22 States and Major Cities Sue to Block Trump's Public Charge Rule Before Friday Deadline

Since the Department of Homeland Security rescinded Biden-era public charge guidance on July 16 and followed it with an Aug. 18 policy manual update, the rule has moved from paperwork to open legal warfare. On Monday, Sept. 14, a coalition of 22 states and the District of Columbia, plus a separate coalition of cities including New York, Chicago, San Francisco, and Seattle, filed federal lawsuits to stop it before it takes effect Friday, Sept. 18.

The legal fight centers on a phrase buried in the rule's text: "totality of the circumstances." That standard replaces a narrower Biden-era rule that, since December 2022, let USCIS officers weigh only cash aid like TANF and SSI when deciding whether a green card applicant might become dependent on government support, according to Latin Times. Under the new framework, officers can also factor in an applicant's use of Medicaid, SNAP, CHIP, WIC, and housing vouchers, though DHS has not published a specific list, Latin Times reported.

What DHS's Own Numbers Say

According to Tech Times, DHS's own regulatory impact analysis projects that roughly 950,000 people will drop off public benefits they remain legally entitled to use, before the rule denies a single green card on public charge grounds. That's a projection of a chilling effect, not people actually found inadmissible.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani cited far larger numbers at a Monday press conference, claiming "up to four million" people nationally could be affected and that up to 1.8 million children could lose health coverage. "None of this is abstract. People could die," Mamdani said, according to Fox News and the Daily Wire. He also cited a projected 10.6% rise in premature mortality in New York City's immigrant communities within five years, a figure he did not attribute to a named study.

New York Attorney General Letitia James, who joined both the state and city lawsuits, said the rule forces families into "impossible questions" about whether accepting food assistance will cost them a green card, according to CNN. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, who is also the Democratic nominee for governor, filed the 82nd lawsuit his office has brought against the Trump administration over this rule, arguing DHS is trying to "weaponize" a 140-year-old legal standard, the Denver Gazette reported.

DHS's Response and the Narrower Reality

DHS pushed back hard. The agency told the Epoch Times that sanctuary-city leaders suing over the rule are trying to "justify their defrauding of the American taxpayer." A USCIS spokesperson said the administration is "protecting American taxpayers from subsidizing aliens who may become dependent on public benefits," per the Denver Gazette. The administration's underlying argument, echoed in its July announcement, is that the 2022 Biden rule "straitjacketed" immigration officers by restricting which benefits they could even consider.

Immigration attorneys and community groups say the rule applies to a much smaller population than the political rhetoric implies. It only touches people filing a brand-new green card application, via Form I-485, on or after Sept. 18. It does not apply to U.S. citizens, to existing green card holders pursuing naturalization, or retroactively to benefits used before that date. Refugees, asylees, Temporary Protected Status holders, and people adjusting status under the Cuban Adjustment Act are exempt entirely, according to Latin Times.

Rebecca Telzak of Make the Road New York told the Epoch Times the real damage is the confusion itself: "Because the rule is very nuanced and complicated, people think that it may impact them, which is what the chilling effect is, even though it actually does not." Advocates argue a vague, undefined "totality of the circumstances" standard will scare away people the rule was never meant to touch, while DHS argues that ambiguity is a feature, letting officers evaluate the full picture instead of following a rigid checklist that critics say ignored the statute's original intent.

Neither side disputes the basic mechanics. The rule does not apply to undocumented immigrants, who are already ineligible for these benefits. It applies only to lawfully present immigrants applying for new green cards.

What Happens Next

The lawsuits, filed in federal court in New York, ask judges to block the rule outright rather than issue a temporary injunction, according to the Epoch Times. With the rule scheduled to take effect Friday, Sept. 18, a federal judge has only days to rule on any emergency request to delay it. No court has yet issued a decision, and it remains unresolved whether litigation will pause implementation before the deadline or whether the rule takes effect while the lawsuits proceed.