A new federal policy taking effect Friday gives immigration officers broader discretion to consider whether certain immigrants may rely on public benefits, creating new questions for Utah families seeking permanent legal status.
The Department of Homeland Security says the new policy will remove restrictive regulations and allow immigration officers to grant admission on a case-by-case basis.
“Under @POTUS Trump, DHS is restoring the basic principle that immigrants must be able to support themselves,” the Department of Homeland Security posted on X.
Individuals, advocacy groups and healthcare providers who oppose these changes have raised concerns about the potential negative impact on immigrants and their families, particularly those receiving public benefits such as Medicaid and food stamps.
In Utah, a state where immigrants comprise about 9% of the resident population, the change could significantly affect some families navigating the legal immigration system.
The public charge test, explained
Ever since Congress passed the Immigration Act of 1882, the U.S. government has classified individuals it believes likely to become dependent on government welfare as a “public charge” and has denied their entry into the United States.
Traditionally, immigration officers considered factors such as age, health and financial status when granting individuals admission into the country.
What has changed?
In 2022, the Biden administration formally defined a public charge as someone who is “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence.”
Under this definition, immigration officers could only consider direct cash assistance when evaluating green card applicants. This primarily included enrollment in programs such as Supplemental Security Income and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
The new policy, effective Friday, allows officers to weigh a much wider array of factors, including participation in Medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance and financial aid for college.
Possible effects in Utah
Utah is one of only 15 states that uses state revenue to provide health coverage to children regardless of their immigration status. The state argues that covering children preventively is cheaper than treating them in emergency rooms, and healthy children perform better in school and become more productive adults.
Because of the vagueness of the new public charge rule and what qualifies as receiving a public benefit, Utah’s built-in safety net specifically created for children in immigrant families could now count against a parent’s green card application.
This could result in families walking away from state coverage out of fear, resulting in uninsured children and the state of Utah losing the return on its own policy investment.
What Utah families should know
DHS expects the new policy to reduce annual federal and state spending by approximately $13 billion due to immigrant families disenrolling or forgoing enrollment in public benefits programs.
Much of that disenrollment is expected to occur before any green cards are actually denied. Because the new rule doesn’t specify which benefits will count against applicants, the ambiguity itself acts as a deterrent that pushes families to drop coverage.
Linh Tran-Layton, an immigration attorney based in Salt Lake City and the founder of Green Immigration, advises those applying for green cards and visas not to panic.
“Don’t assume that you shouldn’t apply based on the fact that maybe there was some sort of public assistance in the past,” Tran-Layton said. “You may be missing out on an opportunity if you don’t apply at all, which is why it is important to talk to an attorney to figure out the risks and benefits of applying.”
That being said, Tran-Layton acknowledges the ambiguity of the new policy and the uncertainty it causes current and future applicants.
“They’re supposed to look at everything, the whole picture. How they’re going to do that, we have yet to find out.”