The Trump administration’s latest “public charge” rule, which promises to deny legal residence permits to immigrants who benefit from two or more public social programs in a year, accumulates court suits and legal responses: one Mexican English teacher and one Honduran student went to court in their personal capacities; 16 U.S. Attorneys General challenged the rule in their states, and, most recently, Democratic Senators Mazie Hirono and Richard Blumenthal introduced yesterday the Bill for the Protection of U.S. Values, with the intention of blocking the rule.
Univision Noticias reports that 27 senators support this bill, but there may not be sufficient majority to move it forward. “Republicans who largely support the immigration policies of the Trump administration” control the Senate.
According to the rule, announced in August, immigrants who use two or more public social benefits in one year for three consecutive years will be subject to a protocol that will determine to which of them the government will approve an adjustment of status, either an extension of the visa or a permanent residence (green card). Jorge Cancino, immigration journalist, explains this in an Univision Noticias feature.
The administration could interpret immigrants who use these services are a threat to become a “public charge”, as they call it officially.
The programs included in the rule, Cancino writes, are: income maintenance cash benefits, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), most of Medicaid, Section 8 assistance in the housing choice voucher program, Section 8 based on a rental assistance project, and those of subsidized public housing.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will have more power to decide on these extensions or adjustments of status. When denied, USCIS will be able to send immigrants a notice to appear so they will have to go to an immigration court to fight against their deportation.
The “public charge” rule could affect 4.6 million people. About 380,000 people a year apply for the green card. It does not affect refugees and asylum seekers, those who have applied for a visa or change of status before the publication of the rule, applicants for Temporary Protected Status, and, as Cancino lists:
- – Afghan and Iraqi interpreters or Afghan or Iraqi citizens employed by or on behalf of the U.S. Government, pursuant to section 1059(a)(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006.
– Cubans and Haitians who obtained adjustment of status under the Immigration Reform Control Act of 1986 (IRCA).
– Foreigners applying for adjustment of status under the Cuban Adjustment Act.
– Nicaraguans and other Central Americans who are adjusting their status pursuant to section 202(a) Section 203 of the NACARA Act.
– Haitians who are adjusting their status in accordance with Section 902 of the Haitian Refugee Act of 1998.
– Immigrants covered under the Special Youth Program (SIJ). Certain minors who are eligible to apply for legal residency and who have been subject to a state juvenile court proceeding relating to abuse, neglect, abandonment, or other similar forms under state law.
– Immigrants who entered the U.S. before January 1, 1972, and are eligible for residency under Section 249 of the Immigration Act (INA).
– Non-immigrant victims of human trafficking who apply for a T-visa.
– Non-immigrant victims of crimes who apply for a U visa.
– Victims of domestic abuse petitioning for protection under the VAWA Act.
– Immigrants who adjust status under the National Defense Authorization Act for the fiscal year 2004.
Fear
The clock is ticking until October 15, when the rule will take effect. Recent reports indicate that immigrants may be avoiding medical care out of fear.
The latest U.S. Census Bureau statistics, released last week, indicate that 1.9 million people nationwide were left without health insurance in 2018. According to an Associated Press report, Hispanics “were the only major racial and ethnic category with a significant increase in the rate of uninsured”: 1.6 percent more in 2018. A total of nearly 18 percent of these people are not protected by any medical insurance.
AP says the most influential factor numbers was a drop in the population enrolled in Medicaid. The drop was 0.7%.
The Trump government announced the “public charge” rule this year, but policies such as family separations in the border may have had and impact. AP consulted Katherine Hempstead, a health policy expert with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, on the issue.
“There are many children eligible for public health insurance, but they are not enrolled because of several things that make enrolling less comfortable for them. People are interpreting the ‘public charge’ broadly and although their children are eligible for Medicaid because they were born in this country, they stay away,” she said.
A recent Azcentral piece shows that legal and undocumented low-income immigrants living in Arizona are avoiding health care services. There is confusion and fear, the article signed by Stephanie Innes says. Innes asked local social service agencies about this.
Erika Mach, grassroots coordinator for the Arizona Alliance for Community Health Centers, told her: “We have received reports from our members, as well as community partners, that families are asking to be dropped from wraparound services, including Medicaid, KidsCare and SNAP (food stamps).”
One of the centers, Mach continued, recorded a 50% drop in the Women Infant and Child (WIC) program, which aims to support families with nutrition and education services.
“Although WIC isn’t one of the programs in the public charge test, families have misconceptions about the new rule and are stopping their use out of fear,” she added.
Meanwhile, Florida, a U.S. state with a huge Hispanic population, was the fourth state in the country with the largest drop in health coverage, according to the Census Bureau figures, Cibercuba reported.
For his part, David Adams wrote in another Univision News piece that it is a tradition, according to federal law, that immigrants who aspire to permanent residency must prove that they are not a burden to the country. “But the new regulations could raise the eligibility standard, penalizing those with low incomes and a low level of education. It would also turn the U.S. immigration system into one based on merit that rewards immigrants’ ability rather than a long tradition of family reunification,” he writes.