Categories
Updates

Who Will Be Affected by Trump’s Proposed Public Charge Rules?

Share this:

On September 22, 2018, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security published on its website a 447 page proposal called the “Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds”. This proposal would have the effect of denying green cards to immigrants who have legally availed public benefits. Obviously, this is part of Trump administration’s overall trend of cracking down on both legal and illegal immigration.

Most non-immigrants and unauthorized immigrants in the United States are not eligible for most public benefits. But for those who find themselves availing of food stamps, housing vouchers and Medicaid, they may face risk to their future immigrant status if the proposal is fully implemented.

What is this new proposal about?

This new proposal refers to a “public charge” finding as a ground for inadmissibility or basis for denial of visas. An individual is considered a public charge if s/he is dependent primarily on government assistance for her/his subsistence.

Currently the public charge rule is that a person who is dependent primarily on welfare or government assistance will be denied a visa if s/he availed of monetary public benefits such as (1) Supplemental Security Income or SSI for the aged, blind and disabled; (2) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) cash assistance, and (3) State and local cash assistance programs known as General Assistance (GA).

Under the recent proposal, the definition of public benefits in determining whether one is a public charge has been expanded. The additional public benefits are Medicaid (with limited exceptions for medicaid benefits paid for an “emergency medical condition,” and for certain disability services related to education), Medicare part D low income subsidy, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or Food Stamps), institutionalization for long-term care at government expense, Section 8 housing choice voucher program, Section 8 project-based rental assistance, and public housing.

In addition, the proposal added the totality of circumstances test in determining whether one is a public charge. This means that USCIS examiner or consular officers may now examine varying factors that may lead them to the conclusion that the applicant for visa is likely to become a public charge. These factors include applicant’s age, health, family status, assets, resources, and financial status, and education and skills.

Who are affected by this proposal?

Those affected are those (1) non-immigrants present in the United States who are applicants for adjustment of status; (2) those applying for visas at consular offices abroad and (3) those entering the United States who are found to be receiving public benefits within 5 years of of being a lawful residents or in green card status.

Will green card holders applying for U.S. citizenship be affected?

Generally, a finding of public charge is not a ground for denial of U.S. citizenship and so a green card holder who is an applicant for naturalization is not affected by the proposal. The issue of public charge will only matter and result in denial of U.S. citizenship if during the examination on the naturalization application, it is determined that the green card holder had engaged in fraud and misrepresentation in obtaining public benefits.

Should prospective immigrants withdraw from receiving public assistance?

Several community immigrant advocates had opposed the new proposals as being discriminatory against low income immigrants who may happen to receive some benefits because of sudden illness or they have unexpectedly lost their jobs due to economic downturns or changes in their company. In most cases receipt of benefits is only temporary and simply served as a basic economic safety nets to provide economic stability until the individuals becomes self sufficient again. To take this safety net against them in their future application for green cards is cruel and unjust.

A person who is prospectively affected by this proposal may be compelled to choose between risking his future immigration status and meeting his basic need. But it is premature to make a decision on whether those who are receiving public assistance should start withdrawing from these government programs. Although in anticipation of the implementation of the proposals, several public benefit recipients already stopped receiving public benefits at the expense of their health and safety. This proposal becomes a final rule 60 days after it is published with the Federal Register. It must be clear that the proposal is not yet a final rule. It was just recently published on the DHS website. Once it is published with the Federal Register the public will be afforded 60 days to comment and oppose these restrictive proposals. There is still an opportunity to completely negate the impact of this proposal.

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is a San Francisco based immigration attorney and an immigrant rights advocate. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com or facebook.com/tancincolaw, or through this website tancinco.weareph.com/old)

Categories
Updates

Refusal of Visas Based on “Public Charge” Ground

Share this:

For many years, an Affidavit of Support is an essential document before a visa may be issued to an applicant seeking to enter the United States. What happens if the the affidavit of support is found to be insufficient? Why are many visa applicants now being denied despite submission of Affidavits of Support? What are the new changes in policy regarding public charge?

Public Charge Finding

A non citizen may become a public charge for inadmissibility or deportability if s/he has become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence or is proven to have (1) received public cash assistance for income maintenance or (2) institutionalization for long term care at government expense. Only 3 types of public cash assistance benefits are referred to become a public charge: (1) Supplemental Security Income or SSI for the aged, blind and disabled; (2) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) cash assistance, and (3) state and local cash assistance programs known as general assistance.

Affidavits of Support Plus Other Factors

Before new policies took place, an Affidavit of Support should be sufficient to overcome a public charge ground for denial of the visa. This is a document executed by the Petitioner who will attest that she has sufficient assets and income to support the visa applicant. If the petitioner is unable to show financial capacity to support, a co-sponsor may submit an affidavit of support. The petitioner or the sponsor shall demonstrate that she has the means to maintain an annual income equal to at least 125 percent of the Federal poverty line. In addition, she has to agree to provide support to maintain the sponsored visa applicant at an annual income that is not less than 125 percent of the Federal poverty income line.

Early this year, the U.S. Department of State changed the policy on Affidavits of Support. It added now a provision on 9 FAM 302.8-2(B)(2) that states that an Affidavit of Support is one of the positive factors taken into account in the totality of the circumstances test and is not in itself sufficient to protect an individual from a public charge determination. The other factors that are to be taken into account are the applicant’s age health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education and skills.

In addition to the totality of circumstances test that is currently being used, it is anticipated that in the next few months, the new public charge policy of the Department of Homeland Security will be published and implemented. The worst part of the new rule that is USCIS will count benefits received by the petitioner U.S. citizen and take it against the visa applicant to show a finding of public charge.

In applying the amendments to the public charge policy, using the totality of circumstances test, there are cases now where a visa applicant is denied for public charge ground upon finding that the co-sponsor who executed the affidavit of support has no familial relationship to the visa applicant. This means that if the co-sponsor is a friend and not the relative of the visa applicant, even if there is proof of sufficient means to support the applicant, visa applications are being denied.

While this new policy is being implemented, there is no basis under the law to require a co-sponsor to be a relative. INA § 213A(f) or 8 CFR§213a.2 does not include a relationship requirement for a joint sponsor. In addition, the visa applicant should not be denied outright of their visas if initially there is a public charge finding. There should be an opportunity to augment the record by submitting additional evidence to show that the applicant will not be reliant on government welfare upon arrival in the United States. A visa applicant improperly denied based on public charge finding should not simply accept the decision without seeking a reconsideration and having the opportunity to submit additional documents to contest the denial.

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is a San Francisco based immigration attorney and an immigrant rights advocate. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com or facebook.com/tancincolaw, or through this website.)

Categories
Global Pinoy

When petitioner’s relatives won’t support the US visa applicant

Share this:

Most petitioners for immigrant visas are familiar with Affidavits of Support that are required to be submitted before the future immigrant is issued a visa. What are the responsibilities of a person who signs an affidavit of support for an intending immigrant? What will happen if the petitioner does not have enough income to support another person?

Pablo petitioned for Nathan, his single adult child, more than 10 years ago. The National Visa Center initiated the visa processing recently and an affidavit of support is required to be submitted. Pablo is reliant only on his monthly welfare check or Supplemental Security Income (SSI). He lives in a rented room owned by his brother. He wants Nathan to immigrate to the United States so that Pablo will have his son to hopefully support him during his remaining years.

Pablo’s brother who lives with him refuses to sign an Affidavit of Support because he claims that he has his own financial issues. What can Pablo do to enable his son to complete his visa processing and travel to the United States?

In order that future immigrants do not become a public charge, US immigration law requires the applicant for visa to submit an affidavit of support from the petitioner on Form I-864. The petitioner or sponsor must show evidence of “the means to maintain an annual income equal to at least 125 percent of the Federal poverty line”.

Clearly, the U.S. government expects the sponsor to provide support to the intending immigrant and to make sure that s/he does not rely on any federal or state agency for means tested benefits. Finding a co-sponsor may be a challenge for some petitioners, and sometimes there is malicious refusal to sign affidavits of support by relatives in a few dysfunctional families. Whatever it is, there are alternate ways to meet the Affidavit of Support requirement.

In case the petitioner does not meet the income level as set by the federal poverty guidelines, the law permits him to consider the income or assets belonging to other household members. The latter may be the spouse, children, parent, sibling or another relative who lives in the same principal residence as the petitioner. If there is no sufficient income or asset of the petitioner or household member, the next step is to secure a co-sponsor who can satisfy the financial requirements of the affidavit of support.

In the case of Pablo, while he has a household member who is a relative, the latter is unwilling to sign the affidavit. Pablo’s option is to seek an Affidavit of Support from his non-household relatives or friends who will be willing to be co-sponsors and who have sufficient income to meet the federal poverty guideline. Absent a co-sponsor’s affidavit of support and given the inability of Pablo to meet the income requirement, Nathan will not be able to get a U.S. immigrant visa. The law provides very few exceptions law on certain classes of immigrant visa petitions. The case of a Filipino seeking an immigrant visa based on a family petition is not one of the exceptions.

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco is a San Francisco CA based immigration attorney and a partner at Tancinco Law Offices. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com, tancinco.weareph.com/old or at www.facebook.com/tancincolaw)