Change in Adjustment of Status Policies
President Donald Trump’s team is working to halt a lesser-known procedure that has allowed the former president to quietly legalize or pardon millions of economic immigrants over the years.
“Maybe this is a big movement,” stated the Immigrant Responsibility Project Action Group in a tweet.
Officials released their announcement on Friday. In the U.S., there’s an interest in utilizing less recognized avenues. The path to securing a green card—or eventually citizenship—will now have to adhere to standard legalization protocols through U.S. embassies in individuals’ home countries.
This new policy affects millions of economic immigrants, including undocumented individuals who have been in the U.S. for years, temporary foreign workers, students, and those on parole visas. However, it does not include refugees or asylum seekers.
In recent years, it’s estimated that about half of all immigrants obtained their legal status, often via amnesty, through the Adjustment of Status (AOS) process, rather than having to exit the country to apply at a U.S. embassy.
“We’re returning to the original intent of the law, which is to ensure aliens can navigate through our immigration system appropriately,” explained Zach Koehler, a spokesperson for Joseph Edlow’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, part of the Department of Homeland Security. He added:
Going forward, foreign nationals living temporarily in the U.S. who wish to pursue a green card must return home to apply, except under special situations. This policy aims to align our immigration system with its intended function, moving away from encouraging loopholes.
Kevin Lin, founder of the American Skilled Workers group, remarked, “This is a significant and positive change.” On the other hand, Jared Culver, an analyst at the Immigrant Responsibility Project Action, voiced concerns about the implications for low-wage employers who bring in workers with the promise of future legalization in exchange for labor. “It’s like when you’re playing Jenga: stop this, and your whole business model might collapse,” he noted.
This policy also implies that many undocumented immigrants will be excluded from the amnesty process, as consular officers have stricter approval criteria that cannot be overturned by pro-immigration judges.
Critics have highlighted the policy’s advantages for regular Americans. David Bier, an immigration advocate at the Cato Foundation, expressed concerns, claiming, “This administration seems to be the most anti-legal immigration administration in American history.” He noted that 1.2 million immigrants are currently looking to utilize the AOS route and emphasized that the new requirements could be burdensome.
Bier highlighted potential consequences for applicants, such as mandatory leave from the country and barred reviews from courts regarding consular decisions. The adjustment of status process, which has historically benefited many, is now under significant threat, potentially disrupting families and businesses.
He also indicated that the legal ramifications for immigrants could be severe, noting how the policy could lead to heightened risks of arrest for undocumented individuals. One immigrant, Joe, mentioned a personal struggle with his situation, emphasizing how these changes affect everyday lives.
Further complicating matters, critics argue that the new policy could double the number of immigrants impacted by entry bans, leading to additional fees—and frustrations—for many seeking legal status.
“Why can’t Congress impeach?” Bea lamented.
In light of an impending lawsuit, Edlow’s office released documents clarifying the changes, stating that permission for Adjustment of Status is now optional, and it’s up to foreign nationals to prove their case.
Some proponents, like Rep. Eli Crane, urged that Congress should take steps to eliminate the adjustment status altogether. Others have praised the administration’s efforts, indicating a shift toward resolving this complicated issue through lawful means.
