Supreme Court allows Trump administration to move forward with 'public charge' rule (merged)

[ivantran85 1]

Does it affect the current green card holder? I heard that if LPR travel outside of the US more than 6 months, when they come back, the CBP officer can use public charge rule to determine whether they can let the LPR into the US or not?

That part is scary if it is true.

My wife is LPR, she never used any public benefit. But she frequently traveled back to VN to take care her mommy, the trip usually last longer than 6 months ( she does have re entry permit).Im just worry that if she come back after long trip outside of US, the custom officer wont let she in because they can say that my wife might use the public benefit in the future. She doesnt own any asset and is stay at home mom. Our house is under my name.

 

[Crazy Cat 41,845]

2 minutes ago, ivantran85 said:

I heard that if LPR travel outside of the US more than 6 months, when they come back, the CBP officer can use public charge rule to determine whether they can let the LPR into the US or not?

That is not part of the rule expansion that I have seen.  Sounds like another false rumor.

[Nick&Darina 36]

Hi,

 

I think this is a great rule but i have a question. I am about to file the AOS for my new wife and i am trying to understand if i will need to use that new I-944 form. I dont think its active today but is there a date when it will become required? I have more then enough to support my wife but the form itself looked like it would take some time to complete.  I would need to get credit reports and other evidence apparently. Sorry if i am mistaken about this, i am just going by other posts i read previously.

 

Thank You

[Crazy Cat 41,845]

12 minutes ago, Nick&Darina said:

Hi,

 

I think this is a great rule but i have a question. I am about to file the AOS for my new wife and i am trying to understand if i will need to use that new I-944 form. I dont think its active today but is there a date when it will become required? I have more then enough to support my wife but the form itself looked like it would take some time to complete.  I would need to get credit reports and other evidence apparently. Sorry if i am mistaken about this, i am just going by other posts i read previously.

 

Thank You

Good question. I'm not sure when and how they will start, but here is the applicable table referencing Adjustment of Status for people entering via a K-1........page 188, Table 3

 

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2019-17142.pdf

 

[NikLR 13,227]

To be honest, I have never felt that joint sponsors should be allowed except on a case by case basis per the CO (and never in a AOS case)  and that the poverty guidelines are far too low.  But they should hurry the heck up on people's EAD.  It shouldn't take 6 months to process this. 

If the USC is using low income housing, using snap, using medicaid, etc, they shouldn't be allowed to bring a spouse into the country as well. They can't afford to live, how can they support another person?  Now I will say that it's not always the fault of the person who is on those items.  Maybe the cost of living is just high where they live and obviously they can't afford to just move.  Maybe they're already working two jobs.  But that doesn't mean they get to bring in another person from another country either.

If you're denied for public charge, then there shouldn't be a "reapply" option either. 

[usmantariq88 4]

what are the things included in public charges? does it include OBAMA CARE and FASFA (federal student aid)??

[igoyougoduke 1,656]

22 minutes ago, NikLR said:

To be honest, I have never felt that joint sponsors should be allowed except on a case by case basis per the CO (and never in a AOS case)  and that the poverty guidelines are far too low.  But they should hurry the heck up on people's EAD.  It shouldn't take 6 months to process this. 

If the USC is using low income housing, using snap, using medicaid, etc, they shouldn't be allowed to bring a spouse into the country as well. They can't afford to live, how can they support another person?  Now I will say that it's not always the fault of the person who is on those items.  Maybe the cost of living is just high where they live and obviously they can't afford to just move.  Maybe they're already working two jobs.  But that doesn't mean they get to bring in another person from another country either.

If you're denied for public charge, then there shouldn't be a "reapply" option either. 

that federal income level is a joke. most people will be broke and living in low income housing with those wages in places like New york, California

[Lucky2Lucky 2,526]

12 hours ago, InRainbows14 said:

Any indication of how today's ruling might effect current filers? I'm a K-1 adjuster and plan to mail my Adjustment of Status package tomorrow.

Are you on public benefits? If not you have nothing to be concerned about.

[Mike E 11,739]

1 hour ago, AshMarty said:

 

I would never consider that my son a US citizen and born to me a US citizen would be considered a public charge because of a medical diagnoses. But also the comments of this thread and brief articles I did say didn’t not mention

That’s why there are lawyers you can ask if comments from strangers make you concerned.  
 

Again best wishes for your son, your husband and you.   

[beloved_dingo 1,976]

That I-944 form seems really odd when applied to K-1. For instance, it asks about credit reports/credit scores. My husband didn't have an SSN until December, and our AOS interview is tomorrow. He didn't get his EAD/AP until December either. So the idea of him having built credit in that time is laughable. We can't even properly check his credit yet, because the credit agencies have no way to verify his identity without a driver's license/state ID, and he doesn't have one yet. He's been unemployed since his arrival in May, obviously, since he wasn't authorized to work. So from that view, he is not "self-sufficient" because he literally hasn't had the ability to even try to support himself. Isn't that the whole point of my Affidavit of Support? 

 

Anyway, I have no issue with the public charge rule being more defined and enforced (fairly) but I'm a little concerned that K-1s might be treated unfairly going forward. 

 

 

 

 

[yuna628 9,676]

15 minutes ago, beloved_dingo said:

That I-944 form seems really odd when applied to K-1. For instance, it asks about credit reports/credit scores. My husband didn't have an SSN until December, and our AOS interview is tomorrow. He didn't get his EAD/AP until December either. So the idea of him having built credit in that time is laughable. We can't even properly check his credit yet, because the credit agencies have no way to verify his identity without a driver's license/state ID, and he doesn't have one yet. He's been unemployed since his arrival in May, obviously, since he wasn't authorized to work. So from that view, he is not "self-sufficient" because he literally hasn't had the ability to even try to support himself. Isn't that the whole point of my Affidavit of Support? 

 

Anyway, I have no issue with the public charge rule being more defined and enforced (fairly) but I'm a little concerned that K-1s might be treated unfairly going forward. 

 

 

 

 

And the whole credit history angle is one of the issues I have with this policy, and it will mean that K1 couples are going to have to be more diligent to obtain an SSN asap and be added to their spouse's accounts quickly. Of course easier said than done, as we see all the time the SSA screwing things up, or the couple didn't know they could get an SSN right away. Of course as a housewife/carer I didn't have a credit score whatsoever (and plenty of people for many reasons don't) until my husband started working and applied for credit. Our joint sponsor certainly had one.

 

There is no way to know what not having a score will do towards the application. It's quite silly and invasive anyway.

[geowrian 22,337]

I doubt credit history will have any impact for K-1 based filers, visitors who AOS, etc. It would only matter for people who do have a credit history - those living/working in the US already.

 

I concur that credit scores shouldn't be used at all...they were never designed with this purpose in mind. They're designed for one part of consideration to extend credit - nothing more.

[emma24 161]

39 minutes ago, beloved_dingo said:

That I-944 form seems really odd when applied to K-1. For instance, it asks about credit reports/credit scores. My husband didn't have an SSN until December, and our AOS interview is tomorrow. He didn't get his EAD/AP until December either. So the idea of him having built credit in that time is laughable. We can't even properly check his credit yet, because the credit agencies have no way to verify his identity without a driver's license/state ID, and he doesn't have one yet. He's been unemployed since his arrival in May, obviously, since he wasn't authorized to work. So from that view, he is not "self-sufficient" because he literally hasn't had the ability to even try to support himself. Isn't that the whole point of my Affidavit of Support? 

 

Anyway, I have no issue with the public charge rule being more defined and enforced (fairly) but I'm a little concerned that K-1s might be treated unfairly going forward. 

 

 

 

 

This was my concern as well. I don't know how my fiance is supposed to be self sufficient if he may not get an EAD for months once arriving in the states (not including the time it will take to OBTAIN a job). I'm curious to see how this applies to K-1 moving forward. I wonder if the income of a sponsor will weigh more heavily than other factors such as work history and credit score in the case of K1.

[Mr and Mrs S 207]

1 hour ago, Donald120383 said:

that federal income level is a joke. most people will be broke and living in low income housing with those wages in places like New york, California

 

Raising the federal poverty income would mean the government admitting the US has a lot more poor people than they want us to believe. Also, a lot more US citizens would qualify for benefits with a higher poverty income. Nobody in Washington wants to pay for that. 

Edited January 28, 2020 by Mr and Mrs S

[Orangesapples 1,954]

41 minutes ago, geowrian said:

I doubt credit history will have any impact for K-1 based filers, visitors who AOS, etc. It would only matter for people who do have a credit history - those living/working in the US already.

 

I concur that credit scores shouldn't be used at all...they were never designed with this purpose in mind. They're designed for one part of consideration to extend credit - nothing more.

Yep, using credit scores for anything other than judging whether to give credit to a person is a misuse and abuse of the credit score system.