On May 21, 2026, USCIS quietly issued one of the most significant policy shifts in years. If you have a pending green card application or were planning to file one, this affects you.
What Changed
USCIS released Policy Memorandum PM-602-0199, which reframes adjustment of status (the process of getting a green card while staying inside the U.S.) as an "extraordinary" act of "administrative grace" rather than a standard step in the immigration process.
In plain terms: being eligible is no longer enough.
Officers are now directed to weigh the "totality of circumstances" when deciding whether to approve an I-485. Any negative factor in your history can now tip the scales against you, even if you meet every legal requirement. USCIS is also signaling that most non-immigrant visa holders should leave the U.S. and apply for permanent residence through consular processing abroad instead.
Why This Policy May Not Hold Up in Court
Immigration attorneys across the country are raising serious legal questions about
PM-602-0199. There are arguments that this policy may contradict established law in at least four ways. Nothing here is legal advice, and how courts ultimately rule remains to be seen -- but these are the grounds attorneys are watching closely.
It may conflict with congressional intent. When Congress wrote the Immigration and Nationality Act, it deliberately created the U.S.-based adjustment framework so that immigrants lawfully present in the country would not have to disrupt their lives and return abroad. That framework has been in place and expanded since the 1950s. A policy memo cannot simply override what Congress built into the statute -- though courts will have the final say on how far that argument goes.
It may contradict binding agency precedent. A 1970 Board of Immigration Appeals decision called Matter of Arai held that when an applicant has no adverse factors in their record, adjustment should ordinarily be granted as a matter of discretion. PM-602-0199 says the opposite -- that a clean record is not enough. A policy memo cannot override a precedent decision the agency is legally bound to follow, which may give applicants a strong argument against any denial that relies on the memo alone.
It may have bypassed the required rulemaking process. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, agencies generally cannot make sweeping policy changes that affect the public without going through a formal notice-and-comment process. USCIS issued PM-602-0199 without that process, which legal commentators have flagged as a potential procedural vulnerability.
The Supreme Court's recent ruling may be relevant. The Court's decision in Loper Bright limits how much deference courts must give to agency interpretations of statutes. That decision may create an opening for courts to scrutinize PM-602-0199 more closely -- though how any particular court applies it is uncertain.
Litigation to Watch
No lawsuits have been filed yet as of this writing, but legal challenges are widely expected and likely imminent.
The grounds being discussed include APA violations, statutory authority arguments, and retroactive application concerns for pending I-485 cases. Watch for litigation from immigration advocacy organizations, employer groups, and potentially state attorneys general.
We are monitoring these developments closely and will update this post as cases are filed.
If You Are on an H-1B Visa
H-1B and L-1 visa holders are in a better position than most -- but not an untouchable one.
The memo acknowledges that dual-intent visa holders (like H-1B) are different from single-intent visa holders (like B-2 tourists or F-1 students), because H-1B holders are legally permitted to have immigration intent while maintaining nonimmigrant status. However, a footnote in the memo walks back that concession: maintaining H-1B status alone is not sufficient to guarantee approval.
What this means practically: H-1B holders pursuing adjustment of status should now affirmatively document positive factors in their application. Employment history, community ties, tax compliance, family circumstances, and other equities all matter more than they did before.
If You Are Pursuing EB-1A or an Employment-Based Green Card
PM-602-0199 does not change your eligibility for EB-1A or other employment-based categories. Your underlying petition and priority date are not affected.
What has changed is how your I-485 will be evaluated. The same heightened discretionary scrutiny applies. If you are an H-1B holder with an approved EB-1A petition, the packaging of your adjustment application now requires more care than it did six months ago.
Strong applications will include thorough documentation of positive equities alongside the standard eligibility evidence.
What You Should Do Right Now
If you have a pending I-485, do not panic -- but do not wait either.
Here is what we recommend:
- Review your pending application. Are there any adverse factors that could be used against you? Now is the time to understand your exposure.
- Consult an immigration attorney before making any decisions. Do not voluntarily depart the U.S. based on this memo without legal advice. Leaving could trigger bars to reentry that are far worse than the memo itself.
- Stay informed on litigation. If a federal court issues a preliminary injunction against PM-602-0199, it could halt the policy before it is ever applied to your case.
- Strengthen your record. If you have not yet filed, work with an attorney to build the strongest possible application under the new standard.
This policy is new, contested, and may change. What will not change is the need for experienced legal guidance.
We Are Here to Help
The Modi Law Firm has been handling complex immigration cases, including E-2, EB-1A, and H-1B adjustment of status matters, for over a decade. We are actively tracking PM-602-0199 and its legal challenges and advising clients on how to navigate this shift.
If you have a pending application or are planning to file, contact us for a consultation. The rules changed last week. Your strategy should too.
This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law is complex and fact-specific. Contact an attorney for guidance on your individual situation.
Sources: