying green cards based on an applicant’s potential use of public assistance.
According to a policy notice posted on the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) website, immigration officers now possess broader discretion to reject applications from individuals deemed “likely at any time to become a public charge.” The administration, which first announced the rule in July, argues that under current law, applicants can be denied permanent residency if they are likely to rely primarily on government cash assistance or federally funded long-term medical care.
The new regulation significantly widens the scope of considered benefits to include non-cash, temporary programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program. Consequently, federal officers can deny permanent legal status if they believe an applicant might eventually need these services.
Critics warn that the expanded definition could deter U.S. citizens and their families from accessing essential benefits. For example, a child’s participation in a school free lunch program could be counted against a parent’s citizenship application. Mamdani condemned the policy during a news conference at New York City Hall, stating, “This is an undisguised effort to strip New Yorkers of the services they rely on. People could die.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James led a separate lawsuit challenging the rule in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alongside 21 other states. Their complaint argues that the policy will exacerbate homelessness, increase untreated illnesses, and worsen food insecurity and lack of educational access.
“New Yorkers should not have to choose between putting food on the table, getting the health care they need, and pursuing a future in this country,” James said at the press conference.
While USCIS noted that certain vulnerable populations, including asylum seekers, refugees, and victims of human trafficking, would remain exempt from the rule, opponents argue the broad impact will still harm many law-abiding residents.
In response, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson defended the policy to ABC News, asserting that sanctuary states are opposed to the rule because they fear losing federal funds as noncitizens might leave welfare programs. “We’re shaking in our boots over this supposedly terrible outcome,” the spokesperson stated.
Leave a Reply