Skip to content
Home » News » New York State » New York leads lawsuit over expanded immigration public-charge rule

New York leads lawsuit over expanded immigration public-charge rule

New York leads lawsuit over expanded immigration public-charge rule

New York Attorney General Letitia James is leading a multistate lawsuit to block a federal immigration rule that, her office says, could put green-card applicants at risk for using public benefits or having family members use them.

James and attorneys general from 21 other states and the District of Columbia filed the challenge to a Department of Homeland Security “public charge” rule scheduled to take effect Sept. 18. They are asking the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to declare the rule unlawful and vacate it. A separate coalition of cities led by New York City is challenging the rule's effects on local governments.

Finger Lakes Partners (Billboard)

What the rule would change

Under the 2022 federal standard described by James' office, public-charge decisions are limited to cash assistance for income maintenance or long-term institutional care at government expense. The challenged rule would allow immigration officers to weigh nearly any public benefit, regardless of how long it was used, when deciding whether to grant a green card, according to the attorney general's account.

James' office said benefits lawfully used by a family member could also count against an applicant, even when that family member is a U.S. citizen. It cited a child receiving state health insurance or free school meals as examples of assistance that could affect a noncitizen parent's application. The office said the rule does not set a clear limit on which benefits or how much use would matter.

The lawsuit contends that the rule exceeds DHS's authority and departs from the longstanding meaning of “public charge” as a person likely to depend primarily on government support for long-term subsistence. The coalition also argues that DHS acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. Those are the states' claims, not findings by the court.

States warn of lost benefits and funding

James and the coalition argue that uncertainty over immigration consequences could discourage eligible families from seeking food assistance and health coverage, including for U.S. citizen children. James said families should not have to forgo benefits to which they are legally entitled because they fear an immigration penalty.

The attorney general's office said the federal government acknowledged that a similar earlier policy was associated with disenrollment rates as high as 35% among mixed-status families and 60% among refugees. It also cited DHS projections that a chilling effect from the new rule would cost states $4.05 billion a year in Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program funding and $1 billion a year in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funding nationwide. Those are projections, not losses already incurred.

The coalition says lower enrollment could lead people to delay medical care and rely more on emergency rooms, adding pressure to hospitals and community health centers. It also warns that schools could lose automatic certification for free or reduced-price meals if SNAP and Medicaid enrollment falls below required thresholds, and that Title I education funding tied to those enrollment figures could decline.

States and local governments would also face administrative costs for public communications, staff training and technology changes, the lawsuit says. Reduced SNAP participation could affect grocery stores and other local businesses, according to the coalition.

James' office said it led a successful challenge to a similar rule introduced in 2020 and that the resulting decision was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The current lawsuit seeks a new ruling on the 2026 rule before its Sept. 18 effective date.

The other participating states are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and Wisconsin; Pennsylvania's governor also joined.