Final public charge rule

[zaback21 29]

1 minute ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

The 250% over FPG is not a requirement, but a heavily positive factor. People won't be denied if they earn way less than that. 

I hope that's how it is. But it is hard to believe they will use it just as one of the factors and not the defining factor. No one can argue now since they will have a policy to deny. 

[Unlockable 7,315]

From the USCIS website itself...

 

https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-announces-final-rule-enforcing-long-standing-public-charge-inadmissibility-law

 

Quote

 

USCIS Announces Final Rule Enforcing Long-Standing Public Charge Inadmissibility Law

Regulation promotes self-sufficiency and immigrant success

WASHINGTON — Today, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a final rule that clearly defines long-standing law to better ensure that aliens seeking to enter and remain in the United States — either temporarily or permanently — are self-sufficient and rely on their own capabilities and the resources of family members, sponsors, and private organizations rather than on public resources.

 

 

So this confirms that this is not a new law. They are simply enforcing a law that has been around for a while.

 

Also, it states in the first paragraph that immigrants can use resources other than public benefits like family members, sponsors, and private organizations (companies). 

 

This is how it is now except they are putting more assurance of using welfare benefits.

 

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

7 minutes ago, JC&BS said:

The terms 'admissibility' and 'household size' is confusing me. Are they saying the foreigner (that applies to enter US) has to make 125%-250% to be eligible to enter OR the LPR that is already in the US? Or both?

Applies to both admission and adjustment applicants.

Assets, support -meaning sponsors-, or income of the applicant, if over 125% of the FPG is positive. If 250% over the FPG is very positive. 

[Nitas_man 3,100]

1 hour ago, lonesurvivor said:

So what about homemakers/mothers or fathers who do not work. Or young couples that even in America, do not make 250% of the poverty line, They are just inadmissible? 

 

Listen, I get having to show some sort of money in savings/ability to work in the future like young age, english proficiency, etc. But if their husband/wife makes more than enough money and in a lot of normal relationships in america, one spouse might make a lot more than the other and has no problem being the breadwinner, why does that make it so they will be a public charge?

 

I am only 23 and my husband does make 250%, but I am fortunate in that he is very successful for his age. I do not and neither does pretty much anyone in my age group in Canada or the USA that I know make anything close to that amount except for him. It is not the norm. Will that really make it so if I applied later on and I was not already waiting for an interview, I would just be inadmissible? Sounds ridiculous to me...I can easily work and finish school + my husband will and does provide the money to take care of us and obviously has no issue doing so. 

Based on the statistics working and easily finishing school seems to have been out of reach for many immigrants which is why now these new rules are being enforced.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

7 minutes ago, zaback21 said:

I hope that's how it is. But it is hard to believe they will use it just as one of the factors and not the defining factor. No one can argue now since they will have a policy to deny. 

It says so in the rules. 

Now, it could create confusion among adjudicators, who are the ones evaluating and taking the final decision.

[zaback21 29]

2 minutes ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

It says so in the rules. 

Now, it could create confusion among adjudicators, who are the ones evaluating and taking the final decision.

Exactly. And if the administration is not so friendly towards immigration, it can lead to whole lot of policy abuse.

Edited August 14, 2019 by zaback21

[lonesurvivor 48]

6 minutes ago, Nitas_man said:

Based on the statistics working and easily finishing school seems to have been out of reach for many immigrants which is why now these new rules are being enforced.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I guess my worry is they will use too much discretion with all these new rules. I don't see how someone like me could possibly be told they are a public charge (young, has completed highschool, fluent english, and will work on secondary education and has held jobs in the past), but I worry they may be able to use as much judgment as they please. For example, maybe because I am young and have not made more than 30k a year in my life yet, would this outweigh all the positives? idk.

 

Maybe a point based system would be more appropriate rather than "negative, highly negative, positive" which may allow for too many differences between adjudicators. 

Edited August 14, 2019 by lonesurvivor

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

Just now, zaback21 said:

Exactly. And if the administration is not so friendly towards immigration, it can lead to whole lot of policy abuse.

I honestly think the biggest issue won't be the agents abusing the policy, but being completely overwhelmed and overworked -and even maybe undertrained regarding the new rules-.

The backlogs will seriously increase. 

[zaback21 29]

4 minutes ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

I honestly think the biggest issue won't be the agents abusing the policy, but being completely overwhelmed and overworked -and even maybe undertrained regarding the new rules-.

The backlogs will seriously increase. 

That is true but I also see serious fall in the number of petition submission. How many people will be able to fulfill those requirements? Not a lot of people . 

 

Just like what is happening now. Priority Date has gone down but USCIS processing time has ballooned. 

Edited August 14, 2019 by zaback21

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

1 minute ago, zaback21 said:

That is true but I also see serious fall in the number of petition submission. How many people will be able to fulfill those requirements? Not many. 

 

Just like what is happening now. Priority Date has gone down but USCIS processing time has ballooned. 

Exactly what I shared on a post yesterday: there is a possibility of applications decreasing, mainly based on people's fear of being denied. 

 

[azblk 338]

4 hours ago, missileman said:

The Consulate Officer has ALWAYS had discretion when it come to public charge.....at least for years......There are multiple cases here on VJ which attest to that.

So did the applicants suddenly become more likely to became public charges in the last 2 years because the rate of denials based on public charge went from 1033 in 2016 to over 12K in 2018. You can keep pretending that nothing has changed but a lot has changed. The number do not lie.

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

10 minutes ago, lonesurvivor said:

Maybe a point based system would be more appropriate rather than "negative, highly negative, positive" which may allow for too many differences between adjudicators. 

They might have some sort of scale that we don't know about. Not everything goes public, especially specifics regarding manuals for adjudicators.

[yuna628 9,689]

Just now, Allaboutwaiting said:

Exactly what I shared on a post yesterday: there is a possibility of applications decreasing, mainly based on people's fear of being denied. 

 

According to Cato's analysis approvals will plummet. https://www.cato.org/blog/explanation-public-charge-rule-frequently-asked-questions

Boundless and Cato agree that this could result in 200,000 couples being separated and thereby denying half of all applications in the spouse category alone.

 

[lonesurvivor 48]

1 minute ago, yuna628 said:

According to Cato's analysis approvals will plummet. https://www.cato.org/blog/explanation-public-charge-rule-frequently-asked-questions

Boundless and Cato agree that this could result in 200,000 couples being separated and thereby denying half of all applications in the spouse category alone.

 

That is really scary...I do not think half of the couples abuse the system. This all seems too drastic 

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

Just now, yuna628 said:

According to Cato's analysis approvals will plummet. https://www.cato.org/blog/explanation-public-charge-rule-frequently-asked-questions

Boundless and Cato agree that this could result in 200,000 couples being separated and thereby denying half of all applications in the spouse category alone.

 

Boundless interprets the 250% over the FPG as a requirement, when it is not. 

Denials will increase? Very likely. And that is exactly why I anticipate people deciding not to file in the first place.