Trump’s Green Card Crackdown Triggers Lawsuits Across the US

A coalition of 22 states and cities has sued to block a new US immigration rule that would expand the programmes considered when determining whether an immigrant could be classified as a “public charge”.

Led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, the coalition filed the lawsuit as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) prepares to implement the rule on Friday, 18 September. The measure would give immigration officials greater authority to deny visas, green cards or entry to foreign nationals considered reliant on public assistance.

The dispute centres on the definition of a “public charge”. US immigration law has traditionally applied the term to people dependent on cash welfare or long-term institutional care. The new rule would allow officials to consider a broader range of benefits, including food assistance, housing support and healthcare coverage.

James said the policy could force families to choose between accessing essential services and protecting their chances of obtaining legal immigration status.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has filed a separate lawsuit with several municipalities, including Chicago, San Francisco and Seattle. He said the rule could discourage residents from seeking medical care or food assistance because of concerns that using those services could affect their immigration applications.

The lawsuits were filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs argue that DHS has exceeded its legal authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which requires federal agencies to follow established procedures, including public notice and opportunities for comment, when introducing major regulations.

The states and cities also argue that DHS has not clearly identified which programmes could result in an applicant being disqualified. They contend that this could leave applicants subject to inconsistent decisions based on individual assessments.

DHS has rejected the challenges and defended the rule as necessary to ensure that immigrants are able to support themselves without becoming a burden on taxpayers. In a statement reported by the Associated Press, the department also criticised so-called “sanctuary states” and suggested that they were concerned about losing federal funding if immigrants stopped using welfare programmes.

The legal challenge forms part of a wider dispute over the Trump administration’s immigration policies and the role of state and local governments in supporting immigrant communities. The administration has pursued tighter restrictions on legal immigration, while opponents have challenged measures they argue could discourage immigrants from using essential public services.